I'll somewhat disagree with that.
1 shot has been proven 60-70% effective. It does provide as much protection as a flu vaccine.
Is it enough to protect someone in Brazil? Likely not but here it is probably very effective...NOT IDEAL...but effective
I can understand people not wanting the second dose especially if they had a reaction. Not condoning it but I understand
[USER=57]@wader[/USER] you can't look at the single shot numbers in terms of herd immunity, only the fully-vaccinated ones. Therefore at 39.3% full-vaccinated, you a good ways off from that 70-80% number...
those numbers for full vaccination will increase as the vast majority of those partially vaccinated will go up as the 2 week window closes for the second shot - my belief - we will be at or near 70-80% by the end of the month
anyone I've spoken to that has had the 1st shot has said they are going back for the second - reactions be damned - even the Brit is going back for his second dose this week
those numbers for full vaccination will increase as the vast majority of those partially vaccinated will go up as the 2 week window closes for the second shot - my belief - we will be at or near 70-80% by the end of the month
anyone I've spoken to that has had the 1st shot has said they are going back for the second - reactions be damned - even the Brit is going back for his second dose this week
I know a number of people that were effected so bad the first time that they don't plan on getting the second.
I'll somewhat disagree with that.
1 shot has been proven 60-70% effective. It does provide as much protection as a flu vaccine.
Is it enough to protect someone in Brazil? Likely not but here it is probably very effective...NOT IDEAL...but effective
I can understand people not wanting the second dose especially if they had a reaction. Not condoning it but I understand
Yeah, but in regards to the Delta variant, preliminary data suggest that only the first shot imparts 40ish% protection, but the second jumps the number into the high 80 and low 90%...
those numbers for full vaccination will increase as the vast majority of those partially vaccinated will go up as the 2 week window closes for the second shot - my belief - we will be at or near 70-80% by the end of the month
anyone I've spoken to that has had the 1st shot has said they are going back for the second - reactions be damned - even the Brit is going back for his second dose this week
Faith, not data. I do hope you're correct...
I know a number of people that were effected so bad the first time that they don't plan on getting the second.
George - that is sorry to hear. I had a mild reaction to the first & the second knocked me off my feet for two days. I would gladly accept what I experienced for that two day period then live with the effects of the virus for two weeks & beyond. Two friends in NJ became stricken & they described to me in detail how it felt like they had ground glass in their lungs. One has not gotten back her ability to taste food completely. This is since March of last year.
I don't know why someone who might have to put up with a bad reaction for 24 or 72 hours from vaccine elect to potentially put up with a reaction from the Virus for two weeks or more & potentially risk near permanent damage or even death.
It just astounds me..
George - that is sorry to hear. I had a mild reaction to the first & the second knocked me off my feet for two days.
Pretty much same here, 1st shot was arm pain at injection site and 2nd knocked me down for almost 3 days.
Im not a big subscriber to "preliminary" anything. Preliminary just means limited sample size..........
Side effects from the various vaccines available pales in comparison to the short and long term debilitating effects of getting Covid.
If you are an OBESE SMOKER, I would be especially worried................
Guess I was lucky. First shot, sore arm for a couple of days. Second shot, sore arm for a couple of days.
Even if it had been worse, I still think the rewards far outweigh the risks. I mean, if you respond that badly to the vaccine, how do you think you'd handle the disease itself?
Im not a big subscriber to "preliminary" anything. Preliminary just means limited sample size..........
Agreed in the case of "Good News", but in "Bad News" scenarios like this, I would be more apt to strongly consider in these preliminary data.
If there are folks out there reticent about their second jab of Pfizer or Moderna, and rationalize skipping their second injection based on the original COVID strain results of ~80% immunity from a single vaccination, they could be making a literally fatal mistake. Pretty soon, the Delta variant will be the major strain seen here.
I did fine with the shots. As a cancer and stroke surviver and 65 years old, there was no question that I was getting it. I have friends that are dealing with the after effects of covid and it's not fun.
However there's so many unanswered questions. If my child was in their teens I would hold out, at least until it's approved. I'd like to see a test that shows who has natural imunity. I saw a father son combo that both ended up in the hospital soon after their vax. That concerns me.
In answer to your question about "natural immunity", unlike other viruses having had Covid doesn't mean you will produce enough antibodies to prevent reinfection.
We don't know why some develop a higher titer of antibody than others.
BUT
What we have now seen is the mRNA vaccine neutralizes the spike protein preventing the debilitating immune response. That is a fact!
[URL unfurl="true"]https://www.yahoo.com/news/man-boosted-pfizer-covid-19-170000819.html[/URL]
The coronavirus can live in men's reproductive organs for seven months after contracting it.
According to [a new study ]('https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2781360?guestAccessKey=17114e03-640c-4688-b1c2-9ed8b936c3cd&utm_source=For_The_Media&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ftm_links&utm_content=tfl&utm_term=061721')by a Florida doctor, this can cause complications for couples hoping to get pregnant.
Because the vaccines contain mRNA and not the live virus, it is unlikely that the vaccine would affect sperm parameters. While these results showed statistically significant increases in all sperm parameters, the magnitude of change is within normal individual variation and may be influenced by regression to the mean.
The coronavirus can live in men's reproductive organs for seven months after contracting it.
According to [a new study ]('https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2781360?guestAccessKey=17114e03-640c-4688-b1c2-9ed8b936c3cd&utm_source=For_The_Media&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ftm_links&utm_content=tfl&utm_term=061721')by a Florida doctor, this can cause complications for couples hoping to get pregnant.
George, have to assume that your information was gleaned from a newspaper headline/story and you didn't vet this article, nor the accompanying literature on COVID virus in semen. I'm guessing your "source" was the Sun Sentinel and the reporter tried to tie this study into other COVID folk lore without actually looking up the other articles. The recent JAMA Letter did not actually study viral longevity in semen, nor whether or not the virus can be sexually transmitted.
I've posted the Discussion part of the recent Florida-generated, JAMA Letter below. They actually say that the mRNA vaccine DOES NOT impact any of the accepted parameters of "sperm health". Other studies that have found COVID virus in semen, have yet to SHOW that the virus can be sexually transmitted, so to date the "OMG, can't get the vaccine because it will prevent me from being a future father", is high on the total COVID BS List, right up there with the "OMG, the vaccines contain a government-sponsored tracking device so spoons will stick to me".
June 17, 2021
[HEADING=2]Sperm Parameters Before and After COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination[/HEADING]
*Discussion
In this study of sperm parameters before and after 2 doses of a COVID-19 mRNA vaccine, there were no significant decreases in any sperm parameter among this small cohort of healthy men. Because the vaccines contain mRNA and not the live virus, it is unlikely that the vaccine would affect sperm parameters. While these results showed statistically significant increases in all sperm parameters, the magnitude of change is within normal individual variation and may be influenced by regression to the mean.[5]('https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2781360#jld210039r5') Additionally, the increase may be due to the increased abstinence time before the second sample. Men with oligospermia did not experience further decline.
The limitations of the study include the small number of men enrolled; limited generalizability beyond young, healthy men; short follow-up; and lack of a control group. In addition, while semen analysis is the foundation of male fertility evaluation, it is an imperfect predictor of fertility potential. Despite this, the study’s time frame encompasses the full life cycle of sperm.*
Sign in to reply to this thread.
