All things CoronaVirus

[tech37]

Another lab leak hypothesis convert?

https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-ori ... -at-wuhan/

"By the end of this article, you may have learned a lot about the molecular biology of viruses. I will try to keep this process as painless as possible. But the science cannot be avoided because for now, and probably for a long time hence, it offers the only sure thread through the maze."

Interesting explanation, though it remains a highly speculative, if plausible, theory. Indeed, he's quite correctly clear that they really don't know and won't know without data proving lab creation and accident that they are unlikely to ever see. Without that data, it remains highly subject to the biases and motivations of those debating the likely 'cause'.

Those who believe, accurately, that deadly viruses regularly jump species through zoonotic progressive transmission, and indeed that the risks of pandemics have accelerated as humans have grown denser and are more mobile across the world, believe that such research is absolutely critical to preparation to combat such viruses. Those in that camp will naturally be defensive about speculative efforts to blame the very research intended to prevent pandemics for the worst pandemic in a century...for fear that such critical research will be shut down by those with an anti-science bias.

Such defensiveness (in any field) can become over-defensive and prevent very necessary safety oversight reforms.

And, in this case, that defensiveness has been hugely magnified by the extreme claims of those whose agenda is political blame, especially the sorts of accusations that the research was for military purposes and/or the the virus was released on purpose rather than by accident.

My take on the human psychology of the debate is that identification of whatever was the factual reality of the initial cause of this pandemic is less important than recognizing that both paths are possible and that it is thus imperative that we utilize our best efforts to prevent both such routes going forward and/or be prepared to respond effectively when outbreaks do occur. Research is very important, but so too is the oversight of safety.

Your rationalized opinion

"Where we are so far. Neither the natural emergence nor the lab escape hypothesis can yet be ruled out. There is still no direct evidence for either. So no definitive conclusion can be reached.

That said, the available evidence leans more strongly in one direction than the other. Readers will form their own opinion. But it seems to me that proponents of lab escape can explain all the available facts about SARS2 considerably more easily than can those who favor natural emergence."

... except for the facts Wade et. al. ignore. Nothing has moved on this origin debate in the period since the WHO report.

Facts? The WHO report = politicized trash. What difference does "nothing has moved" matter? Truth is not bound by an agenda.

Not one fact in the Wade article is new. There are a number of facts, he ignores. All this is, is an attempt by right wing media to act as if there is something new, when nothing is. Look at your own agenda there Trump boy.

You've got nothing but the usual lies genius. Right wing media? Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is right wing media? And Wade, a Brit, who for years wrote for Nature, Science, and the NYT? Yeah, right wing media alright. No one said this was new information (straw man BS on your part) but it is new that a well known science writer is speaking out. And, it is probably the most comprehensive piece written to date in favor of a lab leak hypothesis.

But you keep on lying genius and keep on politicizing a virus. The agenda is obviously yours. Trump is long gone except in your fevered brain. I want the truth to be known one way or another. I believe the lab leak hypothesis. Yes, that's my opinion.

Washington Examiner headline on Friday (5/7) did say this was new, "More evidence that the Wuhan lab-leak theory is the correct one". They were clearly pushing this is new news, when all it is is a rehash of things known for months - when I read it, except not all the things known for months. The guy is not a scientist, he is a reporter. Perhaps he believes what he writes, perhaps he doesn't, I don't care. What I know is the right wing media organizations are pushing this as a big deal conclusive news. Not presenting any thing new. Just a rehash. It is not conclusive. Nothing has changed except right wingers (Trumpnistas) are falling for this "its new information" non-sense.

No one claimed he is a scientist, yet another straw man argument (lie) from you. He is an accomplished science writer though and has been for years. You don't have to be a scientist in order to understand the science and write about it clearly, coherently, and competently. This article is the most comprehensive to date that explains some real esoteric stuff on a layman's level, and establishes the process utilized by the WIV with corroborating quotes from the scientists involved. Perhaps that is why some/most of what he is saying appears "new" to the general public. The only thing missing is proof of the growing lab leak evidence and that is due to the Chinese hiding the lab documentation. Why do that when so many have died? Oh wait, I just answered my own question.

Your MO/agenda is to try to discredit or label as right wing conspiracy every new voice in the scientific community, including this author, that affirms lab leak validity. For someone who is supposedly very educated, why are you so fearful of the lab leak hypothesis becoming generally endorsed and/or confirmed? I always believed that intelligent people seek truth above all else.

I stated at least a year ago now on here that I believed the lab leak hypothesis makes the most sense. I also stated that I believed that it was accidental and not intentional. I certainly still believe that.

[Peter Brown]

Another lab leak hypothesis convert?

https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-ori ... -at-wuhan/

"By the end of this article, you may have learned a lot about the molecular biology of viruses. I will try to keep this process as painless as possible. But the science cannot be avoided because for now, and probably for a long time hence, it offers the only sure thread through the maze."

Interesting explanation, though it remains a highly speculative, if plausible, theory. Indeed, he's quite correctly clear that they really don't know and won't know without data proving lab creation and accident that they are unlikely to ever see. Without that data, it remains highly subject to the biases and motivations of those debating the likely 'cause'.

Those who believe, accurately, that deadly viruses regularly jump species through zoonotic progressive transmission, and indeed that the risks of pandemics have accelerated as humans have grown denser and are more mobile across the world, believe that such research is absolutely critical to preparation to combat such viruses. Those in that camp will naturally be defensive about speculative efforts to blame the very research intended to prevent pandemics for the worst pandemic in a century...for fear that such critical research will be shut down by those with an anti-science bias.

Such defensiveness (in any field) can become over-defensive and prevent very necessary safety oversight reforms.

And, in this case, that defensiveness has been hugely magnified by the extreme claims of those whose agenda is political blame, especially the sorts of accusations that the research was for military purposes and/or the the virus was released on purpose rather than by accident.

My take on the human psychology of the debate is that identification of whatever was the factual reality of the initial cause of this pandemic is less important than recognizing that both paths are possible and that it is thus imperative that we utilize our best efforts to prevent both such routes going forward and/or be prepared to respond effectively when outbreaks do occur. Research is very important, but so too is the oversight of safety.

Your rationalized opinion

"Where we are so far. Neither the natural emergence nor the lab escape hypothesis can yet be ruled out. There is still no direct evidence for either. So no definitive conclusion can be reached.

That said, the available evidence leans more strongly in one direction than the other. Readers will form their own opinion. But it seems to me that proponents of lab escape can explain all the available facts about SARS2 considerably more easily than can those who favor natural emergence."

... except for the facts Wade et. al. ignore. Nothing has moved on this origin debate in the period since the WHO report.

Facts? The WHO report = politicized trash. What difference does "nothing has moved" matter? Truth is not bound by an agenda.

Not one fact in the Wade article is new. There are a number of facts, he ignores. All this is, is an attempt by right wing media to act as if there is something new, when nothing is. Look at your own agenda there Trump boy.

You've got nothing but the usual lies genius. Right wing media? Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is right wing media? And Wade, a Brit, who for years wrote for Nature, Science, and the NYT? Yeah, right wing media alright. No one said this was new information (straw man BS on your part) but it is new that a well known science writer is speaking out. And, it is probably the most comprehensive piece written to date in favor of a lab leak hypothesis.

But you keep on lying genius and keep on politicizing a virus. The agenda is obviously yours. Trump is long gone except in your fevered brain. I want the truth to be known one way or another. I believe the lab leak hypothesis. Yes, that's my opinion.

Washington Examiner headline on Friday (5/7) did say this was new, "More evidence that the Wuhan lab-leak theory is the correct one". They were clearly pushing this is new news, when all it is is a rehash of things known for months - when I read it, except not all the things known for months. The guy is not a scientist, he is a reporter. Perhaps he believes what he writes, perhaps he doesn't, I don't care. What I know is the right wing media organizations are pushing this as a big deal conclusive news. Not presenting any thing new. Just a rehash. It is not conclusive. Nothing has changed except right wingers (Trumpnistas) are falling for this "its new information" non-sense.

No one claimed he is a scientist, yet another straw man argument (lie) from you. He is an accomplished science writer though and has been for years. You don't have to be a scientist in order to understand the science and write about it clearly, coherently, and competently. This article is the most comprehensive to date that explains some real esoteric stuff on a layman's level, and establishes the process utilized by the WIV with corroborating quotes from the scientists involved. Perhaps that is why some/most of what he is saying appears "new" to the general public. The only thing missing is proof of the growing lab leak evidence and that is due to the Chinese hiding the lab documentation. Why do that when so many have died? Oh wait, I just answered my own question.

Your MO/agenda is to try to discredit or label as right wing conspiracy every new voice in the scientific community, including this author, that affirms lab leak validity. For someone who is supposedly very educated, why are you so fearful of the lab leak hypothesis becoming generally endorsed and/or confirmed? I always believed that intelligent people seek truth above all else.

I stated at least a year ago now on here that I believed the lab leak hypothesis makes the most sense. I also stated that I believed that it was accidental and not intentional. I certainly still believe that.

Read this Tech. Some interesting discoveries about Wuhan.

https://spectator.us/topic/anthony-fauc ... -virology/

[tech37]

Another lab leak hypothesis convert?

https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-ori ... -at-wuhan/

"By the end of this article, you may have learned a lot about the molecular biology of viruses. I will try to keep this process as painless as possible. But the science cannot be avoided because for now, and probably for a long time hence, it offers the only sure thread through the maze."

Interesting explanation, though it remains a highly speculative, if plausible, theory. Indeed, he's quite correctly clear that they really don't know and won't know without data proving lab creation and accident that they are unlikely to ever see. Without that data, it remains highly subject to the biases and motivations of those debating the likely 'cause'.

Those who believe, accurately, that deadly viruses regularly jump species through zoonotic progressive transmission, and indeed that the risks of pandemics have accelerated as humans have grown denser and are more mobile across the world, believe that such research is absolutely critical to preparation to combat such viruses. Those in that camp will naturally be defensive about speculative efforts to blame the very research intended to prevent pandemics for the worst pandemic in a century...for fear that such critical research will be shut down by those with an anti-science bias.

Such defensiveness (in any field) can become over-defensive and prevent very necessary safety oversight reforms.

And, in this case, that defensiveness has been hugely magnified by the extreme claims of those whose agenda is political blame, especially the sorts of accusations that the research was for military purposes and/or the the virus was released on purpose rather than by accident.

My take on the human psychology of the debate is that identification of whatever was the factual reality of the initial cause of this pandemic is less important than recognizing that both paths are possible and that it is thus imperative that we utilize our best efforts to prevent both such routes going forward and/or be prepared to respond effectively when outbreaks do occur. Research is very important, but so too is the oversight of safety.

Your rationalized opinion

"Where we are so far. Neither the natural emergence nor the lab escape hypothesis can yet be ruled out. There is still no direct evidence for either. So no definitive conclusion can be reached.

That said, the available evidence leans more strongly in one direction than the other. Readers will form their own opinion. But it seems to me that proponents of lab escape can explain all the available facts about SARS2 considerably more easily than can those who favor natural emergence."

... except for the facts Wade et. al. ignore. Nothing has moved on this origin debate in the period since the WHO report.

Facts? The WHO report = politicized trash. What difference does "nothing has moved" matter? Truth is not bound by an agenda.

Not one fact in the Wade article is new. There are a number of facts, he ignores. All this is, is an attempt by right wing media to act as if there is something new, when nothing is. Look at your own agenda there Trump boy.

You've got nothing but the usual lies genius. Right wing media? Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists is right wing media? And Wade, a Brit, who for years wrote for Nature, Science, and the NYT? Yeah, right wing media alright. No one said this was new information (straw man BS on your part) but it is new that a well known science writer is speaking out. And, it is probably the most comprehensive piece written to date in favor of a lab leak hypothesis.

But you keep on lying genius and keep on politicizing a virus. The agenda is obviously yours. Trump is long gone except in your fevered brain. I want the truth to be known one way or another. I believe the lab leak hypothesis. Yes, that's my opinion.

Washington Examiner headline on Friday (5/7) did say this was new, "More evidence that the Wuhan lab-leak theory is the correct one". They were clearly pushing this is new news, when all it is is a rehash of things known for months - when I read it, except not all the things known for months. The guy is not a scientist, he is a reporter. Perhaps he believes what he writes, perhaps he doesn't, I don't care. What I know is the right wing media organizations are pushing this as a big deal conclusive news. Not presenting any thing new. Just a rehash. It is not conclusive. Nothing has changed except right wingers (Trumpnistas) are falling for this "its new information" non-sense.

No one claimed he is a scientist, yet another straw man argument (lie) from you. He is an accomplished science writer though and has been for years. You don't have to be a scientist in order to understand the science and write about it clearly, coherently, and competently. This article is the most comprehensive to date that explains some real esoteric stuff on a layman's level, and establishes the process utilized by the WIV with corroborating quotes from the scientists involved. Perhaps that is why some/most of what he is saying appears "new" to the general public. The only thing missing is proof of the growing lab leak evidence and that is due to the Chinese hiding the lab documentation. Why do that when so many have died? Oh wait, I just answered my own question.

Your MO/agenda is to try to discredit or label as right wing conspiracy every new voice in the scientific community, including this author, that affirms lab leak validity. For someone who is supposedly very educated, why are you so fearful of the lab leak hypothesis becoming generally endorsed and/or confirmed? I always believed that intelligent people seek truth above all else.

I stated at least a year ago now on here that I believed the lab leak hypothesis makes the most sense. I also stated that I believed that it was accidental and not intentional. I certainly still believe that.

Read this Tech. Some interesting discoveries about Wuhan.

https://spectator.us/topic/anthony-fauc ... -virology/

Thanks. Yep, this is all pretty established but more and more voices being heard...

The truth, one way or another, will come out.

[CU88]

Moderna booster works!

Katelyn Jetelina
May 11

We got the first round of results from the Moderna booster trial (here is the study and here is the press release).

Booster shots

A few months ago, Moderna started its Phase II trial with booster shots designed against the two similar variants of concern: B1.351 (S. Africa) and P.1 (Brazil). Specifically, they are testing three booster shot strategies:

mRNA-1273.351: I’ll call this 351. This is basically a vaccine that includes instructions made JUST for the S protein found in the B.1.351 variant. This is called a monovalent vaccine- it’s designed to immunize against a single antigen.

mRNA-1273.211: I’ll call this 211. This is a mixed vaccine: 50% with the original vaccine and 50% with 351 booster. This is called a polyvalent vaccine-it’s designed to immunize against two or more strains

mRNA-1273: I’ll call this 1273. This is just a smaller dose (half actually) of the original vaccine that we already got.

This update is on the effectiveness and safety of 351 booster compared to the 1273 booster.

This was a “rollover” study, which means people in the original Phase III Moderna trial were invited to participate in the booster trial. If someone had at least 6 months of follow-up time since their original two-dose series and voiced interest, they were either given 351 or 1273. There were 20 people in each group.

Safety

351 had less side effects:

351: fatigue (37%), headache (37%), muscle pain (32%), fever (0%)

1273: fatigue (70%), headache (55%), joint pain (50%), muscle pain (45%), fever (15%)

Effectiveness

351 also worked better

351: Before the booster, variants had a 7.7 fold decrease in antibody neutralization. This is not surprising, as we know these variants are concerning. After the booster, though, there was a 2.6 fold decrease in neutralization. Which is great!

1273: Before the booster, variants had a 7.3-fold decrease in antibody neutralization. After this booster, there was a 5.3 fold decrease in neutralization. This is better, but not as good as 351.


We’re waiting on more results to see how well 211 works.

We’ll probably have a booster by the end of the year. And probably annually for at least a few years until we get transmission down, so mutations slow down.

By the way, we just got word of the first animal trial on a flu/COVID19 combo vaccine by Novavax. So, ideally and eventually we would only need one shot a year.

[jhu72]

Chinese and AstraZeneca vaccine failures to control the South African variant??

[old salt]

Focus on supply chain all the way to arms changed significantly and much larger forward volume commitments...which will extend beyond US demand to world distribution.


Salty, I thought it was a fair question, deserving of a response and explanation. I didn't assume you were in attack mode, just asking for clarification.

https://www.downtoearth.org.in/blog/hea ... onse-75598

https://spectrumlocalnews.com/nys/buffa ... r-of-covid
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/21/us/p ... ponse.html

It was planned & developed in Warp Speed under Trump...

LOL, if planning is "Let the states figure it out!"

Classic

The CDC & CVTF provided guidance for the states to follow. You live in MD right ? Did you see how closely the state followed that guidance ?

Do you expect the Feds to come into your county or city & put the shot in your arm ? The states, counties & cities have a public health system in place.

Nonspecific whining.

[old salt]

Sure as heck was a lot easier for my wife and me to schedule a shot than it had been for my mom two months earlier, super easy for my son this past month...materially changed, from "personal observation".

Fair point that increased supply was probably the biggest factor.

...fair point ? Of course you had to wait for an appointment when demand greatly exceeded supply.
As production increased, it was possible to open more sites.

Would you have preferred a Fed appointment scheduling system ? Look how well ObamaCare sign up worked.

[Peter Brown]

Sure as heck was a lot easier for my wife and me to schedule a shot than it had been for my mom two months earlier, super easy for my son this past month...materially changed, from "personal observation".

Fair point that increased supply was probably the biggest factor.

...fair point ? Of course you had to wait for an appointment when demand greatly exceeded supply.
As production increased, it was possible to open more sites.

Would you have preferred a Fed appointment scheduling system ? Look how well ObamaCare sign up worked.

Everything started working January 20th. Before then, dark days.

You know the script.

[MDlaxfan76]

Sure as heck was a lot easier for my wife and me to schedule a shot than it had been for my mom two months earlier, super easy for my son this past month...materially changed, from "personal observation".

Fair point that increased supply was probably the biggest factor.

...fair point ? Of course you had to wait for an appointment when demand greatly exceeded supply.
As production increased, it was possible to open more sites.

Would you have preferred a Fed appointment scheduling system ? Look how well ObamaCare sign up worked.

yes, all sign-ups should have been tracked and prioritized. One time effort instead of the really dumb, many, many efforts way it was done. Ridiculous.

They had many months to stand-up the process, which needn't have been a single, central system, nor dependent upon a single server location etc. though the data would have fed into a central database. The technology available for this sort of task has been well developed, with lots of redundancies, cheap. You start with simply registering, name, address, age, some basic health data relevant to Covid risk, profession, etc. Info that would be necessary for prioritization and direction of limited supplies. When supply is ready, the contact is made with the patient for actual scheduling.

They simply didn't bother. Or worse, they intentionally wanted to push all such to the states or private companies instead of taking responsibility.

In addition to the huge amount of wasted time for those trying, fruitlessly, to sign up, they were not able to track and direct supply to highest priority, supplies were held in reserve, and they lost the easiest way to have created vaccine passport capabilities.

We've discussed this before (I liked your idea of a free drink at your local watering hole) that verification of vaccination unlocking various benefits would be very helpful as we run into the hesitancy period.

Instead, we're going to have a mish mash of trying to prove our status, which is going to be important for all sorts of things (or should be), like international travel.

Huge lost opportunity.

However, my point wasn't to criticize the former Admin on the subject of vaccines, they deserve credit for putting up big dough commitments to encourage the development. Not so much the distribution planning, but that wasn't the point of my post.

I also wasn't saying that the current Admin has had every element right, either. Just better communication with the public and with the various necessary players, bigger commitment to supply, including beyond our shores...they have their work cut out for them because of the brain dead right wing anti-vaxxer crowd who think it's somehow a show of loyalty to a side, like wearing a red hat...I think they'll overcome the hesitancy in the African American community, but not so sure about the MAGA, evangelical, QAnon sorts...

[JoeMauer89]

Sure as heck was a lot easier for my wife and me to schedule a shot than it had been for my mom two months earlier, super easy for my son this past month...materially changed, from "personal observation".

Fair point that increased supply was probably the biggest factor.

...fair point ? Of course you had to wait for an appointment when demand greatly exceeded supply.
As production increased, it was possible to open more sites.

Would you have preferred a Fed appointment scheduling system ? Look how well ObamaCare sign up worked.

yes, all sign-ups should have been tracked and prioritized. One time effort instead of the really dumb, many, many efforts way it was done. Ridiculous.

They had many months to stand-up the process, which needn't have been a single, central system, nor dependent upon a single server location etc. though the data would have fed into a central database. The technology available for this sort of task has been well developed, with lots of redundancies, cheap. You start with simply registering, name, address, age, some basic health data relevant to Covid risk, profession, etc. Info that would be necessary for prioritization and direction of limited supplies. When supply is ready, the contact is made with the patient for actual scheduling.

They simply didn't bother. Or worse, they intentionally wanted to push all such to the states or private companies instead of taking responsibility.

In addition to the huge amount of wasted time for those trying, fruitlessly, to sign up, they were not able to track and direct supply to highest priority, supplies were held in reserve, and they lost the easiest way to have created vaccine passport capabilities.

We've discussed this before (I liked your idea of a free drink at your local watering hole) that verification of vaccination unlocking various benefits would be very helpful as we run into the hesitancy period.

Instead, we're going to have a mish mash of trying to prove our status, which is going to be important for all sorts of things (or should be), like international travel.

Huge lost opportunity.

However, my point wasn't to criticize the former Admin on the subject of vaccines, they deserve credit for putting up big dough commitments to encourage the development. Not so much the distribution planning, but that wasn't the point of my post.

I also wasn't saying that the current Admin has had every element right, either. Just better communication with the public and with the various necessary players, bigger commitment to supply, including beyond our shores...they have their work cut out for them because of the brain dead right wing anti-vaxxer crowd who think it's somehow a show of loyalty to a side, like wearing a red hat...I think they'll overcome the hesitancy in the African American community, but not so sure about the MAGA, evangelical, QAnon sorts...

Why don't you just appoint yourself in charge of the process and see just how "easy" is it is to implement your "simple" plan. All bluster, no bite.

JoeMauer89!

[jhu72]

Sure as heck was a lot easier for my wife and me to schedule a shot than it had been for my mom two months earlier, super easy for my son this past month...materially changed, from "personal observation".

Fair point that increased supply was probably the biggest factor.

...fair point ? Of course you had to wait for an appointment when demand greatly exceeded supply.
As production increased, it was possible to open more sites.

Would you have preferred a Fed appointment scheduling system ? Look how well ObamaCare sign up worked.

yes, all sign-ups should have been tracked and prioritized. One time effort instead of the really dumb, many, many efforts way it was done. Ridiculous.

They had many months to stand-up the process, which needn't have been a single, central system, nor dependent upon a single server location etc. though the data would have fed into a central database. The technology available for this sort of task has been well developed, with lots of redundancies, cheap. You start with simply registering, name, address, age, some basic health data relevant to Covid risk, profession, etc. Info that would be necessary for prioritization and direction of limited supplies. When supply is ready, the contact is made with the patient for actual scheduling.

They simply didn't bother. Or worse, they intentionally wanted to push all such to the states or private companies instead of taking responsibility.

In addition to the huge amount of wasted time for those trying, fruitlessly, to sign up, they were not able to track and direct supply to highest priority, supplies were held in reserve, and they lost the easiest way to have created vaccine passport capabilities.

We've discussed this before (I liked your idea of a free drink at your local watering hole) that verification of vaccination unlocking various benefits would be very helpful as we run into the hesitancy period.

Instead, we're going to have a mish mash of trying to prove our status, which is going to be important for all sorts of things (or should be), like international travel.

Huge lost opportunity.

However, my point wasn't to criticize the former Admin on the subject of vaccines, they deserve credit for putting up big dough commitments to encourage the development. Not so much the distribution planning, but that wasn't the point of my post.

I also wasn't saying that the current Admin has had every element right, either. Just better communication with the public and with the various necessary players, bigger commitment to supply, including beyond our shores...they have their work cut out for them because of the brain dead right wing anti-vaxxer crowd who think it's somehow a show of loyalty to a side, like wearing a red hat...I think they'll overcome the hesitancy in the African American community, but not so sure about the MAGA, evangelical, QAnon sorts...

+1

I largely agree with all of this.

The roll out under Biden had some problems, that were left overs from the pre-Biden planning. Biden did not change things that should have been changed. I have discussed those before. I dealt with 3 entities in getting my vaccination. The State of Maryland was by far the worst (but this was a result of federal rollout planning and lack of federal support). The keep calling until you get an appointment was a total mess. The best entity was my private physician office. I was already on their list, I didn't need to do anything. They sent me an email message to call and schedule my vaccine appointment. The third entity was directly with the federal government via their "vsafe" software. This software worked very well, was straight forward and effective.

I first contacted the state, in mid January (before Biden took office, as the State of Maryland indicated I should). I didn't hear from them until mid March, only after trying to contact them a number of times, due to not hearing anything back from my first contact. They contacted me in mid March, I had no confirmation of anything until then, they contacted me to tell me they had no vaccine for me. A few days later, my private physician office contacted me to make an appointment. 10 days or so after my 1st shot appointment through my physician, the state contacted me to try to setup an appointment for my 1st shot. The state and my physician were not communicating at all. My 2nd appointment was scheduled at my 1st appointment (this seems pretty standard). After my first shot I interacted with the "vsafe" website as part of the ongoing vaccine trial - registering with the site. Thereafter this involved the website sending me a text message to ask a few simple question about my health status. This happened every couple of days from the 1st shot through the 2nd shot. They now contact me every couple of weeks, to answer a few simple health status questions. This is totally automated, not human interaction.

The process and timing expectations set early in the process by the state were not clear in the least. It is clear the state needed help in planning their rollout. There is no good reason this could not have been provided by the federal government. There is not and was not enough of a difference between the states that it was necessary to have 50 states doing the same thing that could have been done once by the federal government. Trump's decision to have the states individually manage the shot distribution was a mistake.

All in all, it got done as we now turn attention to the hesitant population. Biden has now decided it makes sense to more completely engage individual primary care offices (one of my gripes explained months ago), as this provides comfort for the hesitants. This should have been done earlier as previously explained.

[MDlaxfan76]

Sure as heck was a lot easier for my wife and me to schedule a shot than it had been for my mom two months earlier, super easy for my son this past month...materially changed, from "personal observation".

Fair point that increased supply was probably the biggest factor.

...fair point ? Of course you had to wait for an appointment when demand greatly exceeded supply.
As production increased, it was possible to open more sites.

Would you have preferred a Fed appointment scheduling system ? Look how well ObamaCare sign up worked.

yes, all sign-ups should have been tracked and prioritized. One time effort instead of the really dumb, many, many efforts way it was done. Ridiculous.

They had many months to stand-up the process, which needn't have been a single, central system, nor dependent upon a single server location etc. though the data would have fed into a central database. The technology available for this sort of task has been well developed, with lots of redundancies, cheap. You start with simply registering, name, address, age, some basic health data relevant to Covid risk, profession, etc. Info that would be necessary for prioritization and direction of limited supplies. When supply is ready, the contact is made with the patient for actual scheduling.

They simply didn't bother. Or worse, they intentionally wanted to push all such to the states or private companies instead of taking responsibility.

In addition to the huge amount of wasted time for those trying, fruitlessly, to sign up, they were not able to track and direct supply to highest priority, supplies were held in reserve, and they lost the easiest way to have created vaccine passport capabilities.

We've discussed this before (I liked your idea of a free drink at your local watering hole) that verification of vaccination unlocking various benefits would be very helpful as we run into the hesitancy period.

Instead, we're going to have a mish mash of trying to prove our status, which is going to be important for all sorts of things (or should be), like international travel.

Huge lost opportunity.

However, my point wasn't to criticize the former Admin on the subject of vaccines, they deserve credit for putting up big dough commitments to encourage the development. Not so much the distribution planning, but that wasn't the point of my post.

I also wasn't saying that the current Admin has had every element right, either. Just better communication with the public and with the various necessary players, bigger commitment to supply, including beyond our shores...they have their work cut out for them because of the brain dead right wing anti-vaxxer crowd who think it's somehow a show of loyalty to a side, like wearing a red hat...I think they'll overcome the hesitancy in the African American community, but not so sure about the MAGA, evangelical, QAnon sorts...

Why don't you just appoint yourself in charge of the process and see just how "easy" is it is to implement your "simple" plan. All bluster, no bite.

JoeMauer89!

Well, though I take it you're trying to be insulting to me, I'll treat this as more of a question than insult. No, this wasn't "simple". In fact, there's a ton of complexity and a ton of rigorous execution required.

But that's only further reason to put the effort into doing it well. They had many months to choose to do so, but did not.

By "simply begin" (not "simple"), I was referring to the process of registration first, then the scheduling as supply rolls out.

By doing the registering upfront, the prioritization of supply becomes far better informed, so more efficient, and a ridiculous amount of wasted time and energy is avoided. And by tracking the actual process into arms, the capabilities to provide 'vaccine passport' would have been far more straightforward.

Again, they chose to go a different way.

As to the technology of a registration and scheduling system, it's not "simple", but it's not rocket science nor is it terribly expensive. I happen to help run a company whose quite complex app is capable of scaling seamlessly into the many millions of users a day, processing billions of data endpoints, to deliver a consumer facing experience which is easy to use. And which has intense regulatory oversight requirements on PII etc. So, I know a little about the topic.

The challenge of a questionnaire with the necessary info on which a variable algorithm can work to achieve vaccine scheduling prioritization is relative child's play to our app. These days, could have been built with agile sprints in 3-4 months, including testing. But that requires believing it's your responsibility in the first place.

On the other hand, it ain't "simple" to execute on a rollout distribution plan with complex logistics, new supply chain development etc....but it's a heck of a lot easier with the kinds of 'demand' signals that a registration system would have provided. and far better "user experience".

But hey, that's backward looking, there are new challenges ahead. I would be willing to bet that this Admin will have its own missed opportunities, its own screw-ups, but at least so far it doesn't look like it'll be because they didn't want to 'own' the problem.

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/1 ... 4019856189

[old salt]

Boo Hoo. You couldn't get an appointment as quickly as you wanted one. My wife & I are in the 65-75 range. We registered on our county health dept website & waited for an appt, which we subsequently received via email. We got our first shot on Feb 12. My wife's doc told her we'd be lucky if we got it in Apr....In Apr, walk-in clinics started opening for every adult who wanted one.

The urgent objective was to get as many people vaccinated, asap, with priority for the most vulnerable.
It was not necessary to create a national registry to adjudicate precise scheduling priority for the impatient entitled & to create vaccine passports. If Federalized, in pursuit of equity, as a member of the overserved privileged white class, you'd still be waiting until all the underserved were vaccinated.
Our CDC cards with date & lot# sticker are our vacc passports. More secure than showing a utility bill as a voter ID.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Boo Hoo. You couldn't get an appointment as quickly as you wanted one. My wife & I are in the 65-75 range. We registered on our county health dept website & waited for an appt, which we subsequently received via email. We got our first shot on Feb 12. My wife's doc told her we'd be lucky if we got it in Apr....In Apr, walk-in clinics started opening for every adult who wanted one.

The urgent objective was to get as many people vaccinated, asap, with priority for the most vulnerable.
It was not necessary to create a national registry to adjudicate precise scheduling priority for the impatient entitled & to create vaccine passports. If Federalized, in pursuit of equity, as a member of the overserved privileged white class, you'd still be waiting until all the underserved were vaccinated.
Our CDC cards with date & lot# sticker are our vacc passports. More secure than showing a utility bill as a voter ID.

If your post is directed at me in response to what I posted above, you are off base Old ⏱.

[old salt]

Boo Hoo. You couldn't get an appointment as quickly as you wanted one. My wife & I are in the 65-75 range. We registered on our county health dept website & waited for an appt, which we subsequently received via email. We got our first shot on Feb 12. My wife's doc told her we'd be lucky if we got it in Apr....In Apr, walk-in clinics started opening for every adult who wanted one.

The urgent objective was to get as many people vaccinated, asap, with priority for the most vulnerable.
It was not necessary to create a national registry to adjudicate precise scheduling priority for the impatient entitled & to create vaccine passports. If Federalized, in pursuit of equity, as a member of the overserved privileged white class, you'd still be waiting until all the underserved were vaccinated.
Our CDC cards with date & lot# sticker are our vacc passports. More secure than showing a utility bill as a voter ID.

If your post is directed at me in response to what I posted above, you are off base Old ⏱.

It was not. I don't recall you complaining. I didn't want to clutter the thread with repetitive quotes.

[Typical Lax Dad]

Boo Hoo. You couldn't get an appointment as quickly as you wanted one. My wife & I are in the 65-75 range. We registered on our county health dept website & waited for an appt, which we subsequently received via email. We got our first shot on Feb 12. My wife's doc told her we'd be lucky if we got it in Apr....In Apr, walk-in clinics started opening for every adult who wanted one.

The urgent objective was to get as many people vaccinated, asap, with priority for the most vulnerable.
It was not necessary to create a national registry to adjudicate precise scheduling priority for the impatient entitled & to create vaccine passports. If Federalized, in pursuit of equity, as a member of the overserved privileged white class, you'd still be waiting until all the underserved were vaccinated.
Our CDC cards with date & lot# sticker are our vacc passports. More secure than showing a utility bill as a voter ID.

If your post is directed at me in response to what I posted above, you are off base Old ⏱.

It was not. I don't recall you complaining. I didn't want to clutter the thread with repetitive quotes.

Ok. Stay safe.

[MDlaxfan76]

Boo Hoo. You couldn't get an appointment as quickly as you wanted one. My wife & I are in the 65-75 range. We registered on our county health dept website & waited for an appt, which we subsequently received via email. We got our first shot on Feb 12. My wife's doc told her we'd be lucky if we got it in Apr....In Apr, walk-in clinics started opening for every adult who wanted one.

The urgent objective was to get as many people vaccinated, asap, with priority for the most vulnerable.
It was not necessary to create a national registry to adjudicate precise scheduling priority for the impatient entitled & to create vaccine passports. If Federalized, in pursuit of equity, as a member of the overserved privileged white class, you'd still be waiting until all the underserved were vaccinated.
Our CDC cards with date & lot# sticker are our vacc passports. More secure than showing a utility bill as a voter ID.

If your post is directed at me in response to what I posted above, you are off base Old ⏱.

It was not. I don't recall you complaining. I didn't want to clutter the thread with repetitive quotes.

72?

If aimed at me, I have no complaint about my timing, though I got a bit lucky that the Florida county where my mom had registered had called her when they had some supply and she asked whether my wife and I could get scheduled, as 60+ was opening up the following week...otherwise I would likely have gone through much the same interminable process she'd gone through as an 84 year old, checking at 7AM sharp as to whether any appointments were open...for nearly a month, every day, multiple times a day...for the first couple of months there was no "registering", just luck of getting through...having had to input your data each time before finding out whether there were any appointments open, and the site not saving your data...some people got appts, but everyone was doing the same stupid thing checking each day, spending a half hour early each morning, multiple devices...dumb.

The process you describe is what should have and could have been done from a federal level, implemented through the states and counties, nationwide.

But it wasn't. So, a mess at first.

[old salt]

Did you check to see if you could register (& wait) with your county health dept ?

We could also register (& wait) with the large commercial heath care provider (Luminis) who runs the hospital in our county.
I think you could also register with MedStar in counties where they had hospitals.
Our county health dept came through first, so we unsubscribed with the others.
Those sites received the largest allocation of doses, by far.

The commercial pharmacies received much smaller allocations, so trying to sched an appt with them was an exercise in frustration, if you were not willing to wait & expected an immediate confirmation.

This was our county sign up portal :
https://aacounty.org/covidvax
It went active on Jan 21 & was linked in various county & elected officials covid update newsletter emails.
I first saw it on our county library newsletter email.

Next, on Jan 24, on our county health dept website, I found this link to register with Luminis.
https://living.aahs.org/covid-19-vaccine-information/

Also, our County Exec posted weekly covid updates with vacc info & registration links.
which I first discovered on Feb 27.
https://www.aacounty.org/coronavirus/we ... -02-27.pdf

[wgdsr]

24,000th post.
bump.