Jump to content

Coronavirus - Part Two.

Recommended Posts

Make of numbers what rocks ya world.

I am in another forum.and someone is very het up about surging infections in Isreal.

They have more adults ( vunerable) vaccinated than us and infections have dropped from 10,000 a day Jan to about 100  after bottoming out in the 20s .

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
48 minutes ago, tinfoilhat said:

Good news, but why are sections of the scientific community getting all panicky about booster jabs this winter?

Hancock told us months ago that the manufacturers had developed new vaccines that were more resistant to variants than the vaccines currently in use, and they were to be rolled out in the Autumn.   Nowhere did I hear any suggestion that the new vaccines should be used for peoples 1st or 2nd jabs (as would make sense), but then that would be criticism of the rollout, and we know that is not allowed!

 

I find it interesting that it all went quiet for a while after that, until now.  Perhaps with almost all age-groups being vaccinated and we are about to open up  on the 19th July, now is about right to pass out the bad news that we'll all need more jabs if we want to be seen as "fully vaccinated" against the new variants, as the ones we've been told do work against variants,... well they don't work as well as these new ones!

 

Edited by Thirsty Relic

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Thirsty Relic said:

Hancock told us months ago that the manufacturers had developed new vaccines that were more resistant to variants than the vaccines currently in use, and they were to be rolled out in the Autumn.  

Did he? I can't remember reading anything about any new vaccines that had been developed only that they were hoping to do so and that Moderna were seeking permission to trial a modified vaccine to cover the B.1.351 variant (South African) one. Both Pfizer and A/Z are in discussion as to what to do next.

 

Quote

Nowhere did I hear any suggestion that the new vaccines should be used for peoples 1st or 2nd jabs (as would make sense), but then that would be criticism of the rollout, and we know that is not allowed!

Maybe because there are none. It seems senseless to try and produce any new vaccine especially as new variants are continually arriving from countries that have not had much of their population vaccinated yet. At the moment infections may be up because of new variants but it also seems the mortality rate is still low because of the vaccination success we have had.

 

Quote

I find it interesting that it all went quiet for a while after that, until now.  Perhaps with almost all age-groups being vaccinated and we are about to open up  on the 19th July, now is about right to pass out the bad news that we'll all need more jabs if we want to be seen as "fully vaccinated" against the new variants, as the ones we've been told do work against variants,... well they don't work as well as these new ones!

Even if the vaccines we have now are only 60% effective if enough people have them then herd immunity will kick in anyway thus making it harder for any new variants to spread.

Edited by apelike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, apelike said:

Maybe because there are none.

You're nitpicking: the vaccines we have are easily tweaked so 'new vaccines' are available at relatively little effort. I think the assertion has been made that new versions of the mRNA vaccines can be designed in a matter of hours. Of course there then has to be some testing and processes have to be redirected and retested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

You're nitpicking: the vaccines we have are easily tweaked so 'new vaccines' are available at relatively little effort. I think the assertion has been made that new versions of the mRNA vaccines can be designed in a matter of hours. Of course there then has to be some testing and processes have to be redirected and retested.

Not nitpicking at all. Either we have some new ones already ready to go or we have not, so which one is it? As you have already pointed out any new ones will still have to undergo trials and testing and in that time new variants could also appear as has done in the time since the ones we now have.  As pointed out its not practical to keep "tweaking" any current vaccines even the mRNA ones as that can just be an endless process and also may be unnecessary. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, apelike said:

Not nitpicking at all. Either we have some new ones already ready to go or we have not, so which one is it? As you have already pointed out any new ones will still have to undergo trials and testing and in that time new variants could also appear as has done in the time since the ones we now have.  As pointed out its not practical to keep "tweaking" any current vaccines even the mRNA ones as that can just be an endless process and also may be unnecessary. 

It may well turn out to be unnecessary, but being prepared won’t hurt.

 

There are a number of antibody studies going on at the moment. My daughter was invited to join one this morning to see how long her antibodies persist after infection. That will complement other studies on vaccinated people and tests against new variants. 
 

It is going to take time to understand how far our immune response will protect us against future waves and new variants. It’s a good job that we have world class virologists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, apelike said:

Either we have some new ones already ready to go or we have not

You have just changed the goalposts from 'developed' to 'ready to go'.

 

2 hours ago, apelike said:

As pointed out its not practical to keep "tweaking" any current vaccines even the mRNA ones as that can just be an endless process and also may be unnecessary. 

 

I do not see why it is impractical. New flu vaccines are produced each year directed against whatever is anticipated to be the dominant strain of flu. I would certainly agree that it would be better if this were unnecessary but I would rather take a new coronavirus vaccine every year than not if it provides good protection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sibon said:

It is going to take time to understand how far our immune response will protect us against future waves and new variants. It’s a good job that we have world class virologists.

Very true in both cases and especially the time aspect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

You have just changed the goalposts from 'developed' to 'ready to go'.

Eh! Developed means they are here already and so does ready to go and so far there are no new ones developed or ready to go in either case.

 

53 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

I do not see why it is impractical. New flu vaccines are produced each year directed against whatever is anticipated to be the dominant strain of flu.

It's not very practical at the moment because this is a new novel virus and not enough is known about it including how long antibodies produce from them will actually last and stay effective. It's a bit of an apples and oranges comparison as well. Flu vaccines have been here since the 1940s and the tech behind them is well known and is based on injecting a dead flu virus but because of that they dont give anywhere near the same level of protection as coronavirus vaccines do and the reason why we need booster shots every year to cope with the latest strains. The coronavirus vaccines are different in the way they have been produced and also so is their their effectiveness. All the mRNA ones have been developed using new technology by modifying the genetic sequence of the virus on a computer. The A/Z one also is new technology but works differently to the mRNA ones as it uses a modified version of a chimpanzee adenovirus.

 

53 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

I would certainly agree that it would be better if this were unnecessary but I would rather take a new coronavirus vaccine every year than not if it provides good protection.

But the point is there is very little data around on whether it is necessary to do that as the vaccines presently available may also be doing the job well by providing good protection against variants as well. As sibon said it's going to take time to understand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Infections are surging in schools at the moment. Last week over 10% of students were absent nationally. That’s more than double the long term average rate. In the North West, things are even worse:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/jun/22/quarter-of-a-million-children-in-england-missed-school-last-week-due-to-covid?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@apelike, you do know I am able to scroll up and check what you actually said. If you mis-spoke, by all means correct yourself but your attempts to gaslight me are doomed to fail

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Carbuncle said:

@apelike, you do know I am able to scroll up and check what you actually said. If you mis-spoke, by all means correct yourself but your attempts to gaslight me are doomed to fail

By all means scroll up, check and report back about how I mis-spoke as it then will then give me a clue as to how I misspoke and would give me an idea as to how I can correct it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.