Quote:
"That first dose we think gives you somewhere around 50%, and you need that second dose to get up to 95%," Ramers added.
What exactly needs to be stressed?Quote:
This needs to be stressed.
Charpie said:
The OP comes here constantly to find something to COMPLAIN about.
There are any number of reasons why this might have happened. Most people understand how it could have happened.
The virus takes 1-2 weeks to incubate. She was infected before the shot. It's will require 2 shots to reach the 90-95% effectiveness.The Fall Guy said:
https://www.reuters.com/article/reutersComService_2_MOLT/idUSKBN2940QL
Nurse who got Covid shot got Covid over a week later.
And the 6th shot will now be required for future Black Belt CertificationsShai-Hulud said:
Doe that mean a 3rd shot can get me to 99.865?
Dr. Not Yet Dr. Ag said:
Takes about 11 days for the vaccine to take effect. We actually don't know whether the second shot is necessary, although it likely provides much longer immunity compared to a single dose and probably provides slightly improved immunity in the short term. You can see that prior to the second dose taking effect under "dose 2 to 7 days after dose 2", the vaccine is ~90% effective already at that point.
We just started moving from healthcare workers only to those over 65. It is a massive undertaking which will be a little rough around the edges.3rd Generation Ag said:
Seems to be major snafu in the addition of my over 65 group to authorization. At least in the metroplex. Gov's website said to call shot centers to see if they have any for the over 65 group. Now the phones for CVS and Krogers, and the like are so overloaded no one can get through. I signed up online with Tarrant County, but who knows if I will ever see back.
The media is saying they should have had giant distribution centers and I agree. Once school starts back I simply will not have time to spend all day looking for a place to get the vaccine.
oragator said:
Well if it is 95 percent effective doesn't that mean 1/20 can still get it?
In a nutshell this is the problem with the whole phenomenon. Highlighting outliers or statistically predicted events in such a way to have people believe their lives, and especially the lives of their children, are at high risk. Taking a statistical anomaly such as a child becoming seriously ill and trumpeting that beyond their local news (where they could get the emotional and financial support needed) is akin to the stranger danger phenomenon; convincing parents that their kids are in so much danger if they play in their front yard that no one does that anymore. People - humans - cannot apply statistical probability to their own lives and understand how survivable this virus is. Thank the media.oragator said:
Good info, thanks.
But I guess I was just saying that someone testing positive and having mild symptoms after getting the shot shouldn't be national news, there will be many thousands of these if it isn't 100 percent effective no? Or do we think her symptoms were outside of the expected results? Just wondering why this is news.
