BG2008 Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 I got the Moderna vaccine last week. The first shot. I had no side effects other than a sore arm. A clinic that one of my friends manages had extra shots, so I was able to get vaccinated a bit earlier than I expected. My wife and I were fine after the first Moderna shot. After the second dose we both had effects, her's much worse than mine. We had gotten our shots in the morning and I didn't sleep well that night. I think I woke up 20 times and could not get comfortable. The next day I woke with a headache and felt like I was coming down with something, but I could function. The second day I was much better, the effects about 10% of what they were the day before. For my wife she didn't feel well for two days with her symptoms being more severe than mine. This is a well known side effect profile (more side effects, more pronounced and lasting longer) with the second dose. It's actually a sign that your immune response (protection) is building. An interesting feature in many places is that (given the spread that has occurred) many people who are being vaccinated have been exposed to the virus already and it is expected that such a pre-exposed population is more likely to suffer from side effects. An interesting aspect which is being documented with the CV vaccines is that the increased delay (vs studied delay and initial recommendations) between the two doses is actually associated with a stronger (and likely longer lasting) immunity ('booster' effect). Local reactions to vaccines can be quite marked (pain and skin changes at injection site) for certain vaccines (ie tetanus shot) when immunity is already present. Keep a record for your next emergency room visit. There are 'biological' explanations behind this phenomenon but it's basically the inverse of the law of diminishing returns (on certain incremental capital). I have been waiting for the side effects of the second shot and it hasn't materialize yet. The first shot had more side effects.
boilermaker75 Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 I got the Moderna vaccine last week. The first shot. I had no side effects other than a sore arm. A clinic that one of my friends manages had extra shots, so I was able to get vaccinated a bit earlier than I expected. My wife and I were fine after the first Moderna shot. After the second dose we both had effects, her's much worse than mine. We had gotten our shots in the morning and I didn't sleep well that night. I think I woke up 20 times and could not get comfortable. The next day I woke with a headache and felt like I was coming down with something, but I could function. The second day I was much better, the effects about 10% of what they were the day before. For my wife she didn't feel well for two days with her symptoms being more severe than mine. This is a well known side effect profile (more side effects, more pronounced and lasting longer) with the second dose. It's actually a sign that your immune response (protection) is building. An interesting feature in many places is that (given the spread that has occurred) many people who are being vaccinated have been exposed to the virus already and it is expected that such a pre-exposed population is more likely to suffer from side effects. An interesting aspect which is being documented with the CV vaccines is that the increased delay (vs studied delay and initial recommendations) between the two doses is actually associated with a stronger (and likely longer lasting) immunity ('booster' effect). Local reactions to vaccines can be quite marked (pain and skin changes at injection site) for certain vaccines (ie tetanus shot) when immunity is already present. Keep a record for your next emergency room visit. There are 'biological' explanations behind this phenomenon but it's basically the inverse of the law of diminishing returns (on certain incremental capital). We were in LA March 2020 and cut our visit short because of the virus and flew back to Indiana. My wife became ill and in bed for 7-10 days. We have speculated that she had covid, but back then she only had a video conference with her doctor. Her doctor didn't want her to come in, thought she didn't have covid, and didn't want to test her. Her more severe reaction to the second dose than me could be because she actually had covid.
Novak Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 Her doctor didn't want her to come in, thought she didn't have covid, and didn't want to test her. That was a very common thing early on. Had a lot of friends get sick around then with classic Covid symptoms and their doctors told them they didn't have Covid without a test. Some ended up going to the hospital later, but even then didn't get tested. Probably for the best, though. Going into the hospital early on during the pandemic didn't produce great outcomes - they kept trying to put everyone on a ventilator.
Cigarbutt Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 ... I have been waiting for the side effects of the second shot and it hasn't materialize yet. The first shot had more side effects. Injection site pain (from the physical presence of the liquid injected) is quite common (and variable) but systemic effects (immune response) are felt only by a minority of people. And there are always outliers. Statistical outliers are often the most interesting people (situations) but often outliers are not true outliers, they are simply data looking for their distribution. :) Apparently many people worry that the vaccine does not work if no significant side effects are felt. It's like the widely held belief (when i was young) that a cough syrup works well only if the taste is awful. When my kids were younger, i realized that the taste of cough syrup had considerably improved (bubble gum taste etc) but i think many people still believe the bad taste part.
ValueArb Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 Why is never not an option here? Why get inoculated for polio or hepatitis? Because the cost/benefit ratio is extraordinary.
fareastwarriors Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 Why is never not an option here? Why get inoculated for polio or hepatitis? Because the cost/benefit ratio is extraordinary. This can get ugly fast so let's not make quick judgement. Hopefully he makes an informed decision and that's it. It still his decision.
Xaston Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 Why is never not an option here? Because only sith deal in absolutes
fareastwarriors Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 I snagged an appointment for a Pfizer shot later today at cvs
AzCactus Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 Why is never not an option here? Why get inoculated for polio or hepatitis? Because the cost/benefit ratio is extraordinary. This can get ugly fast so let's not make quick judgement. Hopefully he makes an informed decision and that's it. It still his decision. Valuearb, I think asking why never is not an option is totally fair. In my age range, there have been 5485 deaths over the past year (per CDC). Whats more is that a lot of the people who die from Covid either have pre-existing conditions such as obesity, high blood pressure etc which I don't have. The average vaccine takes years to pass between different stages of the approval process. This one got approved in less than a year. Furthermore, in the US you have no legal recourse if there are long term effects from the vaccine. If you are eager to get the vaccine that's your choice, if I choose not to that's mine.
fareastwarriors Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 Do it for the freebies! lol https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/23/here-are-a-few-of-the-freebies-for-getting-the-covid-vaccine-.html
Gregmal Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 Do it for the freebies! lol https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/23/here-are-a-few-of-the-freebies-for-getting-the-covid-vaccine-.html They really should have just gave people vaccination checks instead of all this "do nothing" stimulus money.
AzCactus Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 Do it for the freebies! lol https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/23/here-are-a-few-of-the-freebies-for-getting-the-covid-vaccine-.html They really should have just gave people vaccination checks instead of all this "do nothing" stimulus money. For some people that would be a huge incentive certainly better than Krispy Kreme :)
Gregmal Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 People receive money to give blood, jizz, etc all the time. Lots of people take money in exchange for carrying someone else's baby or for participating in medical studies, etc. Plenty of of people in general, even with their normal jobs...do things they dont want to, in exchange for money. If the virus is as serious as many claim, this should be a no brainer but like many other things involving government....it seems to elude them.
Spekulatius Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 Why is never not an option here? Why get inoculated for polio or hepatitis? Because the cost/benefit ratio is extraordinary. This can get ugly fast so let's not make quick judgement. Hopefully he makes an informed decision and that's it. It still his decision. Valuearb, I think asking why never is not an option is totally fair. In my age range, there have been 5485 deaths over the past year (per CDC). Whats more is that a lot of the people who die from Covid either have pre-existing conditions such as obesity, high blood pressure etc which I don't have. The average vaccine takes years to pass between different stages of the approval process. This one got approved in less than a year. Furthermore, in the US you have no legal recourse if there are long term effects from the vaccine. If you are eager to get the vaccine that's your choice, if I choose not to that's mine. I agree choosing not to should be an option in a poll. The goal of a poll is to find out how people think, not to lead the outcome or to judge. We can do the latter in the commentary ;D
Castanza Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 How about tell people they don’t have to wear a mask after they get their second dose.
TwoCitiesCapital Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 People receive money to give blood, jizz, etc all the time. Lots of people take money in exchange for carrying someone else's baby or for participating in medical studies, etc. Plenty of of people in general, even with their normal jobs...do things they dont want to, in exchange for money. If the virus is as serious as many claim, this should be a no brainer but like many other things involving government....it seems to elude them. Unfortunately, it's not as straightforward as this. The book Freakonomics outlined the results when Sweden (I think it Sweden) tried to drum up support for where to build a nuclear energy facility. First pass was that ~60% of the population said they wouldn't mind living near the facility, but the government wanted greater support so offered a monetary incentive to drum up more support. The result? The % of the population that supported living near the facility decreased dramatically. Why? 1) It's hypothesized that more people were motivated by patriotism and doing the right thing for their country which took a back seat when a monetary incentive was introduced. Maybe you're more willing to accept a potentially bad outcome if you know it's for the good of your country versus if you were simply paid $100 to do so. 2) It introduces the potential for trying to "game" the system. Obviously the gov't wanted more support than 60%, so maybe they'll offer MORE money if you withhold your support on the first offer (or first few offers). Either way, it's not as simple as saying "pay the people and you'll get more people to do it". In this example, I'll be getting the vaccine because I feel it is the right thing to do and not because I'm scared of having coronavirus (probably already had it TBH given how many people I know have). Ultimately, that is a stronger incentive for me than if the government offered to pay me $50 or $100 to do so.
StevieV Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 People receive money to give blood, jizz, etc all the time. Lots of people take money in exchange for carrying someone else's baby or for participating in medical studies, etc. Plenty of of people in general, even with their normal jobs...do things they dont want to, in exchange for money. If the virus is as serious as many claim, this should be a no brainer but like many other things involving government....it seems to elude them. Unfortunately, it's not as straightforward as this. The book Freakonomics outlined the results when Sweden (I think it Sweden) tried to drum up support for where to build a nuclear energy facility. First pass was that ~60% of the population said they wouldn't mind living near the facility, but the government wanted greater support so offered a monetary incentive to drum up more support. The result? The % of the population that supported living near the facility decreased dramatically. Why? 1) It's hypothesized that more people were motivated by patriotism and doing the right thing for their country which took a back seat when a monetary incentive was introduced. Maybe you're more willing to accept a potentially bad outcome if you know it's for the good of your country versus if you were simply paid $100 to do so. 2) It introduces the potential for trying to "game" the system. Obviously the gov't wanted more support than 60%, so maybe they'll offer MORE money if you withhold your support on the first offer (or first few offers). Either way, it's not as simple as saying "pay the people and you'll get more people to do it". In this example, I'll be getting the vaccine because I feel it is the right thing to do and not because I'm scared of having coronavirus (probably already had it TBH given how many people I know have). Ultimately, that is a stronger incentive for me than if the government offered to pay me $50 or $100 to do so. I hadn't thought of it until these posts, but I definitely could imagine a relatively small monetary incentive having the opposite effect. I'm not sure it is either 1 or 2, but the monetary offer making people more suspect. Why do they think they have to pay me $100? Also, maybe people start to weigh the money against the perceived risk/give. Taking the nuclear power plant - what, they think I'll risk my safety for $100? They think I can be bought for $50? No way.
ERICOPOLY Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 Why is never not an option here? Why get inoculated for polio or hepatitis? Because the cost/benefit ratio is extraordinary. This can get ugly fast so let's not make quick judgement. Hopefully he makes an informed decision and that's it. It still his decision. Valuearb, I think asking why never is not an option is totally fair. In my age range, there have been 5485 deaths over the past year (per CDC). Whats more is that a lot of the people who die from Covid either have pre-existing conditions such as obesity, high blood pressure etc which I don't have. The average vaccine takes years to pass between different stages of the approval process. This one got approved in less than a year. Furthermore, in the US you have no legal recourse if there are long term effects from the vaccine. If you are eager to get the vaccine that's your choice, if I choose not to that's mine. If you get seriously ill from covid-19, do you pay your medical bills cash out of pocket or does somebody else pick up the tab?
Ross812 Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 My wife and I are in our 30s and got the first round of the Pfizer vaccine 7 days ago. Though I don't like being sick, the main reason I got it as soon as possible was to prevent spreading the virus to more vulnerable friends and co-workers. I also like to travel internationally for work and pleasure, but don't want to extend my trip 2 weeks if I test positive. Typing this from a hammock in Costa Rica.
fareastwarriors Posted March 24, 2021 Posted March 24, 2021 Got my first Pfizer shot at cvs. The wait today was bad. Over 45m Need to get my donut All I got this
wachtwoord Posted March 25, 2021 Posted March 25, 2021 Why is never not an option here? Why get inoculated for polio or hepatitis? Because the cost/benefit ratio is extraordinary. Cause Polio is actually dangerous and the available vaccines are well tested and in use for a long time (making the chance of unknown long term side effects negligable). I'm innocolated for a number of other dangerous deseases (the ones that I'm likely enough to run into) with tried and true vaccines available. I don't take vaccines for non-dangerous deseases, it' much wiser to let your own imune system handle it. It's not like I get the yearly flu shot (do you?) and influenza viruses are generally much more dangerous than Corona viruses. Furthermore the available deseases are not even out of stage 2 testing.And we didn't even start talking about possible unknown long term side effects. In fact, I would call taking this vaccine reckless if you fall outside the primary risk groups (and unwise otherwise). I consider injecting your children with this failing at your parental duty of care. The politicians are also highly reckless in my opinion. Vaccination 101 is that you don't start vaccinating during an active outbreak as that risks strengthening the virus. Aren't we in one right now? Dangerous game they are playing with all of our futures ...
TwoCitiesCapital Posted March 25, 2021 Posted March 25, 2021 Why is never not an option here? Why get inoculated for polio or hepatitis? Because the cost/benefit ratio is extraordinary. Cause Polio is actually dangerous and the available vaccines are well tested and in use for a long time (making the chance of unknown long term side effects negligable). I'm innocolated for a number of other dangerous deseases (the ones that I'm likely enough to run into) with tried and true vaccines available. I don't take vaccines for non-dangerous deseases, it' much wiser to let your own imune system handle it. It's not like I get the yearly flu shot (do you?) and influenza viruses are generally much more dangerous than Corona viruses. Furthermore the available deseases are not even out of stage 2 testing.And we didn't even start talking about possible unknown long term side effects. In fact, I would call taking this vaccine reckless if you fall outside the primary risk groups (and unwise otherwise). I consider injecting your children with this failing at your parental duty of care. The politicians are also highly reckless in my opinion. Vaccination 101 is that you don't start vaccinating during an active outbreak as that risks strengthening the virus. Aren't we in one right now? Dangerous game they are playing with all of our futures ... I don't take issue with you being concerned about taking a new and unproven vaccine. I do take issue with underselling the dangers of Covid though. With 550k dead in the US in just a year, and near 3 million worldwide, I would think this has proven far deadlier than polio ever was. And while polio paralyzed just 0.5% of people who caught it (see attached), Covid is estimated to cause long term cardiovascular and/or respiratory issues for up to 1/3 of people who have had it regardless if the severity of symptoms (source is CDC). And we still really don't know how severe that impact will be or HOW long it lasts. So we can stop pretending like Polio was this big bad thing and Covid isn't. Covid, by the numbers, is way worse
Parsad Posted March 25, 2021 Posted March 25, 2021 Why is never not an option here? Why get inoculated for polio or hepatitis? Because the cost/benefit ratio is extraordinary. Cause Polio is actually dangerous and the available vaccines are well tested and in use for a long time (making the chance of unknown long term side effects negligable). I'm innocolated for a number of other dangerous deseases (the ones that I'm likely enough to run into) with tried and true vaccines available. I don't take vaccines for non-dangerous deseases, it' much wiser to let your own imune system handle it. It's not like I get the yearly flu shot (do you?) and influenza viruses are generally much more dangerous than Corona viruses. Furthermore the available deseases are not even out of stage 2 testing.And we didn't even start talking about possible unknown long term side effects. In fact, I would call taking this vaccine reckless if you fall outside the primary risk groups (and unwise otherwise). I consider injecting your children with this failing at your parental duty of care. The politicians are also highly reckless in my opinion. Vaccination 101 is that you don't start vaccinating during an active outbreak as that risks strengthening the virus. Aren't we in one right now? Dangerous game they are playing with all of our futures ... I don't take issue with you being concerned about taking a new and unproven vaccine. I do take issue with underselling the dangers of Covid though. With 550k dead in the US in just a year, and near 3 million worldwide, I would think this has proven far deadlier than polio ever was. And while polio paralyzed just 0.5% of people who caught it (see attached), Covid is estimated to cause long term cardiovascular and/or respiratory issues for up to 1/3 of people who have had it regardless if the severity of symptoms (source is CDC). And we still really don't know how severe that impact will be or HOW long it lasts. So we can stop pretending like Polio was this big bad thing and Covid isn't. Covid, by the numbers, is way worse The problem is that there is an inherent skepticism for science and statistics. Masks, vaccines, etc seem no different among the skeptics than when they first heard about smoking being dangerous to your health. It took decades to convince the skeptics. We're expecting Fauci and others to convince these similarly-minded people that Covid is bad in less than two years. It just won't take with them. Even though today, smokers are about as rare as a poodle with a mohawk, some continue smoking decades after the statistics were more than proven and they are treated as pariahs in society. There will always be the diehards...but if you can get the bulk of the population to change behavior, get inocculated, etc...it still ends up benefitting society overall. Cheers!
Recommended Posts