Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 404 posts

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#191

Post by learc83 »

ghaff wrote: post #185
learc83 wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US vaccination plan is state by state. In many states people working in food service and grocery stores, people under 60 who are overweight, have high blood pressure, asthma etc... will be offered the vaccine in phase 2. It’s not just doctors and the elderly, it’s a huge chunk of the population. And depending on how many people actually want the vaccine and how many are approved it’s possible that healthy, under…

It varies by state but I expect most will at least roughly follow CDC guidelines. There will probably be variance in who is considered essential and who gets it after essential works, at risk, and 65+. At least some places are looking to start vaccinate younger people who are more likely to spread and only then do other older age groups.

Pretty much every state has a publicly available vaccine plan that you can read. The variance is pretty big even though it mostly follows the same progression. My stepdad can get the vaccine in phase 1b in his state, but not my mom. The state over from her my mom could get it in phase 1b, but not my stepdad.

My fiancée's parent's can't get it until phase 3 in their state, but they could both get it in phase 1b in my parent's state.

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#192

Post by dm319 »

thisistheend123 wrote: post #188
dm319 wrote: post #180

I work here and was in clinic this morning. We had three eligible patients. One consented to it and is having the vaccine now. The other two declined. Not making a point, just a data point.

Hey thanks for your comment. Could you describe in more detail how the vaccines are currently being stored in your clinic? How long does the vaccine can remain in room temperature, once taken out of clod storage. How many doses have been allocated to your clinic and on an average how many patients do you foresee being vaccinated over a short period of time, let's say a month. Also, are health workers also planning to…

I run a specialty clinic for a type of cancer, so it isn't specific for vaccination. However, patients >80 yrs who were attending in person were identified as eligible for the vaccine. They have attended elsewhere in the hospital to receive the vaccine, but my understanding is that it needs -80/70 for storage, and can be moved a total of 4 times before needing to be discarded. I'm afraid I do not know more. Maybe if I wasn't so busy in the clinic I would have read through the info sheets in more detail, but it's always a rush!

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#193

Post by LatteLazy »

fabian2k wrote: post #183
LatteLazy wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ingredients list: >6. PHARMACEUTICAL PARTICULARS >6.1 List of excipients ALC-0315 = (4-hydroxybutyl) azanediyl)bis (hexane-6,1-diyl)bis(2-hexyldecanoate), ALC-0159 = 2-[(polyethylene glycol)-2000]-N,N-ditetradecylacetamide, 1,2-Distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine, cholesterol, potassium chloride, potassium dihydrogen phosphate, sodium chloride, disodium hydrogen phosphate dihydrate, sucrose, water for injections S…

The RNA isn't in that list. The first four are likely all components of the lipid vesicles that are used to deliver the mRNA. The rest of the list is mostly some salts and then sugar and water.

Thanks!

Any idea if thoseipid vesicles are "standard"?

In case you care, I have no objections to the vaccine. I'm too young (36 and not working in care) to get it any time soon. But I'd take it tomorrow if it were available for me.

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#194

Post by please-reread »

bamboleo wrote: post #172
madeofpalk wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My casual understanding was that there werent really any asymptomatic spreaders, just "not symptomatic yet ". Is this wrong?

That’s just word play. I’m asymptotic today, symptomatic tomorrow. I, asymptotic young person with nCoV 2, am spreading it today. The “yet” part is completely irrelevant to this point in time.

Are you implying you might become a geometry concept? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asymptote

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#195

Post by nojito »

aphextron wrote: post #3

A 90 year old woman in a nursing home is not spreading COVID. Wouldn't it make more sense to give this to people who are most at risk of spreading it, not dying from it? Why wouldn't we go at the root cause of the pandemic; young healthy asymptomatic spreaders?

The first phase isn't to stop the spread. The initial pool of vaccinations is to lower the strain on healthcare infrastructure. Older patients are at more risk of requiring hospital stays + ICU stays.

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#196

Post by bluGill »

iguy wrote: post #136
sgerenser wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lack of supply. They’ve already pre-sold all they could make to governments.

Presumably they pre-sold based on estimates of their production. I would not be very surprised if it turns out they can make 10% more than they committed, and auction this off. And would expect hospitals treating Saudi princelings & the like to win such an auction. But does anyone actually know what these pre-sale contracts look like? They must have some wiggle room in case production doesn't go as well as planned...…

Companies that have a vaccine are aware of image. They know that the world is watching, and this is a big marketing opportunity. They will make a profit, but long term goodwill is more valuable than any profit they could make selling to billionaires, so I doubt anything will go to auction.

The hospitals treating Saudi princes are real hospitals. So they can win auctions if it comes down to that, because they are invited to them while the rest of the black market isn't. I don't think real vaccines will come to auction though.

There is one thing left: vaccines that have approval issues. Any vaccine that is somewhat effective by not enough (The Oxford vaccine at 65% efficiency is questionable). The Russian vaccine. Any of many that haven't started phase 3 trails yet. Any vaccine that has safety issues. All are candidates for someone to "leak" to the underground. You will have to consider the risks, but it might be worth it to get it now and then in a year when the better vaccines come to you get that too.

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#197

Post by CivBase »

> First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

*after getting approval from regulators

Tens of thousands already received the vaccine during trials. This marks the official rollout with general public availability (pending supply issues), so that's cool. It's just weird that the article refers to this dose in particular as a "historic event".

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#198

Post by scotty79 »

Wintamute wrote: post #41
madeofpalk wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My casual understanding was that there werent really any asymptomatic spreaders, just "not symptomatic yet ". Is this wrong?

I'm not aware of stats relating to how many asymptomatic individuals go on to develop full blown symptomatic Covid-19. My assumption is that testing PCR positive while remaining asymptomatic the entire time is by far the most common experience. Of course, whether you go on to develop symptoms or not, its still highly pertinent information if asymptomatic spread is not a major driver of infection. As long as you self…

Every symptomatic person was asymptomatic before they started getting their first symptoms. It might have been few days that they already had the virus on their mucus membranes.

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#199

Post by alistaira »

AlanSE wrote: post #160
Wintamute wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not aware of stats relating to how many asymptomatic individuals go on to develop full blown symptomatic Covid-19. My assumption is that testing PCR positive while remaining asymptomatic the entire time is by far the most common experience. Of course, whether you go on to develop symptoms or not, its still highly pertinent information if asymptomatic spread is not a major driver of infection. As long as you self…

Truly asymptomatic spread is not a major driver of infection. There are been some major public relations problems when an organization said this, and were mistaken to mean pre-symptomatic, but the science is pretty clear. We used to think true asymptomatic infections (never develop any symptoms but test positive) were ~50% of those infected. More recent research puts it at closer to ~20%. Again, some reporting bungle…

If a person has no symptoms, I think it is reasonable to say they are "asymptomatic".

There is absolutely a difference between 'yet to have' and 'never will have' but I think it is potentially confusing to attempt to delineate between asymptomatic and "pre-symptomatic".

The main concern with messaging that causes confusion in this regard is that a superficial reading of "asymptomatic doesn't spread virus" would imply that if you aren't symptomatic, you aren't a danger.

Re: First person receives Pfizer Covid-19 vaccine in UK

#200

Post by learc83 »

dmurray wrote: post #189
hannob wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a tendency to highlight risks and sideeffects of this vaccine that is without any basis. It's reasonable to ask what the risks are, but unspecific ramblings about risks aren't helpful and it's unreasonable to highlight very hypothetical risks compared to the very real risks of getting Covid-19. Right now the risk issue seems pretty clearcut: There were no serious sideeffects in the trials. What gave me additi…

> It seems almost impossible that the vaccines pose a greater risk than the risk of not using them. While this is a reasonable conclusion from what we've read in the media, it's worth noting that this is at odds with the official opinions of the EMA and the FDA. They both believe more data is needed, or that the agencies need more time to analyze the data, before they can decree that the benefits most likely outweigh…

The FDA set a meeting date for December 10th, that was at least somewhat arbitrary. They reportedly had no one working for 4 days during Thanksgiving break, so It's likely they could have just worked through Thanksgiving and had that meeting last week if they'd wanted to.
Post reply on HN