Category: Covid-19 Vaccine

Missouri is one of several states that last summer announced a lottery to reward people who get the COVID-19 vaccine and entice others to get the shot.

Since Gov. Mike Parson announced the $900,000 lottery in mid-July, more than 668,000 doses of the vaccine have been administered to Missouri residents.

But only 45,000 of the adults who received the vaccine since the giveaways began entered the statewide drawing, a state health department spokeswoman said. That's fewer than 15% of the more than 600,000 people who have entered the drawing, which ends next month.

Still, Missouri State Health Director Donald Kauerauf thinks the lottery has been successful. He said the state is using multiple approaches to inspire people to get the shot, and every strategy helps.

Theres not a single initiative that is the golden ticket to get everyone to get vaccinated, Kauerauf said. That doesnt exist. If it did, every state in the country would do it.

The lottery awards $10,000 prizes to people who have gotten at least one dose of the vaccine. The 900 winners are split between those who received the vaccine before the lottery was announced and those who received it after. The state announces 180 winners every two weeks.

The fourth of five drawings is this week.

Its difficult to identify the reasons people get vaccinated, said Chris Prener, a sociologist at St Louis University who tracks coronavirus and vaccination data.

Its not like we're systematically tracking why people are getting vaccinated when they get vaccinated, he said.

Prener questions the lotterys effectiveness, given that the average number of daily vaccinations in the state was already increasing this summer before the lottery was announced. The number peaked in August before decreasing again.

Nearly 55% of Missourians 12 and older are fully vaccinated.

The delta variant-fueled surge in cases could have prompted people to get vaccinated. The federal Food and Drug Administrations full approval of the Pfizer vaccine in August and several companies vaccine mandates could also have driven the number up.

Incentive programs sometimes discourage people and sow distrust of the vaccine, Prener said.

People see a lottery and say, 'Well, if it's such a good thing, why do you need me to get paid to do it?' he said. For public health folks, they don't want to draw people's minds to a place where there isn't just innate good in vaccination.

Academics have published several studies on the effectiveness of lotteries and other vaccine incentive programs in the past few months, with conflicting assessments of their effectiveness.

One study, published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, found that Ohios Vax-a-Million vaccine lottery had little to no effect on vaccine uptake.

Rewards can help encourage people to get medical care, said Dr. Monica Gandhi, an infectious disease professor at the University of California, San Francisco who has studied incentives for public health measures to reduce HIV rates.

However, when rewards are left up to chance, as with a lottery, people are less likely to be motivated, she said.

The most effective way is to pay people to get vaccinated to the tune of a couple of hundred dollars at least, Gandhi said.

It's usually, frankly, money, she said. Not an offer of money, like a lottery. But money.

Because Missouris lottery has a higher number of winners with smaller payouts, people might be more likely to take part in the lottery here than in a state with smaller numbers of big-ticket winners, Gandhi said.

Most people who take part in lotteries probably dont need much persuading, she said.

What we saw across the country was that incentives worked better when people were likely going to get the vaccine anyway, she said. And so even something small, like doughnuts and a beer, all of these were working.

Follow Sarah on Twitter: @petit_smudge

See the article here:

Did Missouri's Lottery Persuade People To Get The COVID-19 Vaccine? Hard To Tell - St. Louis Public Radio

The COVID-19 vaccination rate offers a rare opportunity for survey researchers to benchmark their data against a high-profile outcome other than an election in this case, the share of adults whove received at least one dose of a coronavirus vaccine as documented by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This kind of benchmarking helps to shed light on whether polls continue to provide reasonably accurate information about the U.S. public on this subject.

A Pew Research Center analysis finds that public polling on COVID-19 vaccination has tracked the CDC rate fairly closely. Polling estimates of the adult vaccination rate have been within about 2.8 percentage points, on average, of the rate calculated by the CDC. Around a quarter (22%) of the polls differed from the CDC estimate by less than 1 percentage point.

This analysis includes 98 public polls conducted by 19 different polling organizations from Dec. 29, 2020, to June 30, 2021. Researchers gauged the accuracy of each poll by computing the difference between the polls published estimate and the vaccination rate from the CDC on the day the poll concluded.

Researchers collected 98 public polls conducted by 19 different pollsters from Dec. 29, 2020, to June 30, 2021. Researchers gauged the accuracy of each poll by computing the difference between the polls published estimate and the vaccination rate from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on the day the poll concluded. CDC numbers were collected from their publicly available API. For a complete list of polls that were included in this analysis, click here.

When polls differed from the CDC rate, they often came in higher rather than lower but not always. One notable difference between how polling fared for the 2020 presidential election and the COVID-19 vaccination rate is that polling errors regarding the vaccine have been less systematic (i.e., in the same direction). One way to measure systematic error, also known as bias, is by letting polls thatunderestimated the CDC benchmark cancel out polls thatoverestimated the benchmark. (Researchers call this computing the signed average error across polls.)

In this analysis, once over- and underestimates of the CDC benchmark were allowed to cancel each other out, polls differed from the CDC rate by just +0.3 percentage points on average, with the net result being that the polls almost exactly matched the vaccination rate. For comparison, according to ananalysisof national polls conducted in the final two weeks of the 2020 presidential election by the American Association for Public Opinion Research, polls understated Trumps share in the certified vote by 3.3 percentage points and overstated Bidens share in the certified vote by 1.0 percentage point.

To be sure, the vaccination rate among Americans was increasing while each poll was being conducted, making it difficult to pin down the exact difference in the vaccination rates reported in polling data and the official CDC rates. The median duration of the polls in this analysis was six days. If the polls accuracy is judged based on the CDC rate for the mid-date of the data collection, rather than the final date, the average absolute difference would be 3.1 percentage points instead of 2.8. Further complicating the comparisons is the fact that the CDC rates themselves are not necessarily without error because of issues such as delays in jurisdictions reporting vaccinations.

As other research has suggested, poll results may differ from the CDC vaccination rate (and from each other) because of differences in how pollsters asked about vaccine status. The most common type of question in this analysis asks something like Have you gotten vaccinated for the coronavirus? with answer options for Yes or No. Other questions asked respondents if they knew anyone who had been vaccinated and included an answer option for the respondent to say they had received the vaccine themselves. Some pollsters asked if respondents planned to get vaccinated with an option to indicate that they had already received the vaccine. The average absolute difference for the 76 questions using a yes/no format was 2.8 percentage points, compared with 3.0 points for all other questions (22 questions used a different format).

In some ways, the fact that the polling industry has done a better job estimating vaccinations than voting is not surprising. Election polls face challenges that dont exist for non-election polls measuring public opinion on issues like abortion or immigration. Election polls focus on a future behavior (will you vote? for whom?) and need to screen for respondents who are likely voters.

Another kind of benchmarking involves pollsters asking questions that are also on gold standard, high-response-rate government surveys and comparing their results to the government result. While this is an important and worthwhile exercise, those analyses arent comparing a survey to an objective outcome, but rather one survey to another.

Coronavirus vaccinations rates present pollsters with a rare opportunity to compare their results on a high-profile outcome that is both fully available to the U.S. adult population (rather than only citizens and registered voters) and has a known truth that pollsters can compare to. Unlike the polls less-than-stellar performance in the 2020 election, the results from this analysis suggest that the polls have done well in tracking growth in the share of adults receiving the vaccines.

Read more:

Polls on COVID-19 vaccination closely align with CDC data - Pew Research Center

FDA approval of COVID-19 vaccine not enough to convince vaccine-hesitant caregivers to roll up their sleeves  McKnight's Senior Living

View original post here:

FDA approval of COVID-19 vaccine not enough to convince vaccine-hesitant caregivers to roll up their sleeves - McKnight's Senior Living

BioNTechs founding story dates back to the late 1990s, when CEO and co-founder Uur ahin, his wife and co-founder zlem Treci, and the rest of the seven-person founding team began their research.

Focused specifically on an area dubbed New Technologies, mRNA stood out as one area with tremendous potential to deliver the teams ultimate goal: Developing treatments personalized to an individual and their specific ailments, rather than the traditional approach of finding a solution that happens to work generally at the population level.

ahin, along with Mayfield venture partner Ursheet Parikh, joined us at TechCrunch Disrupt 2021 to discuss the COVID-19 vaccine, his long journey as a founder, what it takes to build a biotech platform company, and whats coming next from BioNTech and the technologies its developing to help prevent other outbreaks and treat todays deadliest diseases.

At that time, mRNA was not potent enough, ahin recalled. It was just a weak molecule. But the idea was great, so we invested many years in an academic setting to improve that. And in 2006, we realized Wow, this is now working. Okay, its time to initiate a company.'

View post:

For BioNTech, the COVID-19 vaccine was simply the opening act - TechCrunch

Jon Fingas is a contributing writer at Engadget.More posts by this contributor

Theres a real chance youll need proof of a COVID-19 vaccination to enter certain venues, and Apple is hoping it can save you the hassle of digging up an email or carrying a physical card in your pocket. The company is bringing verifiable COVID-19 vaccination cards to Wallet as part of a future iPhone software update. The feature will take advantage of the international SMART Health Cards standard (already in use in several states) to produce proof of vaccination, sign it with a private key and create a public key to verify your info.

The just-released iOS 15 already lets you store verifiable vaccination and test results in the Health app using the same standard. Youll receive your records through QR codes, downloadable files or healthcare providers who use Health Records on iPhone.

Apple is promising strict privacy for all your data. The company wont have access to your imported or shared records, and all info must be encrypted and securely stored when transferred elsewhere. The tech giant also cant see your vaccination card or how youve used it. You can share information with approved third-party apps, but only on a one-time basis.

Apple didnt say when it might release the card update. This wont thrill you if youre anxious about the very concept of sharing your vaccination status with a concert venue or restaurant. However, it should at least streamline the process important when youre already running late for a show.

Editors note: This article originally appeared on Engadget.

Read the original here:

Apple Wallet is getting verifiable COVID-19 vaccination cards - TechCrunch

US doubling order for global COVID-19 vaccines to 1 billion doses, Biden to urge 70% world vaccination rate within year  WBNG-TV

Original post:

US doubling order for global COVID-19 vaccines to 1 billion doses, Biden to urge 70% world vaccination rate within year - WBNG-TV

While vaccine hesitancy is an age-old phenomenon, it has found a newand profoundly frustratingexpression during the COVID-19 pandemic that has led some physicians to reportedly refuse care to patients who have forgone SARS-CoV-2 vaccination.

But as infuriating as it can be to treat patients who refuse the safe and highly effective COVID-19 vaccines that are widely and freely available in the U.S., doctors should keep in mind their professional ethical obligations. It turns out there is extensive guidance for just such a situation.

Ethics in our profession is about making hard choices in the face of conflicting values, said AMA President Gerald E. Harmon, MD. An important value for meand this is inherent within our AMA Code of Medical Ethicsis a physicians duty to provide care for the patient, even when that choice is difficult.

The short answer

Elliott Crigger, PhD, is the AMAs director of ethics policy and secretary to the AMA Council on Ethical and Judicial Affairs. He expanded on Dr. Harmons forceful view.

In general, no, a physician should not refuse a patient because the individual is not vaccinated or declines to be vaccinated, Crigger said.

Physicians have a clear duty to provide care in emergencies, Crigger noted, citing principle VI in the AMA Code of Medical Ethics, which states that a physician shall, except in emergencies, be free to choose whom to serve, with whom to associate and the environment in which to provide medical care.

But the physicians commitment to care for those who are sick or injured carries with it a duty to treat in other circumstances as well, including public health crises, when, according to Opinion 8.3, Physician Responsibility for Disaster Response and Preparedness, doctors may face greater than usual risks to [their] own safety, health or life.

Moreover, Opinion 1.1.2, Prospective Patients, bars physicians from refusing care to patients based solely on their infectious disease status or for any reason that would constitute discrimination against a class or category of patients.

The AMA recognizes the critical importance of scientific integrity, transparency and public trust in the fight to contain the global spread of COVID-19. Stay updated with the AMA on COVID-19 and vaccine development.

Learn more with the AMA about how to answer the question, Can physicians decline unvaccinated patients?

Extenuating circumstances

The strength of a physicians obligation to treat may, however, vary based on the conditions, Crigger noted.

Determining whether, in a particular instance, a physician may ethically decline a patient requires careful reflection, he said.

For example, in the context of a highly transmissible disease that poses significant risk of severe illness for which a safe, effective vaccine is available, the decision to accept or decline a patient must balance three factors:

These are among the questions to be considered.

What are the unvaccinated patients medical needs and how urgent are those needs? In emergency situations, physicians may not ethically refuse to provide care, regardless of the patients vaccination status. But it may be justifiable to decline to provide routine care, such as an annual physical examination, for an otherwise healthy patient.

What is the nature of the physicians practice and patient population? Physicians may decline a patient if meeting the individuals medical needs would seriously compromise the physicians ability to provide care needed by other patients, Crigger said, again citing Opinion 1.1.2.

Likewise, if an unvaccinated patient would pose significant risk to other patients in the practicefor example, if the physicians other patients are immune-compromised or cannot be vaccinated for medical reasonsit may be ethically justifiable to refuse an unvaccinated individual, the more so with the greater the risk of severe disease for other patients in the practice.

Can accommodation be made to minimize the risk an unvaccinated patient may pose to other patients and staff? For example, can unvaccinated and possibly infectious patients be seen in a dedicated examination room or at dedicated times? Or can they be tested negative for COVID-19 before receiving care? Can care reasonably be provided via telemedicine? Opinion 1.2.12, Ethical Practice in Telemedicine, provides additional guidance.

Can the practice provide adequate personal protective equipment to minimize risk of exposure to physicians and other staff? This has been a vexing question in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, when initial supplies of PPE were extremely limited for some practices, Crigger said. As PPE has become more readily available, the responsibility has increased for physician practices and health care organizations to ensure adequate supplies of PPE to enable them to accept even unvaccinated patients.

Can the patient be persuaded to accept vaccination? When an unvaccinated patient presents for care, physiciansor other appropriate staffhave an opportunity to explore with the patient why they are not vaccinated, respectfully acknowledge and address their concerns, and seek to persuade them to accept vaccination to protect themselves and others.

In sum, Crigger said, A patients vaccination status alone is not sufficient reason, ethically, to turn that individual away.

Visit the AMA COVID-19 resource center for clinical information, guides and resources, and updates on advocacy and medical ethics.

See the rest here:

No COVID-19 vaccination, no care? Why that's the wrong path - American Medical Association

Palestinian Health Ministry staff members in Nablus receive 300,000 doses of COVID-19 vaccines donated by the United States through through the COVAX vaccine-sharing initiative on Aug. 24, 2021. Jaafar Ashtiyeh/AFP via Getty Images hide caption

Palestinian Health Ministry staff members in Nablus receive 300,000 doses of COVID-19 vaccines donated by the United States through through the COVAX vaccine-sharing initiative on Aug. 24, 2021.

Facing criticism for its plan to give Americans third doses of COVID-19 vaccines while millions in the world's poorest countries are still waiting for a first shot, the White House is planning a virtual summit next week to try to spur efforts to boost the pace of global vaccinations.

The Wednesday meeting is timed for when world leaders are in New York for the United Nations General Assembly, an event which itself has been pared down as officials try to contain the chances to spread the coronavirus.

Global health advocates had been pushing for weeks for the Biden administration to take on a stronger leadership role in getting vaccines distributed around the world.

Administration officials aren't saying exactly who is expected to attend Wednesday, but White House press secretary Jen Psaki said in a statement that the goal is to "rally civil society, NGOs, philanthropists and industry along with world leaders."

The World Health Organization and other groups have urged the United States to hold back on broad plans for booster shots, arguing that poorer countries need the vaccines more. The Biden administration has pushed back on criticism, arguing that the U.S. has enough doses to vaccinate Americans while also sharing more vaccines globally than any other nation.

Low-income countries have gotten less than 1% of all the doses given so far globally in this pandemic.

The White House hasn't confirmed reports that President Biden will set a goal of 70% of the world's population being vaccinated by September 2022, when leaders convene next year for the U.N. General Assembly.

"We are in a race against time," said Carolyn Reynolds of the Pandemic Action Network, one of many advocates who has been pushing the administration to pick up the pace on global vaccine distribution. "We urge all world leaders to commit to the summit targets to vaccinate 70% of the world's population in less than 12 months, save lives now, and ensure the world is prepared for the next pandemic."

The summit will also address shortages of oxygen for COVID patients and personal protective equipment for health workers. The announcement also talks about accountability: setting targets, tracking progress and actually making sure goals are met.

That sort of accountability is something Dr. Krishna Udayakumar at Duke University has been pushing for. Over the course of the pandemic, there have been many promises, but some countries have backtracked or failed to meet goals for vaccine sharing after the delta variant changed the calculation on their domestic needs.

"That is a point we have been pushing on lack of leadership and accountability is the core challenge to global response," said Udayakumar at the Duke Global Health Institute.

So far, the United States has distributed 140 million vaccine doses to approximately 100 countries. The Biden administration has pledged to distribute 500 million doses of the Pfizer vaccine in the coming months and has hinted an even larger pledge may be coming.

White House COVID response coordinator Jeff Zients didn't directly answer when asked by a reporter during a briefing Friday whether an additional large vaccine contract would be announced in conjunction with the summit.

"It's critical that this summit is not just a flash in the pan but the start of a full-force, coordinated effort to combat this pandemic globally," said Jenny Ottenhoff at the One Campaign. "That includes clear, time-bound commitments to get vaccines to Africa and low-income countries everywhere. Everyone is on the hook to deliver."

Read the original:

Biden Aims To Rally The World To Boost COVID-19 Vaccines - NPR

Americans may be wondering about flu shots as the future of how additional doses of the COVID-19 vaccine will be administered to millions of people. While officials at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) decide when more than just immunocompromised people can receive another immunity-boosting dose, there's more than a good chance that flu shot season overlaps with your timeline for another COVID-19 vaccine.

FDA officials previously determined that anyone who received a two-dose mRNA vaccine should seek another dose around eight months after their final booster dose; for many, that will fall in November, December, and January, the peak of flu season here in the United States. On Friday, September 17, the FDA group known as the Vaccine and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee voted to move forward on this timeline for those over the age of 65.

Those in that age group wishing to plan a timeline for a third COVID-19 vaccine or, if you're hoping to begin the vaccination process now that the Pfizer shot has full FDA approval you may be wondering if there's a way to work in your seasonal flu vaccine. Officers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) have planned to encourage Americans to indeed seek both, as they're both essential to lower health risks this winter (in fact, burgeoning news reports indicate teams at Moderna are working on a joint flu-and-covid shot).

CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, M.D., MPH, previously told Good Housekeeping that it's best to receive a flu shot by the end of October, as it takes at least two weeks for flu antibodies to build up within your immune system. Since many are acutely aware of the side effects associated with COVID-19 vaccines, they may be wary of getting a flu shot before getting another vaccine dose, or vice versa. But Dr. Walensky and other top federal health officials have indicated that this shouldn't be a concern here's why.

The short answer? Yes! You may be confused if you've heard advice against this tactic, though, as previously CDC officials recommended waiting at least two weeks between a COVID-19 vaccine and any other shot. After having almost a full year to monitor these new vaccines, the agency has updated its instructions to reflect the current understanding of vaccination in general, as immune responses are usually unaffected by receiving more than one vaccine at a time. "You can get a COVID-19 vaccine and other vaccines in the same visit," Dr. Walensky says. "CDCs recommendation has been updated so that you no longer need to wait 14 days between getting your COVID-19 vaccine and other vaccinations."

Currently, CDC officers are working to further educate professionals from physicians to pharmacists on administering the flu shot alongside other vaccines. "Based on our prior experience and knowledge of immunology, we do not anticipate any unusual or unexpected safety problems with receiving COVID-19 vaccines and flu vaccines at the same time," she adds.

The flu shot isn't expected to make any potential side effects associated with COVID-19 vaccines particularly arm tenderness or chills, fatigue, or fever worse than it would be if you had got them separately. Dr. Walenksy indicates that an immune system often responds to multiple vaccines with the same potential side effects that have already been well documented; getting vaccinated against the seasonal flu and COVID-19 won't create new side effects altogether.

It's true that there is a lack of robust research on administering COVID-19 vaccines alongside other vaccines, given how new they are to the scientific community. But doctors in the field aren't worried that a combination of the two vaccines will heighten any side effects the biggest concern, at best, could be two sore arms, says William Schaffner, M.D., the medical director for the National Foundation for Infectious Diseases.

"I personally wouldn't want two sore arms at the same time and so if you would wait at least a week between the two, you won't [face the possibility of] simultaneous adverse events," he tells us.

If you're someone who has a well-documented history of experiencing side effects after a flu shot such as a sore arm, or a bit of a fever on the day of you may wish to space the two out for your own personal comfort. All side effects are temporary, but the likelihood of you experiencing a potential side effect (and how mild or severe it may be) may be influenced if you decide to get both shots at the same time, Dr. Schaffner explains.

Currently, pharmacists at CVS and Walgreens, as well as retailers like Walmart and Target, are offering appointments for flu vaccinations online.

While the flu posed less of a threat to Americans during the socially distanced winter earlier this year, there's mounting evidence that influenza may pose more of a threat now than ever. "We know that antibodies that protect against flu wane over time; this means there may be many people, both children and adults, who have less immunity against flu this season than during previous seasons because they werent exposed to flu last year," Dr. Walensky warns.

It's crucial to ensure that you receive both vaccines, as they're equally important do not prioritize one over the other, especially if you are older than 65. "Everyone six months and older should get their flu vaccine each season," she says, adding that those at higher risk for severe flu complications should start planning their vaccine timeline now. "This includes adults 65 years and older, people with certain chronic health conditions asthma, diabetes, and heart disease pregnant people, and children younger than 5 years old."

This article is meant to be educational in nature and isn't a substitute for actual medical or treatment advice from a licensed professional. Please consult your primary health care provider to determine which vaccinations and vaccine schedules are best for you.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io

Read more:

Is It Safe to Get a Flu Shot and COVID-19 Vaccine Together? - GoodHousekeeping.com

The global recovery is slowing as Covid-19 resurges, spurring governments to try to raise vaccination rates in hopes of fueling stronger economic growth.

The thinking is, first, that vaccinations will ease consumers worries about infection, prompting them to spend more on travel, dining out, going to concerts and other activities that involve proximity to other people. Second, reduced Covid-19 case counts would mean fewer government shutdowns of ports, factories and other operations critical to global supply chains.

Original post:

Covid-19 Vaccinations Boost the Global Economy, but May Not Cure It Alone - The Wall Street Journal