Possible vaccines/treatment(s) for Coronavirus
- Thread starter cupid_stunt
- Start date
Have you asked them what happens when you get offered another vaccine? The study I'm doing will unblind you if you ask, then give advice about whether you should have another vaccine if you hadn't had the placebo.
Poot
My wife thinks I work too hard
Ah. So if I was offered a vaccine later I could unblind myself? This is something I hadn't considered (it's a large doc and it makes quite dry reading and I hadn't realised this was an option. Will read up).
I suppose after all this time the worry about the placebo is largely psychological. I'd be scared of going out without protection!
Poot
My wife thinks I work too hard
I checked the document and it's really out of date! One of the FAQs is 'what happens if another Covid vaccine is made available to the public in the meantime?' The answer is that participants 'shouldn't be at a disadvantage.' I'll ask them.
weltweit
Well-Known Member
I don't know what the evidence from Israel is, a first dose confers some protection and as far as I can tell UK gov hasn't said they won't do the second dose. They are just pushing to get the most people possible the first dose.
LDC
On est tous des pangolins
Is it Novavax?
LDC
On est tous des pangolins
Unless you get another approved vaccine soon surely you won't be in a worse position though?
Poot
My wife thinks I work too hard
No it's Ensemble 2.
Poot
My wife thinks I work too hard
Well 2 years and 3 months is a long time. I was hoping to have a vaccine before then! I've signed up anyway.
That's the one I'm doing.
Single Covid vaccine dose in Israel 'less effective than we thought' | Israel | The Guardian
Surge in infections dampens optimism over country’s advanced immunisation programme
Not great news.
purenarcotic
Conveniently Pocket Sized
Single Covid vaccine dose in Israel 'less effective than we thought' | Israel | The Guardian
Surge in infections dampens optimism over country’s advanced immunisation programmeamp.theguardian.com
Not great news.
The vaccines didn’t ever claim full immunity though, even with the second dose. They claimed a significant reduction in the risk of severe disease / death. So I would expect people to still get it, but for it to not affect them as badly as it might have done. I could be wrong though.
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
They are primarily supposed to stop people getting it at all as far as I understand it. That's what the % effective figure from the trials refers to. Of the people who did get it in the trials for all the vaccines the risk of severe illness was reduced as well but that's not the headline aim. None of them have clamed 100% effectiveness though so you're right that you'd expect some people to get it. What I think isn't clear is the effect of the single dose, both for getting it at all and for reducing the effect.
2hats
Dust.
You misunderstand then.
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
OK. Explain?
Supine
Newt Member
You can't stop anyone getting it. That's what masks etc are for. The vaccine is used to speed up the bodies ability to kill it off.
ice-is-forming
let me rephrase that... Fuck off
Looks like Australia may be edging towards Novavax. newsGP - Novavax candidate may prove best long-term solution for Australia
2hats
Dust.
They are designed to reduce the severity of disease having been exposed to and having become infected by SARS-CoV-2.
In such circumstances they are not going to stop transmission (though it may be curbed to some degree) nor are they necessarily going to rid everyone of some longer term consequences of COVID.
In such circumstances they are not going to stop transmission (though it may be curbed to some degree) nor are they necessarily going to rid everyone of some longer term consequences of COVID.
TopCat
Putin fanboy
I get my first dose on Friday. I am having a couple of days with no booze before. My immune system is a bit diminished and I need all the help I can get.
My partner is a nurse and she and all of her colleagues got their first shot over the last week. Lots of reported adverse reactions. No idea of what % though.
My partner is a nurse and she and all of her colleagues got their first shot over the last week. Lots of reported adverse reactions. No idea of what % though.
2hats
Dust.
An early, small study (16 participants from cohorts 18-55 and 56-85 years) indicating that the 2 dose regimen of Pfizer/BioNTech BNT162b2 produces a strong neutralising response to B.1.1.7 suggesting it may not escape that particular vaccine.
DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.18.426984v1
DOI: 10.1101/2021.01.18.426984v1
Monkeygrinder's Organ said:
2hats said:
Monkeygrinder's Organ said:
I'm utterly failing to undestand the meaning of the above exchanges
I've read plenty about anti-Covid vaccines recently, but at no point did I gain any impression that a vaccination against Covid still leaves you at risk of you being infected.
Within the efficacy percentages frequently discussed, anyway, and I appreciate that that's an important caveat ...
And of course we don't know enough yet about how long vaccines will be effective for people.
Nor do we know enough yet about whether or not you can still transmit the virus after being vaccinated ......
Still, I very strongly suspect that Monkeygrinder's Organ is not alone in needing an explanation for the 'vaccines can't stop you being infected' bit!
Out there in the 'real world', loads of those anticipating getting vaccinated, and loads of those who already have been vaccinated, will surely be ultra-disturbed if told that getting vaccinated won't stop you contracting it.
Where's the publicity for that?
None of the above is about me seeing vaccinations as some 'magic bullet' that stop you needing to wear masks,, needing to distance yourself, needing to be generally very careful with hygiene, etc.
Of course all that is correctly going to be go on necessary, and quite rightly.
But!
I've never caught flu after having an (annually adapted/tweaked
) flu vaccine, and I very much hope never to catch Covid after being vaccinated against that, later this year.Maybe annually, too, as time goes on!
I really hope that I'm misundestanding here!!
I'm a non-scientist, after all
Please ecplain in easy-to-grasp terms, with not-too-majorly-technical sources.
Cheers
TLDR : I too thought that the anti-Covid vaccines were meant to stop you gettimg Covid-infected.
Why don't they, if they don't???
Why don't they, if they don't???
Monkeygrinder's Organ
Dodgy geezer swilling vapid lager
TLDR : I too thought that the anti-Covid vaccines were meant to stop you gettimg Covid-infected.
Why don't they, if they don't???
I think maybe my use of 'getting it' was a bit vague and that's where I've been picked up. To most people I think if you don't develop symptoms you'd be described as not getting the illness but I think the point is that without showing symptoms people can still be infected with the virus at some point, to some degree at least.
Supine
Newt Member
TLDR : I too thought that the anti-Covid vaccines were meant to stop you gettimg Covid-infected.
Why don't they, if they don't???
If you have not been vaccinated the first time your body sees covid it spends days learning how to kill it. While it's doing this the virus is replicating. It's an arms race between growing amounts of virus in the body and the immune system.
If you get the vaccine you're basically giving your body some training. It learns how to kill covid. When you get some covid in you after vaccination the body goes straight to work killing it off. Because it hasn't needed to learn how to do it the race is won by the immune system much quicker. So quick in fact you don't even notice you had any if you're lucky.
That's it in simple terms I think (I'm not a virologist or a doctor).
teuchter
je suis teuchter
As I understand it - you quite possibly have caught flu, but the vaccine has prepared your immune system to get rid of it pretty quickly before it causes any unwelcome effects and therefore you are none the wiser.I've never caught flu after having an (annually adapted/tweaked
Of course, other people having been vaccinated helps to make it less likely that you will be infected at all because those other people are unlikely to be carrying it for a long time or having symptoms that help spread it.
Thanks for those explanations folks, they make good sense
DaveCinzano
WATCH OUT, GEORGE, HE'S GOT A SCREWDRIVER!
At the hospital I had mine at yesterday the nurse I spoke to said they were doing 400 a weekday, and 500 on weekend days. Currently they're doing it for 12 hours a day, moving to 18 hours soon, so on paper 3,000-4,500 a week.
It's a massive operation. I felt a bit tearful when i got mine done at the hospital, not with relief, just the massive nature of it. It's not like getting the flu jab.
2hats
Dust.
TL;DR = they don't (variously for reasons of vaccine design, overall efficacy, immune response, route of infection in the body).TLDR : I too thought that the anti-Covid vaccines were meant to stop you gettimg Covid-infected.
Why don't they, if they don't???
The vaccines target SARS-CoV-2, the virus. They aim to reduce the severity of COVID-19, the disease that the virus can produce.
Even with a strong immune response to a vaccine, a virus quite likely will still infect you for some (varying) period of time. This is seen with a number of types of vaccine and their target viruses - they still infect the vaccinated, but the period of infection and/or degree of viral shedding may be reduced to varying degrees. Some vaccines don't stop you from infecting others partly or at all, ie you still get infected. They simply prevent serious episodes of the disease the virus concerned can cause solely in the inoculated individual (for example - polio, diphtheria, measles, hepatitis B).
One of the reasons SARS-CoV-2 is considered a novel virus is because of the unusually high proportion of asymptomatic cases. This twinned with the high level of viral shedding very early on in the infection, in both asymptomatic and presymptomatic cases, is of course one reason why it has spread so effectively. (Even in asymptomatic cases COVID related lung damage has been seen in a significant number of individuals; likely there will be other consequences.)
From trials (for AZD1222, BNT162b2, mRNA-1273), the vaccination (ie that is providing you have all doses, which for those vaccines currently approved in the UK is two) will likely stop somewhere between 50% and 95% of the recipients from experiencing the symptoms of the disease ie COVID-19 (that 50-95% will vary with vaccine type, individual immune health, age, pre-existing conditions, viral load on exposure and timing of exposure with respect to the jabs; note that it is not untypical for 'real world' outcomes to be as good as clinical trial outcomes). So potentially anywhere up to 1 in 2 vaccinated people will still experience some COVID-19 symptoms. However, those same clinical trials suggest that they should prevent pretty much every case of serious disease (serious as in requiring professional medical assistance) - well at least to the level of resolution of those trials. That is what these vaccines have been designed to do (usual target is at least >=50% reduction in serious disease).
Because some vaccinated persons will still develop COVID, and also because SARS-CoV-2 is novel (as described above - viral shedding is observed in the asymptomatic as well as the presymptomatic), a not insignificant number of people, if not everyone, likely will still carry ('be infected') and shed the virus ('potentially be infectious') for some time following post-vaccination exposure to that virus. To what degree a given individual is thus infectious though is going to vary from case to case (just as we are seeing quite widely varying outcomes in response to apparent reinfections). Likely what the vaccine will probably be doing is hindering the progression of the infection from the upper respiratory tract (infected but less serious) to the lower respiratory tract (more severe symptoms and potential for complications, increased morbidities and fatalities). As such people will still become 'infected'.
Indeed, some of the SARS-CoV-2 vaccine trials have attempted to begin to try to get a handle on the potential they have, if any, for reduction in transmission. Whilst the data on that was limited and largely inconclusive (still is right now) what it does clearly demonstrate is that vaccinated persons can still be infected and harbour the virus (upper respiratory tract viral loads were measurable).
We won't really have a feel for how these vaccines curb transmission, if at all, until some time down the road when we can compare the situation 'on the ground' with models of 'vaccine reduces transmission by N% (for 0<N<100)'.
Recent Scientific American article that touches upon some of these issues.
Vaccines Need Not Completely Stop COVID Transmission to Curb the Pandemic
Lessons from other viruses show that even if vaccines don’t completely stop disease spread, they can still successfully contain it
Last edited:
Similar threads
