5 ms·
Its likely, that, like the flu jab, those most at risk will get it first. The vast majority of diligent users here will not be beta testers. Depending on how i
by thinkingemote 6y ago
Its likely, that, like the flu jab, those most at risk will get it first. The vast majority of diligent users here will not be beta testers.
Depending on how it works that is. It might be more effective to jab those most likely to transmit the disease first. (E.g. medical workers, children before Christmas meeting the family) or it might be better to jab those most at risk first.
- 737maxtw 6y agoMy understanding of at least the Pfizer vaccine was that it primarily lowered the risk of developing COVID from a COV-19 infection. Also if I read it properly that means you could/would wond up in the asymptomatic spreader category. IF all of that is true (and if i misunderstood, please correct me!) It would make the most sense to give it to higher risk individuals first.
- enragedcacti 6y agoSomeone please correct me if I'm wrong, but the latest I had heard was that _pre-symptomatic_ spread was the issue rather than asysmptomatic. As in, if you got covid but never developed symptoms, you likely never had enough viral load to transmit the virus. If you later showed symptoms then you likely had a high viral load between contraction and showing symptoms and were likely to transmit the virus. So if this stops the symptoms, it may also stop the viral load from reaching transmitable levels.
- _jesseb 6y agoYeah, that's my understanding as well. There's a period of time between when you initially get it and when you start showing symptoms (4-5 days is the number I've heard) where you are contagious but most likely don't know it. That's why Covid is particularly nasty, because it spreads before it shows symptoms.
- timerol 6y agoThis is another specific scientific communication, of the type that are widely misunderstood. Remember "no evidence that masks reduce transmission" and "no evidence that immunity from COVID will last"? Both were true statements at the time, and widely misunderstood. "No evidence" of X does not mean that X is at all likely to happen, based on our current understanding of disease. Because of the test design, the test itself only measured people who got COVID. But based on current scientific consensus around disease, that means there is a very high likelihood that it also prevents asymptomatic transmission, as the immune system will generally fight off infection. One test being narrowly worded (as is correct scientific practice) does not overthrow our entire understanding of disease.
- paulie_a 6y agoI am one of those most at risk people and like hell am I going to get it first. It looks like it will be safe but I can weather a few more months self isolation while it is adopted on a more massive scale.
- coldcode 6y agoMe too, give my issues with asthma/age and not having a family to support me if I get ill, I am ready right now. If other people choose to wait 10 years that is their option.
- paulie_a 6y agoPeople apparently didnt like my hesitation to be first in line for the vaccine. The weird thing is that I am not against this vaccine by any means, I hope it works very well. But you and me are in a position where we would be in a very bad situation if something went wrong. I dont mind a few more months of staying safe, its not a big deal to me and Ill get it later on
- floatingatoll 6y agoMedical workers will get it first, as without them we can’t vaccinate the rest of us.
- entropea 6y agoI wonder if it's really that smart to give our healthcare workers a minimally tested vaccine first.