Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Spartan
My wife is a cancer survivor, after the initial distribution to essential workers, would she get any type of priority?
Is she taking any kind of medication now? If so, what is she taking? Radiation treatments and some medications are known to suppress the immune system.

I might be able to answer your question, but do not rely on what I say. Find out what her oncologist says.
 
Last edited:
Swerd

Swerd

Audioholic Spartan
No, you became a prodigy. :D
Shh! Don't reveal my secret. It was all those repeated booster shots I got in Navy boot camp that made me the genius that I am :rolleyes:.

Of course, it that's true, what does it say about anti-vaxxers? Avoiding vaccinations made them dumb as rocks ;).
 
Old Onkyo

Old Onkyo

Audioholic Chief
Is she taking any kind of medication now? If so, what is she taking? Radiation treatments and some medications are known to suppress the immune system.

I might be able to answer your question, but do not rely on what I say. Find out what her oncologist says.
No meds, I sent you a message offline with a little more background.
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
No meds, I sent you a message offline with a little more background.
I have no insight into how such a decision is made regarding vaccinations, but I suspect she likely would not.
If i am right it is regretful for your situation, but I believe one of the major considerations when dealing with making rules for a large group over an extended time period is how distinct the rules can be and how easily they can be verified.
I mean, I took my check for $1200, but don't feel like I should have gotten it because compared to others, the Covid-19 pandemic did not cause me much monetary grief. I felt like they should have made it available only to those who suffered direct losses. I can only assume the reason they gave it to everyone is because the nightmare of attempting to determine who justly deserved it would be too much of a barrier to efficient distribution.
I fear the same would be true when asking about health history or comorbidity. I might once have thought that requiring a doctors recommendation coulld work, but given how many doctors are ready and willing to write prescriptions for addictive drugs without careful consideration, I am not sure what a doctor's recommendation means.
That is the "how easily can the need be verified" part. The other part is how distinct can the rules be. For example, if your wife's situation warrants an early vax, is their someone with an equivalent need, but just slightly less that should receive early vax Is there someone slightly below that level of need? With all of the people in the country, it seems likely that there would be a very fine gradient all of the way from extremely vulnerable to totally healthy. I have to imagine a group like the CDC would be looking for a clear breaking point between who would and who would not warrant early vax. The last thing they would want is to leave the decision up to the discretion of each point of administration of the vaccine (which is what you run into if looking at very fine shades of gray).
I hope smarter minds can come up with a better solution and prove me a cynic, but that is what I see as how such a determination would realistically pan out. You have my sympathy as do many others who have much more reason to be concerned about Covid-19 than most of us do (not saying I am not concerned about it, I am, but I certainly recognize other have more reason to
I have a friend who is 91. He is being very careful, but I don't know if they will draw a line for age-based priority, or, if they do, it would distinguish his priority as different than that of a 60 year old.
In my view, the system is not capable of enough precision to be fair while successfully administering vaccines by the millions over the next 3-4 months.
 
Old Onkyo

Old Onkyo

Audioholic Chief
I have no insight into how such a decision is made regarding vaccinations, but I suspect she likely would not.
If i am right it is regretful for your situation, but I believe one of the major considerations when dealing with making rules for a large group over an extended time period is how distinct the rules can be and how easily they can be verified.
I mean, I took my check for $1200, but don't feel like I should have gotten it because compared to others, the Covid-19 pandemic did not cause me much monetary grief. I felt like they should have made it available only to those who suffered direct losses. I can only assume the reason they gave it to everyone is because the nightmare of attempting to determine who justly deserved it would be too much of a barrier to efficient distribution.
I fear the same would be true when asking about health history or comorbidity. I might once have thought that requiring a doctors recommendation coulld work, but given how many doctors are ready and willing to write prescriptions for addictive drugs without careful consideration, I am not sure what a doctor's recommendation means.
That is the "how easily can the need be verified" part. The other part is how distinct can the rules be. For example, if your wife's situation warrants an early vax, is their someone with an equivalent need, but just slightly less that should receive early vax Is there someone slightly below that level of need? With all of the people in the country, it seems likely that there would be a very fine gradient all of the way from extremely vulnerable to totally healthy. I have to imagine a group like the CDC would be looking for a clear breaking point between who would and who would not warrant early vax. The last thing they would want is to leave the decision up to the discretion of each point of administration of the vaccine (which is what you run into if looking at very fine shades of gray).
I hope smarter minds can come up with a better solution and prove me a cynic, but that is what I see as how such a determination would realistically pan out. You have my sympathy as do many others who have much more reason to be concerned about Covid-19 than most of us do (not saying I am not concerned about it, I am, but I certainly recognize other have more reason to
I have a friend who is 91. He is being very careful, but I don't know if they will draw a line for age-based priority, or, if they do, it would distinguish his priority as different than that of a 60 year old.
In my view, the system is not capable of enough precision to be fair while successfully administering vaccines by the millions over the next 3-4 months.
Thanks for the insight. Like you, we couldn’t understand how we qualified for the relief check. We took it added to it and donated it. As far as the vaccine goes, I am hopeful at least she can get the shot by March. She is tough, but I would like for her to be able to get out again.
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
Thanks for the insight. Like you, we couldn’t understand how we qualified for the relief check. We took it added to it and donated it. As far as the vaccine goes, I am hopeful at least she can get the shot by March. She is tough, but I would like for her to be able to get out again.
I certainly wish you the best on that count. Perhaps, down the road, her doctor can do something to get her a vax sooner, but I doubt he has any more idea of the details than we do at this point.
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
She is tough, but I would like for her to be able to get out again.
Take care of those you love!
I just recently had a friend tell me about a woman at her church. She already had multiple issues (strange stuff like the failure of the ability of her organs to stay where they belong - I am no doctor) and at 35 was given 10 years (which would see their 3 kids into college- except for the youngest, who will be a HS senor). She was very much staying at home to be safe. She and her husband now have Covid and it is looking very bad for her. The worst of it is that the most likely source is the husband who is permanent staff at the church. It is pretty well known that while the church services had at least some policies for prevention (temperature checks, mask requirements, spread out seating), the small staff that was there 5 days a week did not feel they were at risk (some deranged combination of "the House of the Lord is a safe place", and Covid is being overblown by the media) and did not follow the same protocol. I also feel there is a lot of "we haven't got it in the 8 past months, so what we've been doing must be safe enough" as well as a certain percentage of people who don't really understand the nature of viral spread and the impact of increased density of virus within the population.
Whatever, the reason/excuse, I can't imagine the shame/guilt the husband will have to bear if Covid takes her from him and his kids so soon.

TLS Guy put it best:
... to a large extent you can control your own destiny. It is time to protect yourselves and family and take maximum precautions, especially of you are older.
The game now is to be alive and well when it is your turn for a vaccine. That is the mantra from now on.
 
Last edited:
TLS Guy

TLS Guy

Audioholic Slumlord
My wife is a cancer survivor, after the initial distribution to essential workers, would she get any type of priority?
That would depend on what her cancer was, and what treatment had to be administered to relive her of her cancer. If the treatment left her compromised in any way, then that would be considered a risk factor.

I was treated for prostate cancer, but I am not at higher risk from that. Cancer is not a monolithic disease.

However I had a major illness and surgery 14 years ago, and was critically ill for around three weeks. That left me with some permanent lung injury, so I probably would not handle Covid-19 well.
However, I have a nice residence here and my wife and I are quite content. So this gives me ample time to indulge my antisocial tendencies, so I am quite content to wait my turn, and expect to be called with the mid seventies age group. Age is by far my biggest risk factor and outweighs all the others.

I think you can all tell that the situation is very serious in the US due to a severe leadership vacuum. We have taken half measures too late and released them too soon and repeatedly taken belated actions. The population are, and will, pay a dreadful price. This all in the name of protecting to economy, not realizing that the only way to protect the economy is to limit the spread if this highly infectious disease. When the final chapter is written, people will shake their heads for a thousand years, and our actions will stand for ever as one of the greatest examples of mass denial and stupidity.
 
KEW

KEW

Audioholic Overlord
That would depend on what her cancer was, and what treatment had to be administered to relive her of her cancer. If the treatment left her compromised in any way, then that would be considered a risk factor.

I was treated for prostate cancer, but I am not at higher risk from that. Cancer is not a monolithic disease.

However I had a major illness and surgery 14 years ago, and was critically ill for around three weeks. That left me with some permanent lung injury, so I probably would not handle Covid-19 well.
However, I have a nice residence here and my wife and I are quite content. So this gives me ample time to indulge my antisocial tendencies, so I am quite content to wait my turn, and expect to be called with the mid seventies age group. Age is by far my biggest risk factor and outweighs all the others.

I think you can all tell that the situation is very serious in the US due to a severe leadership vacuum. We have taken half measures too late and released them too soon and repeatedly taken belated actions. The population are, and will, pay a dreadful price. This all in the name of protecting to economy, not realizing that the only way to protect the economy is to limit the spread if this highly infectious disease. When the final chapter is written, people will shake their heads for a thousand years, and our actions will stand for ever as one of the greatest examples of mass denial and stupidity.
Is it fair to say that this is the first true pandemic where we knew better ... but we still screwed the pooch?
I'm thinking we really did not understand the means of transmission when the Spanish flu was around but not positive that was true.
 
M

Mr._Clark

Senior Audioholic
https://www.wsj.com/articles/pfizer-slashed-its-covid-19-vaccine-rollout-target-after-facing-supply-chain-obstacles-11607027787

Pfizer/BioNTech expected to drop from 100 to 50 million vaccines by end of year. Over a billion for 2021.
I find myself wondering if they should go ahead and use all of the initial doses with the expectation that the second dose will be available, or do they use half and keep half in storage for the second dose?

Here's a related article:

>>>Federal officials estimate about 40 million vaccines will be available by the end of the month if both Moderna and Pfizer get US Food and Drug Administration authorization -- only enough to vaccinate 20 million people, because two doses are needed for each person. But even that number will fall short. Pfizer is only expected to have 6.4 million doses of vaccine ready by mid-December. . . .

California must vaccinate 2.4 million healthcare workers first and Governor Gavin Newsom said earlier this week that the state is only receiving 327,000 doses of the vaccine from Pfizer to start with. Since that covers just a fraction of the healthcare workers needed to get vaccinated, Newsom said Thursday the state would be trimming its list of top priority group of healthcare workers even further to decide who gets vaccinated first.

"It's one thing when you hear the national news about, well, we broadly all agree that our healthcare workers and skilled nursing residential care and assisted living facilities should be prioritized, but that is millions and millions of people. When you only have a few hundred thousand doses of vaccines - doses, you need two doses -- you can cut that in half in terms of the total number of people that actually will be fully vaccinated. We have to look at some prioritization of those doses, and we've done just that," Newsom said Thursday. <<<

 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
Shh! Don't reveal my secret. It was all those repeated booster shots I got in Navy boot camp that made me the genius that I am :rolleyes:.

Of course, it that's true, what does it say about anti-vaxxers? Avoiding vaccinations made them dumb as rocks ;).
Did they give you 'smartenin' pills?
 
highfigh

highfigh

Audioholic Overlord
Is it fair to say that this is the first true pandemic where we knew better ... but we still screwed the pooch?
I'm thinking we really did not understand the means of transmission when the Spanish flu was around but not positive that was true.
Considering the info we got from China, CDC, WHO and other countries at the outset, I'm not sure I would say we 'knew' much of anything. The info changed by the hour and some of it should have been made public, but wasn't. Italy had cases of something they weren't familiar with and rather than say "We're seeing something but don't know what it is- any help?", they didn't say anything. I would say that people here in the US tend to be 'know-it-alls' when they don't have a clue and because of this, they ignore good advice. What do people do when someone has a cold or the Flu? They avoid contact and stay away, to some extent. I think part of this particular illness is different because our 'weird crap-o-meter' has never been pegged the way it has been, this year. That, and people are tired of being cooped up at home.
 
M

Mr._Clark

Senior Audioholic
TLS Guy put it best:

... to a large extent you can control your own destiny. It is time to protect yourselves and family and take maximum precautions, especially of you are older.
The game now is to be alive and well when it is your turn for a vaccine. That is the mantra from now on.
I agree with TLS Guy 100%.

We could argue politics until the Llamas come home with their awesome little antibodies, but that wouldn't actually accomplish much of anything.

 
D

Dude#1279435

Full Audioholic
I find myself wondering if they should go ahead and use all of the initial doses with the expectation that the second dose will be available, or do they use half and keep half in storage for the second dose?

Here's a related article:

>>>Federal officials estimate about 40 million vaccines will be available by the end of the month if both Moderna and Pfizer get US Food and Drug Administration authorization -- only enough to vaccinate 20 million people, because two doses are needed for each person. But even that number will fall short. Pfizer is only expected to have 6.4 million doses of vaccine ready by mid-December. . . .

California must vaccinate 2.4 million healthcare workers first and Governor Gavin Newsom said earlier this week that the state is only receiving 327,000 doses of the vaccine from Pfizer to start with. Since that covers just a fraction of the healthcare workers needed to get vaccinated, Newsom said Thursday the state would be trimming its list of top priority group of healthcare workers even further to decide who gets vaccinated first.

"It's one thing when you hear the national news about, well, we broadly all agree that our healthcare workers and skilled nursing residential care and assisted living facilities should be prioritized, but that is millions and millions of people. When you only have a few hundred thousand doses of vaccines - doses, you need two doses -- you can cut that in half in terms of the total number of people that actually will be fully vaccinated. We have to look at some prioritization of those doses, and we've done just that," Newsom said Thursday. <<<

I think they said they started setting up supply chains in March, but because they had to go back and get the initial vaccines up to standards it caused delays.
 
mtrycrafts

mtrycrafts

Audioholic Slumlord
Is it fair to say that this is the first true pandemic where we knew better ... but we still screwed the pooch?
I'm thinking we really did not understand the means of transmission when the Spanish flu was around but not positive that was true.
I read that they could not identify it well enough due to microscope resolution difficulties of the time. Wasn't sure it was a virus or whatnot. But yes, lack of knowledge of the time
 
M

Mr._Clark

Senior Audioholic
This is not good.

>>>A new statistic shows that health-care workers are running out of space to treat COVID-19 patients. . . .

It is clearest in a single simple statistic, recently observed by Ashish Jha, the dean of the Brown University School of Public Health. For weeks, the number of people hospitalized with COVID-19 had been about 3.5 percent of the number of cases reported a week earlier. But, he noticed, that relationship has broken down. A smaller and smaller proportion of cases is appearing in hospitalization totals.

“This is a real thing. It’s not an artifact. It’s not data problems,” Jha told us.

Why would this number change? As hospitals run out of beds, they could be forced to alter the standards for what kinds of patients are admitted with COVID-19. The average American admitted to the hospital with COVID-19 today is probably more acutely ill than someone admitted with COVID-19 in the late summer. This isn’t because doctors or nurses are acting out of cruelty or malice, but simply because they are running out of hospital beds and must tighten the criteria on who can be admitted.<<<

 
Irvrobinson

Irvrobinson

Audioholic Spartan
I think you can all tell that the situation is very serious in the US due to a severe leadership vacuum. We have taken half measures too late and released them too soon and repeatedly taken belated actions. The population are, and will, pay a dreadful price. This all in the name of protecting to economy, not realizing that the only way to protect the economy is to limit the spread if this highly infectious disease. When the final chapter is written, people will shake their heads for a thousand years, and our actions will stand for ever as one of the greatest examples of mass denial and stupidity.
I think it's worse than a leadership vacuum; even from those politicians trying to provide leadership there's illogic, deception, and lack of focus on what's long been known to be important. I realize that you're discussing is lack of leadership from the federal government, and I agree, but the incompetence is widespread. How many mixed messages from well-regarded experts have we heard about masks? The message should be simple and completely aligned: wear them if you are in the same enclosed space as other people. How many governors have shut down small retail businesses while allowing so-called essential big-box stores to remain open? The state-level exception lists for lockdowns are usually long and include a large percentage of people, including construction businesses, manufacturing, auto repair, home maintenance of all kinds, federal employees, and military personnel. No one in government at any level seems willing to limit protest events of any kind, sending a really terrible mixed message, and at every level politicians are using the constitution to defend religious gatherings, political rallies, and even weddings. Probably the most important spreading events, private gatherings in homes, are out of control, because short of martial law the authorities are powerless to do anything about it. I think we have the pandemic that was inevitable in western democracies.
 

Latest posts


newsletter
  • RBHsound.com
  • BlueJeansCable.com
  • SVS Sound Subwoofers
  • Experience the Martin Logan Montis
Top