Coronavirus 2019-nCoV

[shoxlax]

how many are vaccinated I wonder

I saw somewhere that 97% of people in ICUs were not vaccinated.

[shoxlax]

I get that vaccinations mitigate the effects (a sound reason to vax) but the studies were promoting these vaccines as 90% effective. Now, not sure what that means, but the results not matching the studies is quite concerning. Was there fine print in these studies that I missed?

[shoxlax]

And that right there is much of the opposing point. I know I'm at high risk of becoming very ill if I get Covid. I've stayed home. I probably will for some time. I got vaxxed as soon as I could, and I hope it helps if I do get it.

But it's NOT everyone else's problem. It's mine. And I'm paying insurance to cover me if I do get ill. I don't want anyone to shut down because of my problems. I don't want anyone to wear a mask because of my problems. It's MY job to deal with me, not yours.

This was never going away. People that were saying to shut everything down and we can make this go away were and are wrong. We're going to have to deal with it. Now we have a vaccine that at least mitigates the symptoms effectively. We should be encouraging and bribing all people to get it while NOT shaming anyone or any group (something the left is obviously incapable of doing), we should be truthful about what the vaccine does and does not do (this has been a total cluster eff since day 1) and we should NOT hide people that aren't in serious jeopardy of developing serious symptoms. We are a LOT better at treating this disease. Get this vaccine approved for all (could be as soon as tomorrow, almost certainly this week) and get it to kids asap. Given the timing, somebody should have considered pushing back the start of schools until Sept 1 or maybe October 1 to give people time to vaccinated as many kids as they can/want. As a country/society, there was going to be a huge price to pay because of the relative poor health of our populace. That's just factual.

There is a big picture. And I've said this for years, as long as we pander to the lowest common denominator, as long as you continue to play the blame and shame game with an unreachable goal of zero infections and everyone lives to 100, this disaster will continue on and on.

Please talk to your doctor about getting the vaccine. If you're getting your info from a Washington based doctor, the news or a politician, you are making the wrong decision. If you feel safer with a mask, by all means, mask up. Mask up for life for all anyone cares. But do not force your choices on everyone else.

The maskers are doing it so “you will be safe”, and for you not to reciprocate is selfish and makes you a murderer.

Seriously though, very good comments, Doc.

[Kung Wu]

I get that vaccinations mitigate the effects (a sound reason to vax) but the studies were promoting these vaccines as 90% effective. Now, not sure what that means, but the results not matching the studies is quite concerning. Was there fine print in these studies that I missed?

The efficacy numbers were early pre-trial numbers with experimental vaccine technology. It's not surprising that they weren't super accurate. The J&J vax is based on well known technology so we should expect those pre-trial studies to be quite a bit more accurate. I don't understand why the J&J vax isn't getting a lot more run -- I guess everyone is waiting for the pending study on it to be released?

Even with the diminishing return on efficacy, the vaccines worked quite well for a while, are still much better than nothing, and boosters are nigh.

[wufan]

The efficacy numbers were early pre-trial numbers with experimental vaccine technology. It's not surprising that they weren't super accurate. The J&J vax is based on well known technology so we should expect those pre-trial studies to be quite a bit more accurate. I don't understand why the J&J vax isn't getting a lot more run -- I guess everyone is waiting for the pending study on it to be released?

Even with the diminishing return on efficacy, the vaccines worked quite well for a while, are still much better than nothing, and boosters are nigh.

All studies were run on healthy individuals against the alpha variant. As the population became “less ideal” so did the results. Also, they are not as effective against the delta variant. As the vaccinated population gets younger and healthier, the efficacy will increase.

Now, from a “usefulness” perspective, this is a problem. Those most likely to be in impacted by the virus are getting greater efficacy.

edit: used “delta” instead of “alpha” in first sentence.

[SB Shock]

I don't understand why the efforts are being put into mask wearing. Just do some cash money vaccines in areas where vaccinations are low. Successful efforts are going to have to be very localized at this point. Just my opinion.

1. People are suffering anxiety over covid - so masks are now the grown-up equivalent to pacifiers (or as in our family calls them "binkies"). It doesn't matter if they are effective or not, it make them feel safer regardless. "Feeling" is more important than reality.

2. Politicians are struggling to feel like they are accomplishing anything - "masking" is one tangible thing that they feel they can do. Doesn't matter if they are effective or not, at least they can point to and say I did "something". Plus it is easy, they don't really have to any work. Anything effectual would take planning, work to execute anything meaningful.

[C0|dB|00ded]

I get that vaccinations mitigate the effects (a sound reason to vax) but the studies were promoting these vaccines as 90% effective. Now, not sure what that means, but the results not matching the studies is quite concerning. Was there fine print in these studies that I missed?

Effectivity was defined as allowing the inoculated to avoid hospitalization and other serious outcomes of the virus. That still holds true today. What wasn't known was if folks could still spread the virus, it is clear now that they can, particularly w/ the Delta variant.

What is still being learned, as it pertains to the Delta variant, is how long do the vaccines provide protection and who benefits most from a 3rd/booster shoot. So far it is the old and/or immunocompromised.

The Delta variant is an entirely different animal than what we faced in 2020. It can overwhelm even healthy immune systems and cause symptomatic infection.

Plain and simple: the virus has evolved to thrive even in the face of previously infected or vaccinated individuals. We were warned this could happen and it has. The goal of leading ID minds all along has been to get community infections down because of the dangers of variants. It's very simple statistics.

Nobody has EVER mentioned the goal being zero infections, that is just a right-wing troll. There are massive benefits of getting infections down and keeping them down. I've already enumerated them before.

[C0|dB|00ded]

The efficacy numbers were early pre-trial numbers with experimental vaccine technology. It's not surprising that they weren't super accurate. The J&J vax is based on well known technology so we should expect those pre-trial studies to be quite a bit more accurate. I don't understand why the J&J vax isn't getting a lot more run -- I guess everyone is waiting for the pending study on it to be released?

Even with the diminishing return on efficacy, the vaccines worked quite well for a while, are still much better than nothing, and boosters are nigh.

Because the J&J vaccine is garbage.

[SB Shock]

I get that vaccinations mitigate the effects (a sound reason to vax) but the studies were promoting these vaccines as 90% effective. Now, not sure what that means, but the results not matching the studies is quite concerning. Was there fine print in these studies that I missed?

You have to actually look at the time frame of when these studies were done. The pfizer and Moderna studies were conducted during a period when covid was declining. The J&J was conducted during a period of increasing covid. Thus Moderna and Pfizer effectiveness are overstated and most likely closer to J&J vaccine.

[Kung Wu]

All studies were run on healthy individuals against the delta variant. As the population became “less ideal” so did the results. Also, they are not as effective against the delta variant. As the vaccinated population gets younger and healthier, the efficacy will increase.

Now, from a “usefulness” perspective, this is a problem. Those most likely to be in impacted by the virus are getting greater efficacy.

Do you think the J&J shot, being more well-known tech, will have fairly accurate early trial efficacy numbers? I mean I get we are dealing with a novel virus, so there's definitely going to be learnings needing to happen, but overall you'd think they'd be more accurate wouldn't you?

[Kung Wu]

Because the J&J vaccine is garbage.

Based on what?

[Kung Wu]

Because the J&J vaccine is garbage.

"According to new data from a large clinical trial, the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine is up to 71% percent effective against hospitalization and 96% percent effective against death from the Delta variant."

I mean if that's true --- and that's against Delta -- in a 500,000 sample study of healthcare workers no less, then how can you call something more way effective than Pfizer and probably better results than Moderna garbage?

[C0|dB|00ded]

Based on what?

1) Side effects.

2) Overall immune response compared to alternatives.

3) Increased vulnerability w/ some variants.

Pfizer/Moderna are still the gold standard.

[Kung Wu]

1) Side effects.

That's for pregnant ladies right?

2) Overall immune response compared to alternatives.

The pre-release of research data so far doesn't agree with this statement. Could change when it's fully released though.

3) Increased vulnerability w/ some variants.

See #2.

[Kung Wu]

3) There's a small studying being circulated by the CDC indicating a 2:1 reinfection:breakthrough rate of those w/ natural immunity compared to those w/ the vaccine.

I suppose you are referring to the Kentucky study?