Canadian COVID-19 News

[sv_pelagia]

Canadians who had allergic reaction to first vaccine dose can safely get second, advisory committee says

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/vac...221100?cmp=rss


After reviewing evidence from recent studies, NACI said it found that most people who experienced an immediate allergic reaction did not have a similar reaction when receiving a second dose.

The Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology says allergic reactions to vaccination, including severe ones, are extremely rare. Studies suggest the estimated annual rate of such severe reactions in Canada is about 0.4 to 1.8 cases per one million doses of vaccine administered.

According to Health Canada's review of adverse vaccine reactions, 307 cases of anaphylaxis have been reported in the country — out of more than 56 million COVID-19 doses administered.

[Mike OReilly]

G&M:
Despite breakthrough cases, data show vaccinations are reducing COVID-19 spread and severity

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) defines a breakthrough case as when a person tests positive for COVID-19 more than two weeks after completing all recommended doses of an authorized COVID-19 vaccine. Breakthrough cases currently make up roughly 30 per cent of new cases in much of Canada.

The figure may seem alarming at first glance, but breakthrough cases are expected. While vaccines are highly effective in reducing the risk of infection, severe disease and death, no vaccine offers 100-per-cent protection. And, as vaccination rates increase across the country, so too will the proportion of breakthrough cases, owing to there being fewer unvaccinated people.

“If your denominator … is 75 per cent vaccinated, it stands to reason that because most of the [people] are vaccinated, a good chunk of the new infections will also be in people who were vaccinated,” said Lisa Barrett, a clinician scientist and infectious-diseases physician at Dalhousie University.
“But they are underrepresented – and they are very, very, very underrepresented in deaths and hospitalizations.”

[sv_pelagia]

Some recent BC vaccinated vs non-vaccinated data:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...227068?cmp=rss

[Scorpius]

Exciting Covid times in BC:
1. Recent modelling data shows BC Covid cases dropping at about 2% a day - but of course it is an asymptotic curve meaning that the number of new cases should approximately halve each month:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...2021-1.6226799

2. Over 4000 BC health care workers laid off as deadline for full vaccination passes:

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/thousands-of-b...sses-1.5638687

3. Municipalities imposing vaccine mandates for their employees: On CBC Victoria this morning it was reported that both Victoria and Saanich are requiring their employees to be vaccinated or be laid off.

Exciting!

[sv_pelagia]

Originally Posted by Scorpius

2. Over 4000 BC health care workers laid off as deadline for full vaccination passes:

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/thousands-of-b...sses-1.5638687

Just to put it into proper perspective:

96.8% of BC health care workers (122,247) are vaccinated vs 3.2% (4096) not vaccinated.

4096 off the job seems like a large number, until put into perspective... unfortunately, our media seems to focus on the minority #s

Still, agreed, it's always exciting times here in BC

[danstanford]

I am unreasonably aggravated that the stories about the efficacy of the vaccine now often carry qualifications about the number of immunocompromised in the statistics. There was a chorus of shout downs whenever anyone asked for this kind of information earlier in this pandemic. I hate, hate, hate having to interpret the spin.

While I am ranting, why can't we get any information on the levels of contagiousness of those of us fully vaccinated? I still have everyone in my place screening every day on entry and then signing in despite the fact that they are all fully vaccinated. Is there any point?

[Scorpius]

Originally Posted by danstanford

I am unreasonably aggravated that the stories about the efficacy of the vaccine now often carry qualifications about the number of immunocompromised in the statistics. There was a chorus of shout downs whenever anyone asked for this kind of information earlier in this pandemic. I hate, hate, hate having to interpret the spin.

While I am ranting, why can't we get any information on the levels of contagiousness of those of us fully vaccinated? I still have everyone in my place screening every day on entry and then signing in despite the fact that they are all fully vaccinated. Is there any point?

My understanding is that the fully vaccinated (like me) can still catch and carry the disease (although at a reduced rate) - and transmit it to others - whether they are vaccinated or not. What the vaccines DO though is stop the disease from progressing to the lungs and thus causing the really devastating and deadly illnesses.


I'm not sure what "place" you are referring to, but it does sound like daily screening is overkill if everyone is fully vaccinated - unless it is a health care facility with vulnerable people around, whether vaccinated or not. Colin Powell died of Covid in spite of being fully vaccinated - but he was fighting cancer at the same time and so was immunocompromised.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by danstanford

... why can't we get any information on the levels of contagiousness of those of us fully vaccinated? I still have everyone in my place screening every day on entry and then signing in despite the fact that they are all fully vaccinated. Is there any point?

The vaccinated aren't contagious. The vaccinated who still end up catching COVID (despite the greater odds against catching it, or becoming severely ill) can be contagious. The assumption being that any COVID infection, however mild, could be a source of infection of others, vaccinated or not.

Is there any point to the daily checks? Yes, because this is still a pandemic.

1. we (and you as an employer) want to get early warning of possible infection in an employee so that they don't spread it in the workplace.
2. signing in is valuable tracking information if anyone in your business develops COVID.

At a place I volunteer at, they have a wall-mounted IR thermometer, and a laminated card with the relevant screening questions. Takes about 30 sec to go through all that.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by danstanford

While I am ranting, why can't we get any information on the levels of contagiousness of those of us fully vaccinated? I still have everyone in my place screening every day on entry and then signing in despite the fact that they are all fully vaccinated. Is there any point?

Screen...? you mean like asking people to confirm they aren't exhibiting any of the normal Covid-19 symptoms? That seems like a pretty modest bar to maintain, regardless of vaccination status. Of course, if you mean actual lab testing, then I'd agree, it probably is not justified.

As the story I posted notes, nearly 30% of current infections are people who are vaccinated. And this will inevitably rise over time as vaccine rates increase, and immunity wanes.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by sv_pelagia

Just to put it into proper perspective:

96.8% of BC health care workers (122,247) are vaccinated vs 3.2% (4096) not vaccinated.

4096 off the job seems like a large number, until put into perspective... unfortunately, our media seems to focus on the minority #s

Still, agreed, it's always exciting times here in BC

unfortunately, our media seems to focus on the minority #s


Sad but seeminly true, almost all media seems to focus on the most sensational aspect of a story, even to the point of misrepresentation. (Unless it is a partisan media organization, then it focuses on whatever part of the story looks worst for their "target".)

[Scorpius]

Originally Posted by Scorpius

My understanding is that the fully vaccinated (like me) can still catch and carry the disease (although at a reduced rate) - and transmit it to others - whether they are vaccinated or not. What the vaccines DO though is stop the disease from progressing to the lungs and thus causing the really devastating and deadly illnesses.


I'm not sure what "place" you are referring to, but it does sound like daily screening is overkill if everyone is fully vaccinated - unless it is a health care facility with vulnerable people around, whether vaccinated or not. Colin Powell died of Covid in spite of being fully vaccinated - but he was fighting cancer at the same time and so was immunocompromised.

I read "screening" as "testing". My bad. If screening is just a temperature check and answering a few questions I don't see that as unreasonable in the current situation.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

As the story I posted notes, nearly 30% of current infections are people who are vaccinated. And this will inevitably rise over time as vaccine rates increase, and immunity wanes.

Also if (contrived made-up example) there's a 9:1 ratio between vaccinated and unvaccinated people, and if 10% of the vaccinated catch COVID, and 20% of the unvaccinated catch COVID, then out of a population of 100 people, that's 9 vaccinated, and 2 unvaccinated who get sick.

This is of course when a certain someone would jump in to tell us that this is indelible proof that the vaccine makes more people sick!

[Macblaze]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

As the story I posted notes, nearly 30% of current infections are people who are vaccinated. And this will inevitably rise over time as vaccine rates increase, and immunity wanes.

This is an interesting point and it would probably be good for "people" to get out in front of the story for once. As vaccination rates continue to increase (which I hope to god they still do) the percentage of cases among the vaccinated must also increase. It's just a fact of math.

But it doesn't mean decreasing evidence of vaccine efficacy, it just means decreasing number of non vaccinated. But some people are not going to get that are they? No matter how often we tell them.

It's my biggest beef with this whole ...whatever the hell this last two years has been... Lots and lots of facts and very little understanding. And when there is an attempt at understanding, it is almost always clouded with political, social and/or economic philosophies.

Makes you yearn for the simpler days:
fire = hot
hot = burn
∴ don't put your bloody hand in the fire.

[wingssail]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Also if (contrived made-up example) there's a 9:1 ratio between vaccinated and unvaccinated people, and if 10% of the vaccinated catch COVID, and 20% of the unvaccinated catch COVID, then out of a population of 100 people, that's 9 vaccinated, and 2 unvaccinated who get sick.

This is of course when a certain someone would jump in to tell us that this is indelible proof that the vaccine makes more people sick!

And that same someone will tell you that the health agency which produced the numbers is controlled by the government and paid by someone who’s in on it, so therefore you can't trust the health agency.

And that the media that reported it is biased so the reporters spin the story to match their bias, so you cannon trust the media reports.

And the scientists who concur with the numbers and the reports will say anything to curry favor with their peers and whomever is paying them so their support can't be trusted.

And the educators who teach the scientists and the journalists are hidden communists who put the bias into their students, so naturally the scientists and the journalists carry the bias forward.

And the CF member who relays the numbers and reports is also biased so you can't trust them either.

And that someone will also tell you that a large corporation is behind it all and is paying off everyone.

So, that same someone will say that due to the bias and dishonesty of the health agency, the government, the media, the educators, and the CF members, in fact the whole human race because acting on one's bias is what makes us human, whatever they say is not to be trusted.

BUT, if they read in Facebook that it is all a conspiracy, they will believe that explicitly.

And I know that even if it isn’t true, Facebook will leave it up and present it to other conspiracy believers who will stay engaged on Facebook a little longer just to keep reading their confirmation bias so FB can get a little higher ad revenue.

And all those people who read it will share with their friends, “You know what I heard? That stuff about the vaccines preventing covid is all a conspiracy."

The story ends there.

[Scorpius]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

Also if (contrived made-up example) there's a 9:1 ratio between vaccinated and unvaccinated people, and if 10% of the vaccinated catch COVID, and 20% of the unvaccinated catch COVID, then out of a population of 100 people, that's 9 vaccinated, and 2 unvaccinated who get sick.

This is of course when a certain someone would jump in to tell us that this is indelible proof that the vaccine makes more people sick!

Not to mention that the unvaccinated will probably get MUCH sicker than the vaccinated, will be far more likely to be hospitalized, and will be far more likely to die.