Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Coronavirus

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I received my 2nd Pfizer vaccine shot last week exactly one year after WHO officially declared a pandemic on March 11, 2020.

I had the somewhat typical chills, modest fever, and mild headache starting 14 hours after that morning’s vaccination and continuing overnight. The following day I was mildly fatigued. I’m a volunteer Disaster Service Worker with the San Francisco Fire Department and began volunteering at a temporary vaccination clinic in mid-February. I’m getting perilously close to the currently qualified age group (65 years) but am not quite there yet. I ended up getting a spare leftover shot on my first day helping at the clinic. Last week was my ~3 week follow-up shot. It feels good to be vaccinated. I’m looking forward to helping many others achieve the same over the coming weeks.
Received my second shot of Moderna Friday shortly after noon. Saturday evening and Sunday morning I felt a bit off, not really any specific symptoms just not 100%. So I only rowed ~4 km instead of the usual ~10.5 km on Sunday. However, I rowed extra hard. Felt 100% after rowing and today. Can't wait for enough people to be vaccinated so that it will be safe to actually go places without a lot of paranoia.
 
Wikipedia has a good summary of the global spread of B.1.1.7.

Also worth noting is that variants that include the E484K protein modification, which resists antibodies to the original virus, now represents 30-40% of new infections in New York City. This is mostly due to a local B.1.526 variant rather than the B.1.351 (South Africa) or P.1 (Brazil) variants.

In India - they are seeing the start of a second wave. Wonder how much of that is because of B.1.1.7

The cricket matches have now been turned closed door - after just 2 matches played with spectators.
 
More of this.... :)


Screen Shot 2021-03-15 at 2.26.48 PM.png
 
The problem is - the disadvantaged parents are likely to be going out to work themselves. In that case, it is obviously better for the kids to be at school as well.
I don't know whether this is completely obvious. Risk is basically additive at low levels. More exposure routes aren't a good thing (just because you're exposed at your job doesn't meant that being exposed by your kids is no big deal). In the end, things are going well in the US (in my opinion) because we have managed to effectively cut off some of the nexuses of disease transmission (health care, elder care, other frontline work) through our robust vaccination program - and our vaccines are VERY effective. School is in session in a lot of places already (mostly smaller communities, etc.), but in those places where it is not, adding it back into the mix is going to start the mixing process again. That's going to increase risk. It's basically taking the risk level of the worst-case person in that disadvantaged community and spreading it to all the other parents in that community. Lowest common denominator, or whatever you want to call it. This might increase the risk to many individuals by substantial amounts. A lot of transmission happens in the home - kids bringing it home is a very high risk, relative to being at a workplace, masked, with precautions in place.

I'm not saying schools should not reopen - they should, once all the teachers are vaccinated...but not without a good plan. Seems like there's no reason to allow schools to become such a nexus - we just need the fast tests available as a tool, and other reasonable precautions in place, to make this quite safe. The concern isn't so much for the staff of the schools (at this point), it's more for the overall health of the community. I just don't like what I see in terms of guidance in this regard, so far. It should be possible to reopen fairly safely if done properly. There's been a fair amount of modeling work on what sort of measures to put in place to make it work...and widespread testing appears to be really important, given the asymptomatic spread.

If reopening is in two weeks, I could see this being a problem...if it's in four weeks, it may be much less of a problem. Might not be enough time for infections to really take off before vaccinations really take effect. I guess we'll see.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: madodel
I don't know whether this is completely obvious. Risk is basically additive at low levels. More exposure routes aren't a good thing (just because you're exposed at your job doesn't meant that being exposed by your kids is no big deal).
Yes - the question is what the kids are doing if the parents are off to work. I've no idea - but I'd assume they are not self-isolating ... I've not seen any NYT portraits of such families. Child care for poor folks is the most under-reported story in US.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NikolaACDC
Moderna is about to start their phase 2/3 trial in children, so I guess the ball is rolling. Could be a while: since it looks like maybe 57 days for selection of dose, followed by the phase 3 trial (they can't run in parallel). Might be hard to get children infected by summer for the phase 3 (if we're lucky).


They're not yet recruiting, but if you want your children vaccinated because they're at risk, and you don't mind the (unknown but likely low) risk of vaccination, it might be worth a look to see (no idea how one gets into a trial). Looks like they are looking for MIS-C as a special adverse event, just in case.

There's a contact number in the link.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EVNow
Nearly the one-year anniversary of the "near zero cases in April" tweet (we'll see if he ends up being right about that, but might have to wait until 2022)...so it's time for a little vaccine FUD from Elon:

"Some debate." WTF. Take a little bit of uncertainty and concern and AMPLIFY. He's learned from the best I suppose.
View attachment 644029

I wish we had more data on just one dose for the old. Our parents (currently stuck in our home) don't handle even minor side-effects (like fever) well and we'd like to avoid it.
 
I wish we had more data on just one dose for the old. Our parents (currently stuck in our home) don't handle even minor side-effects (like fever) well and we'd like to avoid it.

The CDC believes the elderly should get both doses, as it should substantially increase the protection/efficacy (they mention it in the discussion section). Substantial side effects are common even in the elderly, but less common than in the general population. Looks like mid-60% efficacy with a single dose (not sure the confidence intervals on that - I haven't read the paper in detail).


We know for sure that the second dose increases antibody levels significantly (10x-100x). Seems like a question for their physician(s).
 
Last edited:
as more Moderna capacity comes online.
I meant Pfizer here. Moderna not expected to ramp until end of month. Pfizer was supposed to be at 13 million or so mid-March but seem to be lagging. New allocations will publish tomorrow (allegedly, but looks like it already updated) so hopefully we will see the promised step change. They are at just 9 million. Big shortfall vs. commitments (though could be a lag from factory to gov’t warehouse).

D94E6C3B-8C14-4ABE-B56D-BD3CBB95E503.jpeg


Moderna doing nothing interesting, steady 6.5 million per week:
8EB1AFD8-B614-4668-B9A7-D75C9CFD3CCB.jpeg
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Dig deeper
We seriously need a head-to-head study of all the major vaccines available. Or, a more comprehensive vaccination campaign to educate the public better.

Today, the entire San Francisco Bay Area counties issued a joint statement saying that the J&J vaccine is also an effective vaccine and not one that can be concluded as being an inferior vaccine. There is probably some case study to be written for epidemiology majors about this situation (on how to convey clinical trial data from different cohorts and time) for public awareness.

Public Health Officers Unified on Protection of Vaccine Brands

On this topic, just curious what everyone’s opinion is here. In an ideal scenario, if all of you on this board were afforded a choice right now between J&J and Pfizer, which would you choose?
 
if all of you on this board were afforded a choice right now between J&J and Pfizer, which would you choose?
Pfizer or Moderna. The trial data says it did better, even (very limited data) for one shot. We don’t know what the reason for the difference is (given the time of the trial, it could have been variants, virus quantity (maybe higher viral loads at a time of higher infection prevalence make more infectious), etc.). But, the difference is there. So I go with what I know.

They may in fact under identical circumstances be nearly equivalent for a single dose of each. No idea. So have to just follow what I do know. So Pfizer/Moderna.

But I’ll take J&J if it is the first available to me. It appears to nearly eliminate risk of serious illness.

Maybe some time they will be compared.
 
  • Like
Reactions: EVCollies
How do you get on the waitlist?
For CVS, walked into the store and asked about it. They had a list and so I put my name on it. Then I called a few other CVS pharmacies, navigated the phone system, spoke to the and got on their wait lists. Not sure how long they are now.
Not clear whether this will work, but I did check a few days ago, and they said they were working through the list. Moderna (if they are still getting it - one of the issues) comes in vials of 10 doses that have to all be used in six hours. So no-shows result in availability.

As of yesterday, nearly everyone in San Diego is eligible now, though - BMI over 25 (“overweight”) qualifies (probably about 70% of people). I still don’t qualify (BMI of 25 is 167 pounds for 5’8.5”). What Is My BMI?

No need for a waitlist now, probably, if you really want the vaccine, and I doubt they will be asking questions anymore due to the wide eligibility. I will wait since I do not qualify.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: Dave EV and Jeff N
We seriously need a head-to-head study of all the major vaccines available. Or, a more comprehensive vaccination campaign to educate the public better.

Today, the entire San Francisco Bay Area counties issued a joint statement saying that the J&J vaccine is also an effective vaccine and not one that can be concluded as being an inferior vaccine. There is probably some case study to be written for epidemiology majors about this situation (on how to convey clinical trial data from different cohorts and time) for public awareness.

Public Health Officers Unified on Protection of Vaccine Brands

On this topic, just curious what everyone’s opinion is here. In an ideal scenario, if all of you on this board were afforded a choice right now between J&J and Pfizer, which would you choose?

Moderna, then Pfizer, then J&J.

That's my official, medical opinion. I put Moderna over Pfizer, even though they have the same efficacy after two doses, because the handling requirements for medical professionals for Pfizer . . . simply suck (see my previous posts about what I saw first hand - don't shake the vials, dedicated staff needed to draw up the dosese because it is "fragile", etc.).
 
How do you get on the waitlist?
No idea about waitlist, but my wife tells me to go stand in the RiteAid store around 6 pm when they finish with scheduled vaccinations and they will ask customers if anyone wants a shot of the leftover, assuming there is any leftover. She's had a few patients who told her that's how they got it.
 
No idea about waitlist, but my wife tells me to go stand in the RiteAid store around 6 pm when they finish with scheduled vaccinations and they will ask customers if anyone wants a shot of the leftover, assuming there is any leftover. She's had a few patients who told her that's how they got it.

I had success calling some Walgreens around me and asking if they had a leftover/expiring doses waitlist. More rural stores seemed happy to take my name and get back to me.
 

Another study on reinfection. Seems like 80% protection or so from prior infection (at least for a period of time). That seems consistent with antibody titers seen after prior infections that I have seen published elsewhere. So these vague correlates of protection seem to hold quite well again. Would be great to see these measurements actually correlated in a study at some point.

Half of reinfections symptomatic (no change from original infection). Decent number of hospitalizations upon reinfection.

The value I've seen (other than not getting COVID, which is a good value too) from the single dose of vaccine vs. natural infection is that it seems to lead to a smaller spread on antibody titers (less variation, more consistent response), and slightly higher average antibody titers than an infection. So probably protection is better. Boosted antibody response is of course way better than natural infection (10x to 100x better). Presumably protection is correlated.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Yuri_G and Jeff N
As of yesterday, nearly everyone in San Diego is eligible now, though - BMI over 25 (“overweight”) qualifies (probably about 70% of people). I still don’t qualify (BMI of 25 is 167 pounds for 5’8.5”). What Is My BMI?
Avg BMI for San Diego is 27.8. Do you have different eligibility criteria for different cities/counties in CA ? In WA it is uniform ...