Canadian COVID-19 News

[Mike OReilly]

The issue with NACI is that they are providing very narrow advice looking only at vaccine efficacy and risk. In the context where two options exist, it makes perfect sense to weight the lower risk option over the higher risk.

At this point the viral vector vaccines appear to have a slightly higher risk associated with them due to the blood clot problem. The risks associated with the mRNA vaccines are all common to most vaccines. In other words, they currently carry no additional risks. The mRNA vaccines also have a slight edge in the clinical efficacy studies.

So... if you can choose one over the other, it makes sense to go with the smaller risk, and higher efficacy, vaccine. This is simple logic.

Now, NACI does explain the risk involved in the viral vector vaccines is exceedingly small. But it's not zero. So being good scientists they report these cold hard facts.

The problem is that most people are piss-poor at understanding risk. This is demonstrated here every time we have an insurance discussion. For most people, rational risk assessment does not come easy, so when we here the risk of blood clots is 1 in a million, most people only hear ONE!

As I said, NACI's role is very narrow. It feeds a very specific part of the whole vaccine equation to Health Canada. But there are multiple other streams of information that the government also receives. From all this information, a cumulative recommendation is distilled.

To use a business analogy, the decision to undertake a significant investment is informed by multiple factors. Finance, logistics, markets, ROI, environmental factors, legal considerations, etc... In the case of NACI's advice constitutes just one of these factors. The totality of all advice must be digested to come up with a rational bottom-line assessment.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by pcmm

yes and she said that based on that hypothetical, she wouldn't have her family use AZ followed by a lot of backpedaling. From my perspective there is risk in everything in life, 1 out of 100,000-250,000 is a low enough risk that we really shouldn't be worrying about it. For reference, the risk of getting blood clots from birth control is 0.3% of users or 300 out of 100,000 users.

The problem is the more NACI and others try to talk their way out of this, the worse they are making it. They say that the mRNA vaccines are preferable and that given a choice wait for it. Then why bother with the AZ vaccines? Then at the same time they say if you are in an area with Covid, get the first available.

Exactly. This example is a communications blunder. She was trying to give an example of how one might approach the risk assessment. But all people hear is that the head of NACI wouldn't give AZ to her family members.

[pcmm]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

The issue with NACI is that they are providing very narrow advice looking only at vaccine efficacy and risk. In the context where two options exist, it makes perfect sense to weight the lower risk option over the higher risk.

At this point the viral vector vaccines appear to have a slightly higher risk associated with them due to the blood clot problem. The risks associated with the mRNA vaccines are all common to most vaccines. In other words, they currently carry no additional risks. The mRNA vaccines also have a slight edge in the clinical efficacy studies.

So... if you can choose one over the other, it makes sense to go with the smaller risk, and higher efficacy, vaccine. This is simple logic.

Now, NACI does explain the risk involved in the viral vector vaccines is exceedingly small. But it's not zero. So being good scientists they report these cold hard facts.

The problem is that most people are piss-poor at understanding risk. This is demonstrated here every time we have an insurance discussion. For most people, rational risk assessment does not come easy, so when we here the risk of blood clots is 1 in a million, most people only hear ONE!

As I said, NACI's role is very narrow. It feeds a very specific part of the whole vaccine equation to Health Canada. But there are multiple other streams of information that the government also receives. From all this information, a cumulative recommendation is distilled.

To use a business analogy, the decision to undertake a significant investment is informed by multiple factors. Finance, logistics, markets, ROI, environmental factors, legal considerations, etc... In the case of NACI's advice constitutes just one of these factors. The totality of all advice must be digested to come up with a rational bottom-line assessment.

Mike I generally agree with you except for 1 factor, for a lot of us the mRNA vaccines were not available to us. As its availability is age based. As an example for me AZ was available at what initially was likely to be months before the mRNA would be available to my age group. The calculation really is take a vaccine now that has a very very slight risk and have protection now. or wait ( what at the time was going to be months) to get the other. When I got my AZ i was looking at having both doses BEFORE I would have been eligible for even my first dose of the mRNA vaccine. That 4 months is a significant factor. Of course that changed quickly in the last week so its not really a factor any longer.

[Stu Jackson]

The part I don't understand about this whole "passport pablum" is this: I got my first shot on April 6th and they gave me a little card that said what and when. Why shouldn't that be enough?



I guess the anti-vaxxers will be going out and making up and printing cards for their very own use.


Tragic.


Making something simple into something really hard. A problem in search of a solution. A solution that's already in my bloody wallet!

Originally Posted by Montanan

Canada's prime minister is teasing that the country has plans to use vaccine passports or certificates similar to what the EU is developing.

"As people start to travel again, perhaps this summer if everything goes well, it would make sense for us to align with partners around the world on some sort of proof of vaccination or vaccine certification," Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said at a press conference on Tuesday. "We are now working with allies, particularly in Europe, on that."

No mention of vaccine passports with the USA,

https://www.yahoo.com/news/justin-tr...215416047.html

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by pcmm

Mike I generally agree with you except for 1 factor, for a lot of us the mRNA vaccines were not available to us. As its availability is age based. As an example for me AZ was available at what initially was likely to be months before the mRNA would be available to my age group. The calculation really is take a vaccine now that has a very very slight risk and have protection now. or wait ( what at the time was going to be months) to get the other. When I got my AZ i was looking at having both doses BEFORE I would have been eligible for even my first dose of the mRNA vaccine. That 4 months is a significant factor. Of course that changed quickly in the last week so its not really a factor any longer.

Yes ... see even I'm doing a piss-poor job here, and I'm a science writer .

If your choice is binary: mRNA vs viral vector, it makes perfect sense to go with the one that has slightly less risk, and slightly more efficacy. But none of these choices are binary. There are multiple factors, including availability AND most importantly getting any vaccine sooner rather than later.

The risk of contracting Covid-19 far outweigh the risk of getting a weird blood clot; by something like 10,000 fold. But an honest scientist will tell you the risk is greater with AZ and Jansen than with Pfizer or Moderna, so in some hypothetical situation where you can reduce your risk of contracting the disease to near-zero, it makes sense to hold out for the lower-risk vaccine.

But this all requires an ability to rationally assess risk, and that is something few people know how to do.

[Macblaze]

I wrote a long rambling reply about this last thread drift then deleted it. Suffice it to say I do think a government should be much better at communication than so far displayed, but I don't necessarily agree its mandate is to tell us the truth or ever expect it. Rather I think they exist to support the common weal. Which IMHO often involves bending or outright distorting "the truth" right out of recognizable shape.

As I say — just my opinion.

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

Which IMHO often involves bending or outright distorting "the truth" right out of recognizable shape.

As I say — just my opinion.

You're probably right except for the motive. Most of these people suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, Certainly the black face Alladin in Ottawa does.

[Macblaze]

Originally Posted by boatpoker

You're probably right except for the motive. Most of these people suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder, Certainly the black face Alladin in Ottawa does.

You know, I was just reading your last post in the Luxury Tax thread wondering what was with people and their spewing of personal vitriol and now this.

I respectfully disagree.

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

You know, I was just reading your last post in the Luxury Tax thread wondering what was with people and their spewing of personal vitriol and now this.

I respectfully disagree.

I support your right to disagree, unlike many in this country at the moment.

[Montanan]

Vaccine tourism: Canadians fly south for shot as U.S. demand falls
https://www.yahoo.com/news/vaccine-t...201205664.html

While almost a third of Americans have been fully vaccinated, Canada has inoculated only 3% of its almost 38 million people, though more than 34% have received a first dose. Canada is allowing for a four-month gap between doses, while Americans are getting their second shots three or four weeks after the first to reach optimal protection much sooner.

The U.S vaccination campaign has reached a tipping point, with supply outstripping demand due to a combination of factors including skepticism about the vaccines. The number of Americans seeking vaccines dropped by a third in recent weeks, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
That is encouraging Canadians to cross the border and tap into this oversupply without paying any fee, which means the U.S. government is paying for foreign travelers to get their COVID-19 shots. The White House declined to comment. The trick was to fly because land crossing has been closed to non-essential traffic since March of 2020.
Everyone age 16 or older can get vaccinated in the United States, while in Ontario, most adults 18 and up will not be eligible for a first dose until May 24.

[TrentePieds]

C'mon chaps! This thread exists by virtue of a sort of "special dispensation". And there's been much good stuff in it. But it doesn't have to exist at all, so don't let's start flinging epithets around - particularly not applied to people we might not like or agree with. Let's do as Auntie Bonnie enjoins us: "Be kind, be calm, be safe..."

TrentePieds

[Montanan]

It must get tiring to have to constantly moderate those that refuse to be moderate as to their forum decorum.

So not a big ask.

[Macblaze]

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/schume...rder-1.6016204

Top Democrat tells Biden administration: Get to work reopening border with Canada

Schumer adds political muscle to push for expanded travel, demands immediate measures

What a an odd idea. As if Biden had any control over things anymore than anyone else. Still, the other big story is the vaccine availability so you never know. We might actually see some border opening. But my money is on it being an expansion of economic trade with severe limitations on personal travel.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/schume...rder-1.6016204

Top Democrat tells Biden administration: Get to work reopening border with Canada

Schumer adds political muscle to push for expanded travel, demands immediate measures

What a an odd idea. As if Biden had any control over things anymore than anyone else. Still, the other big story is the vaccine availability so you never know. We might actually see some border opening. But my money is on it being an expansion of economic trade with severe limitations on personal travel.

I'm all for fast opening. As soon as both countries hit 70% vaccination and no out-of-control hot-spots.

Seriously, about the only way to open sooner is reliable proof of vaccination at the border. And there's no point in pushing cross-border tourism if there's not much open for them when they come.

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by Stu Jackson

The part I don't understand about this whole "passport pablum" is this: I got my first shot on April 6th and they gave me a little card that said what and when. Why shouldn't that be enough?



I guess the anti-vaxxers will be going out and making up and printing cards for their very own use.


Tragic.


Making something simple into something really hard. A problem in search of a solution. A solution that's already in my bloody wallet!

Stu:

When my wife and I received our vaccinations in Montana, the pharmacists aide spelled my wife's name with my last name instead of her last name. A week after we received our second inoculation I noticed the error and brought in her card for them to correct it. They simply scratched out my last name and wrote in her last name.

The next week when I was picking up my prescription medicines, I inquired with the pharmacist stating that I thought a scratched out name with a rewritten substitution is not likely to garner much confidence if the vaccination certificate is needed for some official purpose. So they instead just handed me a blank form and told me just write in the information that they had written on the form during the two inoculation visits.

The image below is of a vaccination record card issued to a patient that received an inoculation at the mass drive in vaccination site in the parking lot of the San Francisco Stadium. Note it does not even have any patient identification data or even who performed the inoculation. Proof of nothingness.

The standard US CDC Vaccination Record form is available for downloading and printing on the CDC website. It is not an official document it was intended to be able to provide a record to the pharmacist and to have a second appointment recorded for the patient to have as a reminder.

Here is the link:

https://www.amlc.army.mil/Portals/73...NPAj1cnA%3d%3d

Basically having the record card is proof of nothing because yeah there are going to be a lot of person who will not be vaccinated but will counterfeit a record stating they are if having such certificate enables them a benefit, e.g. to travel, to enter a venue, to become employed, etc. The Biden Administration has stated that the Federal Government will not stand up a national database or issue any certificates, but some States are beginning to implement digital certificates linked to the State databases, Hawaii and New York.

So I perceive that it may be difficult for Americans to be allowed to travel into countries that have established formal and accurate vaccine databases and official certificates - such as digital certificates with QR codes that link back to online databases for confirmation, not unlike a real passport.

About as good as a certificate from a box of Cracker Jacks.



No ticky, no laundry.