CDC Notifies States, Large Cities To Prepare For Vaccine Distribution As Soon As Late October

[godisney14]

there may very well be two distinct worlds in which the vaccinated and non-vaccinated have totally different things open to them.

No, not really. But, cool story.

 

[snappy]

As I've said here numerous times, I will continue to wear a mask as required until everyone who has had an opportunity to get vaccinated and those who have chosen to do so have done so.

Me too. I shipped some Christmas ornaments and a couple of cloth masks that I find fit really good to our DD today. Then I immediately ordered 5 more of that same style.

 

[tarheelmjfan]

True. But as an additional argument to unblind the studies, you've got tens of thousands of people who are clearly willing to get the vaccine. Give it to them and there's reduced exposure.

And I am most definitely not a scientist or a doctor nor have I claimed to be. I am certain I have used terms incorrectly- you are absolutely right.

But, if we're being honest here, my stuff has been generally pretty good here. And overall, I stand by what I've posted.

I'm not qualified to make the decision on whether or not those in the studies should be first to get the vaccine, but I think it's safe to say that there won't be more available vaccine than willing participants for quite some time.

 

[Jonfw2]

It’s official: the fight against Covid in the United States has now gone from defense to offense. The Pfizer vaccine is approved.

 

[snappy]

Next up, Moderna

 

[rjb123]

When will they meet about Moderna?

 

[Jonfw2]

When will they meet about Moderna?

Next week.

 

[snappy]

I think I heard next Thursday?

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

So as this news rolls on now the next seems to be order of people and data collection of those who receive it.

Yesterday my state advised they will not "send personal information to the federal government about residents who receive coronavirus vaccines, though it has signed a data-use agreement with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention." They are wanting clarification on just how the data will be used on providing personal identification such that the CDC was asking for which includes "a person's name, address and birthdate". This does not mean they won't have such information for residents of the state but that they won't be, at this time, sharing such information with the Federal government.

There's some questions about the data-use agreement "One CDC document lists a recipient's birthdate as “required” and names and addresses as “required if known" under the agreement. But the agreement itself says it “does not create an obligation or commitment to transfer data,” and it promises that the federal government will maintain the confidentiality of personal information about vaccine recipients."

The top admin for the state's health department said “The data-use agreement, we’re very uneasy with and this time don’t have plans to submit that personal, identifying information. “We’re waiting for more clarity on how the data information will be used.” Additionally he said "the state is wary of sending the federal government such personal information because it believes doing so will discourage people from getting vaccinated."

In June my state signed a law that apps cannot be used by health departments for contact tracing and contact tracing is voluntary not mandatory. That was done for privacy reasons and for concern that such action of making something mandatory would reduce the likelihood of someone being forthright with information; whether that has panned out to be the case I don't know.

So we'll see how this progresses. It's not without it's merits to wonder about privacy but it's not without it's merits for the information to be know as in the article it states "data will help determine how vaccines are distributed, monitor their safety and effectiveness and identify places that are under-vaccinated". That said the distribution and under-vaccinated part can be handled by the state, the safety and effectiveness IMO would be outside of the state's lane if you will.

 

[mom2rtk]

So as this news rolls on now the next seems to be order of people and data collection of those who receive it.

Yesterday my state advised they will not "send personal information to the federal government about residents who receive coronavirus vaccines, though it has signed a data-use agreement with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention." They are wanting clarification on just how the data will be used on providing personal identification such that the CDC was asking for which includes "a person's name, address and birthdate". This does not mean they won't have such information for residents of the state but that they won't be, at this time, sharing such information with the Federal government.

There's some questions about the data-use agreement "One CDC document lists a recipient's birthdate as “required” and names and addresses as “required if known" under the agreement. But the agreement itself says it “does not create an obligation or commitment to transfer data,” and it promises that the federal government will maintain the confidentiality of personal information about vaccine recipients."

The top admin for the state's health department said “The data-use agreement, we’re very uneasy with and this time don’t have plans to submit that personal, identifying information. “We’re waiting for more clarity on how the data information will be used.” Additionally he said "the state is wary of sending the federal government such personal information because it believes doing so will discourage people from getting vaccinated."

In June my state signed a law that apps cannot be used by health departments for contact tracing and contact tracing is voluntary not mandatory. That was done for privacy reasons and for concern that such action of making something mandatory would reduce the likelihood of someone being forthright with information; whether that has panned out to be the case I don't know.

So we'll see how this progresses. It's not without it's merits to wonder about privacy but it's not without it's merits for the information to be know as in the article it states "data will help determine how vaccines are distributed, monitor their safety and effectiveness and identify places that are under-vaccinated". That said the distribution and under-vaccinated part can be handled by the state, the safety and effectiveness IMO would be outside of the state's lane if you will.

I have very mixed feelings about all of it. I feel like if you're in a time that kids aren't in school, and businesses are being forcefully limited or closed (to the point of complete business loss) then we all have to be willing to step out of our comfort zones with some of this stuff.

Jumping from "we're all in this together" and "in an abundance of caution let's close things down" to "gee, I don't want to take a chance on a vaccine" or "I don't want information shared on who has gotten the vaccine" is hard for me to accept.

Are we in unprecedented times or not? I hate when that's being used to do some things that are so serious to business owners, but then it doesn't seem to matter with others.

 

[kdonnel]

Facebook has said at this point they will not require employees to get the vaccine before returning to the office.

https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-...-to-get-covid-19-vaccine-to-return-to-office/
I don't think there will be many instances where the vaccine will be required, airlines and international travel perhaps the exception.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I have very mixed feelings about all of it. I feel like if you're in a time that kids aren't in school, and businesses are being forcefully limited or closed (to the point of complete business loss) then we all have to be willing to step out of our comfort zones with some of this stuff.

Jumping from "we're all in this together" and "in an abundance of caution let's close things down" to "gee, I don't want to take a chance on a vaccine" or "I don't want information shared on who has gotten the vaccine" is hard for me to accept.

Are we in unprecedented times or not? I hate when that's being used to do some things that are so serious to business owners, but then it doesn't seem to matter with others.

You know I have mixed feelings too. I think if they get the clarification and it seems clear that the intent is really for the reasons they gave, that they are just acting in the best interests of the citizens for long-term assisting and knowledge that hurdle should be removed.

It's a bit hard discuss too much but the top admin for the health department hasn't really been afraid to speak up to admonish us about our behaviors that have led to case increases in cases, he's always in conferences, always there in the governor's press briefings, etc so on the one hand the fact that he's willing to stick his neck out and say that they are concerned about privacy is something, on the other hand I'm not exactly sure if there isn't a bit of pandering to the political climate going on. I hate that I can't tell 100% either way..

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

I thought this was cool to find out:
https://www.kmbc.com/article/contai...a-will-now-deliver-covid-19-vaccines/34950600

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Even though this article is discussing my immediate area it gives some information about who is shipping what (looks like FedEx and UPS), etc

https://www.kshb.com/news/coronavirus/covid-19-vaccines-en-route-to-kc-metro

 

[RamblingMad]

Facebook has said at this point they will not require employees to get the vaccine before returning to the office.

https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-...-to-get-covid-19-vaccine-to-return-to-office/
I don't think there will be many instances where the vaccine will be required, airlines and international travel perhaps the exception.

I can see the case for elder care workers.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

https://www.kshb.com/news/national/...l-doses-of-pfizers-covid-19-vaccine-on-monday
Exciting days ahead!

 

[godisney14]

Facebook has said at this point they will not require employees to get the vaccine before returning to the office.

https://www.cnet.com/news/facebook-...-to-get-covid-19-vaccine-to-return-to-office/
I don't think there will be many instances where the vaccine will be required, airlines and international travel perhaps the exception.

I’m willing to bet that no major hospital and tech company will ever require vaccinations, from my experience. But, then again, many of these tech companies are allowing remote work (some forever) even after the pandemic subsides, whenever that is.

 

[RamblingMad]

I’m willing to bet that no major hospital and tech company will ever require vaccinations, from my experience. But, then again, many of these tech companies are allowing remote work (some forever) even after the pandemic subsides, whenever that is.

Looks like Google is through September next year. By that time most people should have had a vaccine and experienced all of the fun side effects by then.

 

[snappy]

Moderna study results this morning with info about potential prevention of asymptomatic Disease released on WSJ:

“Moderna’s documents posted by the FDA included new data suggesting that its vaccine begins to prevent asymptomatic infections after the first dose. The ability of a vaccine to prevent asymptomatic infections is important because it could help significantly slow the spread of the coronavirus.”

 

[aggiedog]

I'll be interested to see how long immunity lasts with the vaccines. I'm a health care worker and will most likely be getting whichever vaccine is available here as soon as I can. But if immunity only lasts, say, 6 months, and it take them 6-9 months just to get the first round of the whole population vaccinated, that means the second round/boosters will overlap with folks just getting their first vaccinations. That's even MORE doses they'll have to be able to produce.