Promising New Coronavirus Vaccine

[TechTalk]

The vaccine *DOES* prevent against getting covid. Just not in everyone, but in most people. And for the few vaxxed people who get covid it is less severe. And they didn't say it in the beginning because THEY DIDN'T KNOW!

They did know. Everybody knew—including those pretending otherwise in a childish game. It was discussed months ago at endless length.

You don't have to be a rocket scientist nor an immunologist to understand that if a vaccine at the end of clinical trials had 94% efficacy in preventing moderate disease (mild symptoms) that 6% of vaccine recipients in the trial were infected and became sick, even though they were vaccinated. A child could understand this and the childish will pretend that they can't.

https://www.who.int/coronavirus/topic-efficacy.jpg

What was unknown is what the difference would be between efficacy in limited clinical trials and effectiveness in the larger population over time. The difference between efficacy and effectiveness was also explained and discussed multiple times. Again, a child could understand the difference, but the childish will refuse to acknowledge it.

https://www.who.int/vaccine-efficacy-effectiveness-and-protection

[TechTalk]

I was surprised to read that as many people who had the vaccine subsequently got the disease as people who didn't get vaccinated

Baloney. The difference in disease rate between the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations is enormous.

Why were you surprised to read it; when you're the one that wrote it?

[EricV]

In the US, the vaccination rate is roughly 50%, and perhaps 5% of all serious Coronavirus cases are vaccinated.  So Alan's statement is absolutely wrong for that population. 

However, there is a big difference between these two statistics:
1) Fraction of vaccinated population who get Coronavirus
2) Fraction of Coronavirus patients who are vaccinated

For example, if 99% of some population were vaccinated, it is entirely likely that 90% of new Coronavirus cases would be among the vaccinated population.  In fact, that would be a testament to a highly effective vaccine.

[TechTalk]

Discussed many many times in many places online. Asked and answered many times over.  Why are you bringing it up AGAIN.

From a different thread at a different time, but it may, or may not, offer some insight...

I put it in there to get a rise from you.  Of course you took the bait...

[LesPalenik]

If the current covid trend in USA continues, by end of September the total death count could exceed 700,000 threshold.

That 700K threshold came much earlier than expected. Over 2,200 US deaths just today. Even Canadian deaths are rising, 49 deaths today.

[TechTalk]

Congratulations to Canada for doing so well in its vaccination progress. Canadian citizens fully vaccinated has reached just over 70%. There are only two states in the U.S. (Rhode Island and Vermont) plus the District of Columbia that have managed to get above 70% as of today.

The U.S. stands now at just over 55% fully vaccinated, with several states at 45% or below (Idaho, Louisiana, North Dakota, Mississippi, Alabama, Wyoming) at present.

The difference in the per capita death rate for the U.S. and its neighbor to the North is more than disappointing. The per capita death rate averaged over the past 7 days is about 7x higher in the U.S. than Canada. — it's shocking!

[Alan Klein]

They did know. Everybody knew—including those pretending otherwise in a childish game. It was discussed months ago at endless length.

You don't have to be a rocket scientist nor an immunologist to understand that if a vaccine at the end of clinical trials had 94% efficacy in preventing moderate disease (mild symptoms) that 6% of vaccine recipients in the trial were infected and became sick, even though they were vaccinated. A child could understand this and the childish will pretend that they can't.

https://www.who.int/coronavirus/topic-efficacy.jpg

What was unknown is what the difference would be between efficacy in limited clinical trials and effectiveness in the larger population over time. The difference between efficacy and effectiveness was also explained and discussed multiple times. Again, a child could understand the difference, but the childish will refuse to acknowledge it.

https://www.who.int/vaccine-efficacy-effectiveness-and-protection

Discussed where?  Most people are busy going to work to feed their families. They get bits and pieces of the news online, on the radio while driving, TV news, or from their friends. As I posted, even doctors who are experts in the field acknowledge they left the wrong impression about vaccine's effectiveness.  Why don't you trust this expert?  You're always assuring us that experts are right and we should be listening to them.

“There was so much initial euphoria about how well these vaccines work,” said Dr. Jeff Duchin, an infectious-disease physician and the public health officer for Seattle and King County. “I think we — in the public health community, in the medical community — facilitated the impression that these vaccines are bulletproof.”
https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20210920/i-got-a-mild-breakthrough-case-heres-what-i-wish-id-known

[TechTalk]

The goal is to draw one or more parties into a circular and endlessly repetitive argument and then attempt to drag you thru a series of diversionary rabbit holes. It's exhausting for those that are engaged in it and a source of endless delight for the originator of the game.

[Alan Klein]

In the US, the vaccination rate is roughly 50%, and perhaps 5% of all serious Coronavirus cases are vaccinated.  So Alan's statement is absolutely wrong for that population. 

However, there is a big difference between these two statistics:
1) Fraction of vaccinated population who get Coronavirus
2) Fraction of Coronavirus patients who are vaccinated

For example, if 99% of some population were vaccinated, it is entirely likely that 90% of new Coronavirus cases would be among the vaccinated population.  In fact, that would be a testament to a highly effective vaccine.

When did I mention the seriousness in my point? The article I read stated that vaccinated and unvaccinated people can get Covid roughly equally and pass it on, hence one of the reasons vaccinated people should wear masks.  Of course, vaccinated people get the symptoms more mildly.  I never said they didn't. You misquoted me.

[Alan Klein]

From a different thread at a different time, but it may, or may not, offer some insight...

I didn't think you would take a portion of a quote I made a year ago out of context about something else in order to smear me.  That was a cheap stunt.

[Alan Klein]

Quote from: TechTalk on Today at 03:13:18 pm
The goal is to draw one or more parties into a circular and endlessly repetitive argument and then attempt to drag you thru a series of diversionary rabbit holes. It's exhausting for those that are engaged in it and a source of endless delight for the originator of the game.

You attack me with your usual meaningless verbosity because you have no answer to the scientist's confirmation of my statement. 

[TechTalk]

Discussed where?

Good news if you've been vaccinated.  Of course, he doesn't explain why it's unsafe to go into society the same way.  I assume that's because vaccines aren't 100% effective. 

[Alan Klein]

[quote author=TechTalk link=topic=137509.msg1224814#msg1224814 date=1632365604
Quote from: Alan Klein on Today at 10:32:12 pm
Discussed where?

Quote from: Alan Klein on March 03, 2021, 08:23:05 am
Good news if you've been vaccinated.  Of course, he doesn't explain why it's unsafe to go into society the same way.  I assume that's because vaccines aren't 100% effective. ]

The average person doesn't read LuLa.  I said in my post that they listen to the radio or speak to friends.  Maybe they listened to the doctor I quoted who said they overplayed the efficacy of the vaccine and that the scientists and doctors are to blame for that. Why didn't you mention that part of my post instead of cherry-picking two words?  Again, you skirted the point - ignore it, as you do every time facts refute yours. 

[Manoli]

You attack me with your usual meaningless verbosity because you have no answer to the scientist's confirmation of my statement. 

TechTalk is not attacking you, he’s educating you or at least attempting to.

I’ve suggested previously that you ‘read more, post less’ - here would be a good place to start:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine

[Manoli]

Moving on …

Self-amplifying RNA COVID-19 vaccine technology safe in humans, suggests study

“The approach is emerging as one of the great scientific advances of the pandemic”
Professor Robin Shattock
Head of Imperial's COVID-19 vaccine project

Results from the first trial of a new COVID-19 vaccine technology show no short-term safety concerns.

The data, from scientists at Imperial College London, suggests the technology can generate immune responses against COVID-19 in up to 87 per cent of people, even at extremely low dose levels – the lowest of any COVID-19 vaccine candidate worldwide. 

The technology uses genetic code called self-amplifying RNA (saRNA). This genetic information holds instructions to make a protein found on the outside of the coronavirus, called the spike protein.

Once injected into the muscle of the arm, the cells make this spike protein, enabling the immune system to generate defences against the virus.

Professor Robin Shattock, who leads Imperial’s COVID-19 vaccine project, said: “Global demand for COVID-19 vaccines will remain high in the coming decade, given the emergence of lethal SARS-CoV-2 escape-variants, and expected requirement for booster vaccination. We have shown the saRNA technology is safe and can generate an immune response. We are now refining the Imperial saRNA platform to develop vaccines for a variety of other infectious diseases."

The ultra-low dose saRNA technology has potential to protect against a variety of other infectious diseases, such as rabies and Ebola. The researchers also believe it could be developed to treat other conditions, such as cancer. 

Professor Shattock said: “The approach is emerging as one of the great scientific advances of the pandemic, with the ultra-low dose offering three key advantages. The first is the potential to manufacture a huge amount – one litre of reaction material can produce up to one million doses. 

"The second advantage of a lower dose is the reduced likelihood of side effects. Finally, a low dose vaccine opens up the possibility of combining the COVID-19 vaccine with other vaccines. We may now need annual vaccines against COVID-19, and a lower dose makes combination with other vaccines, such as the flu vaccine, more feasible.”

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/222553/self-amplifying-rna-covid-19-vaccine-technology-safe/

[Alan Klein]

TechTalk is not attacking you, he’s educating you or at least attempting to.

I’ve suggested previously that you ‘read more, post less’ - here would be a good place to start:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine

The average guy doesn't read Wiki.  What do think about what the doctor said about scientists over-selling vaccine's effectiveness to the general public? 

[Alan Klein]

Moving on …

Self-amplifying RNA COVID-19 vaccine technology safe in humans, suggests study

“The approach is emerging as one of the great scientific advances of the pandemic”
Professor Robin Shattock
Head of Imperial's COVID-19 vaccine project

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/222553/self-amplifying-rna-covid-19-vaccine-technology-safe/

Anything new that will help fight viruses is great. 

[Manoli]

What do think about what the doctor said about scientists over-selling vaccine's effectiveness to the general public? 

The short reply is I do not believe they did. The history since December 2019 is one of record and really not open to debate. You and others may have raised your expectations too high (including your doctor) but this was a new vaccine, new technology, a scientific breakthrough and speaking for myself and those close to me, no-one believed that this was a slam-dunk on the research front. None of us changed our ‘precautions’ once we’d been vaccinated. What did become more evident through 2021 was that transmission was more commonly via aerosols rather than contact eye/mouth infection thus we continued to observe distancing and hygiene, restricting contact with others to the outdoors and preferably in a slight breeze whenever possible.

No vaccine had ever been produced in less than 8 years and there were always two questions a) how effective would the vaccine be in the real world, and b) how long would those anti-bodies last?  The later discovery of the  Delta variant caused more infections, spread faster than earlier forms of the virus and still causes more severe illness than previous strains in unvaccinated people.

Add to the above that the two leading vaccine candidates used different ‘tech’. AstraZeneca and Johnson and Johnson both used the traditional tech whereas Pfizer and Moderna were both mRNA based.

So, no, you weren’t ‘sold’ anything, nothing was a given, the FDA gave their approval for ‘emergency use’ and at no point was ‘research’ discontinued.

SARS-CoV-2 (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2), was isolated in late 2019. Its genetic sequence was published on 11 January 2020, triggering an urgent international response to prepare for an outbreak and hasten development of a preventive COVID-19 vaccine.  Since 2020, vaccine development has been expedited via unprecedented research …

In February 2020, the World Health Organization (WHO) said it did not expect a vaccine against SARS‑CoV‑2 to become available in less than 18 months.

On 2 December 2020, the United Kingdom's Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) gave temporary regulatory approval for the Pfizer–BioNTech vaccine, becoming the first country to approve the vaccine and the first country in the Western world to approve the use of any COVID‑19 vaccine. As of 21 December 2020, many countries and the European Union had authorized or approved the Pfizer–BioNTech COVID‑19 vaccine.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine

[Alan Klein]

The short reply is I do not believe they did. The history since December 2019 is one of record and really not open to debate. You and others may have raised your expectations too high (including your doctor) but this was a new vaccine, new technology, a scientific breakthrough and speaking for myself and those close to me, no-one believed that this was a slam-dunk on the research front. None of us changed our ‘precautions’ once we’d been vaccinated. What did become more evident through 2021 was that transmission was more commonly via aerosols rather than contact eye/mouth infection thus we continued to observe distancing and hygiene, restricting contact with others to the outdoors and preferably in a slight breeze whenever possible.

No vaccine had ever been produced in less than 8 years and there were always two questions a) how effective would the vaccine be in the real world, and b) how long would those anti-bodies last?  The later discovery of the  Delta variant caused more infections, spread faster than earlier forms of the virus and still causes more severe illness than previous strains in unvaccinated people.

Add to the above that the two leading vaccine candidates used different ‘tech’. AstraZeneca and Johnson and Johnson both used the traditional tech whereas Pfizer and Moderna were both mRNA based.

So, no, you weren’t ‘sold’ anything, nothing was a given, the FDA gave their approval for ‘emergency use’ and at no point was ‘research’ discontinued.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_vaccine

He wasn't "my doctor".  He was an infectious-disease physician and the public health officer for Seattle and King County, the State of Washington.  Many average people believed him and similar claims from other experts in the field.

“There was so much initial euphoria about how well these vaccines work,” said Dr. Jeff Duchin, an infectious-disease physician and the public health officer for Seattle and King County. “I think we — in the public health community, in the medical community — facilitated the impression that these vaccines are bulletproof.”
https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20210920/i-got-a-mild-breakthrough-case-heres-what-i-wish-id-known

[TechTalk]

It’s hard to keep adjusting your risk calculations. So if you’d hoped to avoid getting sick at all, even slightly, it may be time for a “reset,” Duchin said. This isn’t to be alarmist but a reminder to clear away expectations that covid is out of your life, and stay vigilant about commonsense precautions.

I assume that's because vaccines aren't 100% effective.