Sure, but people with a "history of a significant allergic reaction to a vaccine, medicine or food" having reactions to the vaccine is not surprising to me. The testing phases of these things were absolutely rushed but the findings are consistent. Should we be more or less skeptical with this new information? I personally think its ab the same.

I think it means exercise caution which is probably good advice for life in general. :)

That's fair, but if I get reactions from vaccines I wouldn't expect this one to be different buuuuut people are still eating tide pods. So my faith in common sense is diminished. Touche.

The way I read it was just like, people that have reactions to vaccines are having a reaction to the vaccine. lol:clap:

Wasn't Dr really it was an Occupational Health clinic doing employee testing.

Just for reference: we give medications to people who have allergic reactions to those medications all the time because it can often be the case that people need those medications, and their allergy isn’t significant. We have had people who claim to have an allergy to epinephrine because it increased their heart rate. We have had people who say they are allergic to an antibiotic because it caused diarrhea and upset their stomach. This is a far cry from wrenching nausea, keeling over from abdominal pain, breaking out in hives or a rash, and even further from having a severe allergic reaction like angioedema or something that might cause a collapsed airway or death.

Humans can’t be used as guinea pigs where they are knowingly hurt or put in harm’s way. There is a difference between adverse effects caused by a medication that is applicable to a narrow group versus a broad group, or reactions that can be predicted and thus avoided and ones that would be hard to predict. For instance, people with known reasons to avoid vaccines because they have immuno deficiencies or reactions will be avoiding these vaccines, so there is no reason to include them in a study. They will know not to take the vaccine. Contrast that with hydroxychloroquine, as an example, where the scientists/doctors removed people from the study who had a prolonged QTc or who developed a prolonged QTc or who deteriorated and/or who moved to the ICU during the study, then later claimed there was no adverse effects, as if it was safe and only resulted in improved outcomes when this was clearly not the case. The results of the study could be applied to people in a hospital setting who are receiving multiple tests and ECGs per day at best, but the claim that it is safe would be misleading for the general population, if people started to take hydroxychloroquine as an outpatient for instance .

Circling back to this study, if the vaccine caused wide spread allergic reactions in groups that normally don’t have allergic reactions to vaccines then that would be mentioned or would cause the medication to fail clinical trials, but again, there is no point in torturing people that they already know would be tortured when their adverse effects aren’t specific to this vaccine.

Just an example to make it clear: Say scientists were testing a new Italian dish for enjoyment, but it had gluten in it so celiac people would be excluded and people with gluten sensitivities might also decide to avoid the meal, or they could eat it if they normally have mild GI symptoms like getting an intestinal sunburn (maybe one exposure isn’t the end of the world, but repeated exposures would be destructive). The fact that these groups avoided the meal and didn’t participate in the study wouldn’t change the results about whether the majority of people either enjoyed or did not enjoy the experience of eating this new Italian meal. If the scientists included them then not only would it be unethical, but it wouldn’t make sense. It would be like a celiac patient going to Olive Garden then writing a bad Yelp review that the bread and pasta gave him an adverse allergic reaction.

There will always be side effects. I've been asked about getting alternate flu vaccines if I'm allergic to eggs or other allergens.

To some degree I'm an example of this. I have an allergy to penicillin and to NSAIDs (aspirin, etc). Both of these can cause a reaction in me that is dangerous (swelling in the face, nose, throat, hives) so I don't do those because it could kill me in short order without treatment.

On the flip side I have had mild reactions, at times, to the flu shot. Fever for a short time, or probably more correctly feeling very flush, even had an issue with my vision one year (caused it to look like the back of my hand was "crawling", very odd). Still I take the shot every year because it passes, and doesn't always happen.

Since we're on the topic.

I've never had an allergic reaction to medication or any vaccines (take normal flu vaccine, etc.).

But I have terrible stomach "hypersensitivity" (GI doc term, not mine) to certain foods, which causes unusual allergic reactions, usually acid reflux, terrible stomach pain, occasional nausea if it's extreme enough of an event.

So in this case are we thinking (obviously not looking for an official, medical approval here just theorizing) that this should still be fine for me or do I actually need to confirm otherwise? :bonk:

I personally wouldn’t be concerned. I have IBS and follow a healthy, organic, Mediterranean, FODMAP diet to avoid issues. My wife is vegan, so I eat vegan for many meals too, but where I am going with all this is I can have severe adverse reactions to food as if I am getting food poisoning, but I don’t have rashes or hives or horse throat or other issues with any food. I think we are in the same boat, and I am not worried.

Yeah, sounds roughly the same. I don't get any typical allergic reactions from food (other than like almonds, which somehow do both but never very seriously).

Just FYI, I have been talking to people at work, and I am guessing 50-75% of the staff say they are not going to get the vaccine at all, or they are planning to wait until enough people take it without issues. I’m surprised this sentiment is coming from healthcare professionals, and what’s worse, almost all of them whom I’ve talked to are making this decision from an uninformed position, which is sad.

Sometimes I feel like I am living in the movie Idiocracy.

Do you think this is mostly due to "rushing out the vaccine"?

I originally partially had that mentality, but after reading more about it and how various parts of it have undergone research in the past I've felt more confident about it.

Yes, they think it is rushed. I don’t know what they expect. Again, from my conversations with many people, this seems to be from an uninformed position. Most people don’t research things. Any doubt from anyone anywhere that is pervasive enough turns into a mob mentality where people follow the sentiment of the crowd like lemmings.

225k new cases today with 3,243 new deaths.

ICU beds are reaching capacity. Typically hospitals get full this time of year, but obviously COVID is making it worse. Typically it isn’t this bad so soon when we are still in fall.

Like you, I'm particularly saddened by this.

I have been living under a rock for the last week, has government leadership volunteered to take the vaccine first to convince people it's safe? Because if not they should.

What? No. That's what old people are for.

Actually somewhat, yeah: https://www.npr.org/sections/coronav...cine-on-camera

I've been living under a rock for the last 3 years. It's nice and cozy under here.


I'm very mixed on getting the vaccine. Not outright opposed to it, but am concerned about how it was fast tracked, the stringent storage requirements, and unintended side effects of it. Also unsure of how long it offers any sort of resistance for, sources seem to skew between 3 months to a few years, but then also say being exposed to the virus itself could offer similar protection. At the same time I've heard more than a few times the virus is mutating faster than we can build a resistance to it, so it's all in vain anyways...

I honestly don't even know which way is up anymore with all of the misinformation, pre-information(stuff that's fundamentally true, but jumps to the media before scientists can verify), and facts all getting so jumbled and jammed out everywhere faster than a flat earther can deny the curved horizon...

:D

Meh, stick it in my arm

I've had more vaccinations from everything from the flu to the plague that another won't bother me

There is a small percentage of people that "may" have an issue, like dying on the raod on the way to work, or getting cancer

Some people are idiots and need to remove their tin foil hats and get on with life

Putin gave Sputnik to his daughter.

Somehow, that sounds dirty and just wrong.

I'm confused...

Sputnik is the name given to the Russian COVID vaccine.

It was a sacrifice he was willing to make for his people. :iono:

Putin's daughter took Sputnik.

Why don't we call our vaccine program Apollo? Gemini?

Warp speed is ghey.

I think its better than Sputnik which makes even less sense (space program aside) since it translates to "travelling companion" in Russian I believe.

Mercury would have been the better choice from the space program names in the US since he was the "Flash" winged messenger in mythology.

Still, I'm not sure why calling it what it was like "Operation: COVID Response" or "Operation: Develop me a damn shot before I get sick" wouldn't have been fine.

lol

I don't think we should encourage Mercury injections though...

That did occur to me.

Is Putin playing with words, it could be an anagram but he decided to ignore the 's' and the 'k'.. unless it works as an anagram in Russian.. who knows what goes through the minds of "great" leaders..

Hah! Clever. Took a second though.

Aha! Now that B-rate Russian Sci-Fi movie I watched on Hulu makes sense!

if the Marvel universe is to be belileved, if the injections take place in a high tech scientific lab, i could become bionic.

i'll probably just gain the ability to grow hair whenever i want.

BUT SUPER POWERS

That would kind of be an awesome superpower...

And get a taste for human flesh?

I wish I had kept the post from else where. I won't be able to get the details correct but it went something like this:
Normally to get a new drug to market involves getting the test approved, the paper work submitted, hoping this drug will make it to the top of all the other drugs hoping to be approved, getting the testing done, waiting to get results, hope the money doesn't run out before the final results are through.
As opposed to Covid vaccine. Everyone wants it now. The queuing for money doesn't exist. It is shoved to the front of the line. And yes, one drug company stuffed up their testing to great chagrin.

Has anyone else in the U.S. been invited to participate in this?

https://www.census.gov/data/experime...se-survey.html