COVID Stunning Effectiveness of the Covid Vaccines

[russ_watters]

One route (the proper, licenced route) leads to unlimited liability.

You really need to stop saying the word "proper"/"improper" like that. Governments are following established procedures. That's completely proper.

The other route, the £120,000, was put in place precisely because drug companies were dodging any liability at all, but HM Gov refused take on the full liability of a 3rd party company.

I can assure you that £120,000 is not remotely enough...

You're moving the goalposts/bait and switching. What you said that I objected to is that the individuals are assuming "all of the risk" (emphasis yours). That's patently false. Whether £120,000 is enough isn't the point. The point is that £120,000 isn't zero.

Let me ask these questions; the purpose of the slow approval and licencing protocol is so that any problems can be seen and weeded out on a smaller initial group before the new medicine is distributed to the wider population. But it already is being distributed to the wider population, so what is the point of the 'normal' authorisation process now? Why not just fully license and authorise it now, under Regulation 46 and not 174, if it is so guaranteed and assured?

Two ways to answer:

• That's how the procedure is written and violating procedure would be "improper".
• The fact that it's already been widely distributed does not alleviate the need to dot the i's and cross the T's. It's still important to finish the studies and document the results.

I feel like you're more concerned with being able to stick it to the pharma companies than you are about whether the vaccine is actually safe!

The counter argument to mine is not as many as you have put. The counter argument you should offer is 'we should have no regard for any effect of vaccines on evolutionary autoimmunology and never seek to measure it, because we are so confident', which would surely be a political and not a scientific conclusion?

Nobody is saying we shouldn't study anything and everything people can think of. But as far as I can see, you haven't made an action-based argument so there is nothing for us to counter. You are merely implying that maybe it would be better to just let diseases run their course.

[edit/add]

Well, the point is my starting axiom is so plain obvious and stupid I didn't think it needed to be explained/defended. I am trying to say nothing more than;

'we should have no regard for any effect of vaccines on evolutionary autoimmunology and never seek to measure it, because we are so confident'

Are we in agreement on that stupid-obvious axiom, then, because that's all I actually wrote (seems, I did very badly) on that aspect?

Yes, of course we are. The reason we are questioning you on it is that it is so obvious that it seems pointless to bring it up. If it doesn't lead to action relevant to the current pandemic or the handling of future pandemics(seasonal flu?), then why did you even bring it up?

Note that this sub-discussion started with a spurious analysis/claim you made about people adapting to fight-off COVID, causing the mortality rate to drop. It seems like you started with a faulty belief/premise that we can rapidly adapt (not even evolve -- currently living humans) to fight off a disease ourselves, which leads to a question about whether vaccines do more harm than good in the long run (so we should consider not vaccinating).

 

[atyy]

Similarly, polio has largely been eradicated in the US. It now shows up sporadically in unvaccinated populations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polio#Afghanistan_and_Pakistan

Ref: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polio

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-...-causes-more-infections-than-wild-virus-66778
In rare instances, the live virus in oral polio vaccines can mutate and become infectious, causing new outbreaks.

"“It’s actually crazy because we’re vaccinating now against the vaccine in most parts of the world,” Vincent Racaniello, a virologist at Columbia University, tells NPR, “not against wild polio, which is confined to Pakistan and Afghanistan.”"

 

[Grasshopper]

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-...-causes-more-infections-than-wild-virus-66778
In rare instances, the live virus in oral polio vaccines can mutate and become infectious, causing new outbreaks.

"“It’s actually crazy because we’re vaccinating now against the vaccine in most parts of the world,” Vincent Racaniello, a virologist at Columbia University, tells NPR, “not against wild polio, which is confined to Pakistan and Afghanistan.”"

Here's another question I have for the biologists, since you mentioned this: would a virus or other infection that has been with humans for eons be easier to get rid of or control, since they have never experienced the pressure modern humans would put on them through vaccines and other measures? And would novel viruses/infections maybe have an advantage over these long term parasites because they haven't been conditioned through eons to be extremely well adapted to historical human behavior?

I ask this because polio got destroyed by us when we utilized the fruits of the scientific method against it, and currently influenza is being pushed to the margins with the new behavior caused by the novel coronavirus.

 

[PeroK]

Well, the point is my starting axiom is so plain obvious and stupid I didn't think it needed to be explained/defended. I am trying to say nothing more than;

'we should have no regard for any effect of vaccines on evolutionary autoimmunology and never seek to measure it, because we are so confident'

Are we in agreement on that stupid-obvious axiom, then, because that's all I actually wrote (seems, I did very badly) on that aspect?

Enough already!

 

[bhobba]

Just to be clear, that is about effectiveness against symptomatic infection. The important point is protections against severe illness, which may have dropped, but remains high 88-93% in Israeli estimates, and 91-98% in UK estimates. From that point of view, boosters might be required only in vulnerable populations eg. seniors and immunocompromised.

Data has come in from Isreal about third doses. It is so interesting I will start a separate thread.

Thanks
Bill

 

[cmb]

Enough already!

Yes. I am done, didn't really want it to go that far.

 

[atyy]

https://www.bbc.com/news/health-58270098
Is catching Covid now better than more vaccine?
NOTE: "now" means after being fully vaccinated, NOT before being fully vaccinated

This article is relevant to highly vaccinated populations (ie. not the USA). In such populations, it is reasonable to imagine boosters only for vulnerable populations (immunocompromised, seniors) for whom vaccine efficacy against severe disease is not high. But in populations where vaccine efficacy against severe disease is high, could we just allow people to get infected, ie. COVID really becomes just like flu or even a common cold after a while?

 

[bhobba]

But in populations where vaccine efficacy against severe disease is high, could we just allow people to get infected, ie. COVID really becomes just like flu or even a common cold after a while?

That is the view of my GP when we get high vaccination rates. With one exception - people like me that are immunocompromised and have a higher chance of death. But he still thinks here in Aus; everyone will eventually get the third dose because the government has more or less said that is how it plans to use the Novavax vaccine it has ordered. He has been my doctor for 40 years and holds many older fashioned views different from the current orthodoxy.

Thanks
Bill

 

[Astronuc]

What we actually know about the vaccines and the delta variant​

https://www.vox.com/coronavirus-covid19/22630979/covid-19-vaccine-booster-shots-delta-variant
Covid-19 vaccines still are effective in preventing hospitalization. But vaccinated people are more likely to get sick than before.

And we're still learning, and the virus is still mutating.

 

[Astronuc]

FDA gives full approval to Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine​

https://abc7chicago.com/pfizer-vaccine-fda-approval-date-covid-full-second-dose-timing/10969159/
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/health/fda-gives-full-approval-to-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine

Original source (Aug 23) - https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-vaccine-pfizer-approval-1361ff61d06b815652a08a7cc0683a72

https://www.fda.gov/emergency-prepa...omirnaty-and-pfizer-biontech-covid-19-vaccine
https://www.fda.gov/media/151710/download

 

[Astronuc]

Good essay on vaccination for SARS-Cov-2:

Role in the transmission chain: Vaccinated vs. unvaccinated​

https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/role-in-the-transmission-chain-vaccinated

 

[atyy]

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03744-4
Antibody epitopes in vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopaenia
Angela Huynh, John G. Kelton, Donald M. Arnold, Mercy Daka & Ishac Nazy
Nature 596: 565–569 (2021)
"Vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopaenia (VITT) is a rare adverse effect of COVID-19 adenoviral vector vaccines. VITT resembles heparin-induced thrombocytopaenia (HIT) in that it is associated with platelet-activating antibodies against platelet factor 4 (PF4); ... Our data indicate that VITT antibodies can mimic the effect of heparin by binding to a similar site on PF4; this allows PF4 tetramers to cluster and form immune complexes, which in turn causes Fcγ receptor IIa (FcγRIIa; also known as CD32a)-dependent platelet activation. These results provide an explanation for VITT-antibody-induced platelet activation that could contribute to thrombosis."

 

[merlinbennie]

The Delta variation was also shown to be less susceptible to “sera from naturally immunised individuals,” implying that persons who have already been infected with the virus may not be protected against reinfection with the Delta form.

 

[nsaspook]

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1

Comparing SARS-CoV-2 natural immunity to vaccine-induced immunity: reinfections versus breakthrough infections​

Every adult that hasn't been infected greatly benefits from vaccination but it seems natural immunity will be an important fact in ending the pandemic.

 

[Astronuc]

natural immunity

Can it be achieved with exposure to a killed virus as opposed to a live virus? Is natural immunity achieved through exposure to the 28 proteins of the virus as opposed to the one or two proteins in a vaccine?

 

[nsaspook]

Can it be achieved with exposure to a killed virus as opposed to a live virus? Is natural immunity achieved through exposure to the 28 proteins of the virus as opposed to the one or two proteins in a vaccine?

This is what the study compared and the time period.

We conducted a retrospective observational study comparing three groups:
(1)SARS-CoV-2-naive individuals who received a two-dose regimen of the BioNTech/Pfizer mRNA BNT162b2 vaccine,
(2)previously infected individuals who have not been vaccinated, and
(3)previously infected and single dose vaccinated individuals.
...
The follow-up period of June 1 to August 14, 2021, when the Delta variant was dominant in Israel.

I would guess a similar study with CoronaVac would answer the question.
https://covid19.trackvaccines.org/vaccines/7/

​

 

[bhobba]

Interesting latest paper comparing vaccine effectiveness against Delta:
https://www.ndm.ox.ac.uk/files/coro...ction-survey/finalfinalcombinedve20210816.pdf

Some highlights are:
1. The length of time between the first and second shot is not a factor anymore
2. While Pfizer starts at about 88% efficacy against symptomatic infection and AZ is 67%, Pfizer effectiveness declined at 22% per month, while AZ only at 7% per month. This likely accounts for the low efficacy of 39% in Isreal because they vaccinated their population early.
3. Pfizer provides better protection after one dose than AZ.

This could change how we vaccinate. 4 weeks instead of 12 weeks for AZ second dose, for example, and perhaps earlier boosters at 6 months (better vaccine options may come along during that time). However, priority is likely to be given to getting as many as possible with a second dose rather than starting a third dose rollout because of the much better protection with the second dose.

Thanks
Bill

 

[atyy]

Can it be achieved with exposure to a killed virus as opposed to a live virus? Is natural immunity achieved through exposure to the 28 proteins of the virus as opposed to the one or two proteins in a vaccine?

I agree natural immunity will be important in ending the pandemic, but not because we deliberately infect people. In populations in which the a first infection or vaccination is highly effective against severe disease (eg. for healthy people below the age of 40, where some estimates indicate 96% or more protection by vaccination against severe disease), we should not worry too much about them getting naturally reinfected, and in that sense using natural immunity as a booster. Here I'm also assuming a population like the UK where combined vaccination and infection indicate ~97% seropositivity in ages 40-49 and ~99 seropositivity among those 60 and older.

I don't think Delta alone implies that additional doses or boosters for populations in which the first two doses don't provide enough protection requires vaccines with a greater variety of antigens. The spike-based mRNA vaccines work well against severe disease by Delta (UK: 91-98% against hospitalization; Israel: 94% for age 40-59, 86% for age 60+), so we can expect that boosters will increase protection against severe disease caused by Delta. We can see how the Israel 3rd dose turns out, and also studies on 3rd doses in immunocompromised patients.

However, I agree that there may be an advantage to inactivated virus vaccines, or vaccines that have more antigens than just the RBD of the spike protein. Here are some similar guesses:

https://www.virology.ws/2021/03/25/t-cells-will-save-us-from-covid-19/
"It is possible that SARS-CoV-2 will continue to produce altered spike proteins that will completely evade antibody neutralization. In this case T cells might not be enough to prevent severe disease – they could be overwhelmed by so many infected cells. Our rush to make vaccines – understandable given the urgency – have led us to such a situation. Most of the vaccines were based only on the spike protein. If we change the spike protein to accommodate variants, we might get in a never-ending cycle of changing COVID-19 vaccines on a regular basis. A better approach would be to produce second-generation COVID vaccines that include other viral proteins besides spike protein. Inactivated and attenuated vaccines fall into this category; another solution would be to modify authorized mRNA vaccines to encode additional viral proteins."

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/202...-coronaviruses-could-prevent-another-pandemic
"... Some groups have turned their sights far from the RBD, in molecular terms. Spike has both a head, which includes the RBD, and a stem—known as S2—that varies little between coronaviruses. “The S2 subunit is by far the most conserved portion of Coronavirus spike,” says Jason McLellan, a structural biologist at the University of Texas, Austin, who co-authored the failed grant proposal with Ward.
...
... Finally, there’s an old-school approach to a pancoronavirus vaccine, one that should call into battle both B and T cells. NIAID’s veteran flu researchers Matthew Memoli and Jeffery Taubenberger want to combine inactivated versions of representative coronaviruses from the four known lineages in the beta genus. Vaccines based on the entire virus help the immune system take “multiple shots at the target,” Memoli explains, rather than focusing all the responses on spike or bits of it."

 

[bhobba]

Can it be achieved with exposure to a killed virus as opposed to a live virus?

Of course. That's the old fashioned way of making a vaccine. Sinovac Vaccine is made that way. The trouble is it is not as effective as modern methods. And this proved the case with Sinovac. It works, but Phizer, for example, is more effective. Interestingly by giving a third dose 6 months later, those vaccinated can still achieve good immunity:
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202107/1229716.shtml

Thanks
Bill

 

[cmb]

I am unclear on the nature of the discussion above about relying on natural immunity.

Surely, at some point, we have to end up relying on natural immunity it is a matter of when, not if?

As the vaccine is not of unlimited time benefit, boosters are required, this seems to be accepted. Then the only alternative to relying on natural immunity eventually is for never ending and legally imposed boosters for the rest of human existence?

Or ... we do rely on natural immunity eventually. I accept the question of 'when' need neither be 'now' nor even some pre-determined time period (though in general that is how it works for targetted 'flu vaccines).

But I think it would be prudent to ask what the conditions should be before we may forego vaccines and relying on natural immunity becomes the appropriate way forward?

So, how do we know when the right time is to forego vaccines?

 

[atyy]

So, how do we know when the right time is to forego vaccines?

In the long run you can have both natural immunity and vaccines (like the flu vaccine, well worth taking even if it doesn't prevent infection, but not part of travel requirements etc). I think the question is more what to do in the short run. At what stage do we stop caring about reducing transmission by mandatory quarantine, masks etc? Also, vaccinating the whole world is important, and boosters that don't provide much benefit should be avoided as they contribute to vaccine shortages.

 

[cmb]

In the long run you can have both natural immunity and vaccines (like the flu vaccine, well worth taking even if it doesn't prevent infection, but not part of travel requirements etc). I think the question is more what to do in the short run. At what stage do we stop caring about reducing transmission by mandatory quarantine, masks etc? Also, vaccinating the whole world is important, and boosters that don't provide much benefit should be avoided as they contribute to vaccine shortages.

Yes, that is my question.

It seems in the UK it is now sufficiently widespread that it has become 'another endemic disease' and more people are dying here from general pneumonia than identified as specifically from Covid. Is that the point to back of vaccinations, when the death rate is not a cause of death any more significant than others?

I think the approach of course is not 'no more vaccines' that is mad, but the vulnerable carry on getting boosters. I have taken 'flu jabs for the last few years as my company has paid for them and it seemed to make some sense for us older types, I've no problem with that in principle.

 

[atyy]

Yes, that is my question.

It seems in the UK it is now sufficiently widespread that it has become 'another endemic disease' and more people are dying here from general pneumonia than identified as specifically from Covid. Is that the point to back of vaccinations, when the death rate is not a cause of death any more significant than others?

I think the approach of course is not 'no more vaccines' that is mad, but the vulnerable carry on getting boosters. I have taken 'flu jabs for the last few years as my company has paid for them and it seemed to make some sense for us older types, I've no problem with that in principle.

Also of course, the UK has a terrific vaccination rate. The sensible discussions I've seen on this are from the UK (just gathering the links I've seen in other posts/threads).
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-58270098
Natural infection and / or vaccination?
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-58322882
""So I think the whole thing needs to be much more carefully managed than just giving it to everybody which would be a huge waste and ethically dubious given the resources we have. I think we need a more targeted approach than last time.""
"Prof Adam Finn, a government vaccine adviser, said other studies had shown that the vaccines maintained good protection against serious illness and hospitalisation.
But he said: "We do need to watch out very carefully to see if this waning against milder disease begins to translate into occurrence of more severe cases because then boosters will be needed.""

 

[pinball1970]

I posted a news item in relation to surplus vaccines a few weeks ago w.r.t UK and Gordon Brown
The West in general now has or will have a huge surplus as yet nothing has moved according to the below.https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ges-emergency-covid-vaccine-airlift-to-africaAs well as saving lives the article mentions the reduced risk of new variants arising with such a large population as a potential reservoir for mutation.

 

[bhobba]

As well as saving lives the article mentions the reduced risk of new variants arising with such a large population as a potential reservoir for mutation.

Yes, it is like the Aboriginal issue in Australia. A big issue. Just as a personal opinion, I believe the industrialized countries can handle this and give a third dose as well. But we must not 'slack' off. We have come so far; we can't falter now.

Thanks
Bill

 

[PeroK]

But we must not 'slack' off. We have come so far; we can't falter now.

We've been faltering since July! Our whole anti COVID effort just seemed to fade away to a few half-hearted guidelines.

A few months ago I was speaking to my mother, who had heard someone praising Boris Johnson's leadership skills. Her comment was "the leadership skills of the Pied Piper of Hamlyn"!

 

[pinball1970]

We've been faltering since July! Our whole anti COVID effort just seemed to fade away to a few half-hearted guidelines.

A few months ago I was speaking to my mother, who had heard someone praising Boris Johnson's leadership skills. Her comment was "the leadership skills of the Pied Piper of Hamlyn"!

We are in better shape Pero.
40,000 cases per day is a lot. The school roll out has not been tough enough agreed. We simply cannot allow those kids to have any more time off. @PeroK

 

[cmb]

Yes, it is like the Aboriginal issue in Australia. A big issue. Just as a personal opinion, I believe the industrialized countries can handle this and give a third dose as well. But we must not 'slack' off. We have come so far; we can't falter now.

Thanks
Bill

"we can't falter now"

Could I ask what that means, in practice? Do we have to keep taking these vaccinations forever now, and if not then we will have faltered?

Vaccinations do not last indefinitely, and they are also not going to eradicate this now. Are we now intellectually committing ourselves to being co-dependent on these vaccinations for the rest of humanity's history? Is there an end point which we'll not regard as 'faltering'?

 

[bhobba]

Could I ask what that means, in practice?

We do not know if we will need to keep taking vaccinations forever and what future research will bring. We already take yearly doses of the flu vaccine, so to keep vaccinating is nothing new. Even the triple-antigen needs a regular booster, but many forget. What I do know is Covid research is ongoing, and vaccinations have made a big difference. Here in Aus, we now have 99% vaccination in one state/territory, with 90%+ in another. Other states look like they will have 90%+ by years end. Already it has controlled the breakout in Sydney. Restrictions are gradually being lifted, with cases still falling. Then there are third doses which Isreal shows could have a significant impact when generally adopted. This shows what can be done when we, as human beings, mobilise our resources. I believe not only can we tackle Covid in our countries, but worldwide as well. We need the will.

Thanks
Bill

 

[cmb]

We do not know if we will need to keep taking vaccinations forever and what future research will bring. We already take yearly doses of the flu vaccine, so to keep vaccinating is nothing new. Even the triple-antigen needs a regular booster, but many forget. What I do know is Covid research is ongoing, and vaccinations have made a big difference. Here in Aus, we now have 99% vaccination in one state/territory, with 90%+ in another. Other states look like they will have 90%+ by years end. Already it has controlled the breakout in Sydney. Restrictions are gradually being lifted, with cases still falling. Then there are third doses which Isreal shows could have a significant impact when generally adopted. This shows what can be done when we, as human beings, mobilise our resources. I believe not only can we tackle Covid in our countries, but worldwide as well. We need the will.

Thanks
Bill

I know a doctor who was vaccinated early on as part of the move to protect front line health professionals, but the efficacy only lasted a few months and, having taken it early, has now caught it and suffered some serious complications.

I have had a first shot now and due another ... but ...

To have to keep boosting a vaccination every few months, for everyone on the planet, does not strike me as the hallmarks of a stunning success.