OT: COVID-19 thread #4

[dougthonus]

anybody heard anything regarding herd immunity vaccination rate? scientists were speculating around 70% based on prior viruses, but i have heard that higher than that will be required for COVID-19. i would guess that delta complicates any estimates given that a large number of people got vaxxed prior to its appearance

There is a lot of debate if herd immunity is even possible. For the other commonly circulating coronaviruses, they come in a wave, hit everyone and recede, then come back in a while. You never get enough immunity to eliminate them.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/12/herd-immunity-is-mythical-with-the-covid-delta-variant-experts-say.html

Achieving herd immunity with Covid vaccines when the highly infectious delta variant is spreading is “not a possibility,” a leading epidemiologist said.

Experts agree on several reasons why such a goal — where overall immunity in a population is reached and the spread of the virus is stopped — is not likely.

Sir Andrew Pollard, head of the Oxford Vaccine Group, told British lawmakers Tuesday that as Covid vaccines did not stop the spread of the virus entirely — with vaccinated people still able to be infected and transmit the virus — the idea of achieving herd immunity was “mythical.”

“I think we are in a situation here with this current variant where herd immunity is not a possibility because it still infects vaccinated individuals,” said Pollard, one of the lead researchers in the creation of the AstraZeneca-University of Oxford vaccine.

“And that does mean that anyone who’s still unvaccinated, at some point, will meet the virus. That might not be this month or next month, it might be next year, but at some point they will meet the virus and we don’t have anything that will stop that transmission.”

While that certainly might end up being true, it seems to rely a lot on this bolded sentence. If they make a better vaccine that is Delta specific, this may not be true anymore, or it may be true infrequently enough to effectively not be true anymore.

[Dresden]

Colin Powell passed away today from Covid. He had multiple myeloma, which weakens your immune system. He was 84.

[October28]

I always feel for the survivors when somebody passes.
According to his family, Mr. Powell was fully vaccinated.

[coldfish]

anybody heard anything regarding herd immunity vaccination rate? scientists were speculating around 70% based on prior viruses, but i have heard that higher than that will be required for COVID-19. i would guess that delta complicates any estimates given that a large number of people got vaxxed prior to its appearance

There is a lot of debate if herd immunity is even possible. For the other commonly circulating coronaviruses, they come in a wave, hit everyone and recede, then come back in a while. You never get enough immunity to eliminate them.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/12/herd-immunity-is-mythical-with-the-covid-delta-variant-experts-say.html

Achieving herd immunity with Covid vaccines when the highly infectious delta variant is spreading is “not a possibility,” a leading epidemiologist said.

Experts agree on several reasons why such a goal — where overall immunity in a population is reached and the spread of the virus is stopped — is not likely.

Sir Andrew Pollard, head of the Oxford Vaccine Group, told British lawmakers Tuesday that as Covid vaccines did not stop the spread of the virus entirely — with vaccinated people still able to be infected and transmit the virus — the idea of achieving herd immunity was “mythical.”

“I think we are in a situation here with this current variant where herd immunity is not a possibility because it still infects vaccinated individuals,” said Pollard, one of the lead researchers in the creation of the AstraZeneca-University of Oxford vaccine.

“And that does mean that anyone who’s still unvaccinated, at some point, will meet the virus. That might not be this month or next month, it might be next year, but at some point they will meet the virus and we don’t have anything that will stop that transmission.”

While that certainly might end up being true, it seems to rely a lot on this bolded sentence. If they make a better vaccine that is Delta specific, this may not be true anymore, or it may be true infrequently enough to effectively not be true anymore.

There is a study out there that they looked at the coronavirus 299e. It mutates at a rate such that antibodies from 18 years ago no longer work against it.

Beyond that, antibody levels fall rather rapidly for this class of virus. This isn't measles. Once antibody levels fall enough, a person can get infected again even if their adaptive immune system responds robustly. That would mean a mild infection but you would still be able to pass it on.

Based on the science I have seen, eliminating covid via vaccination is impossible.

Just as an example: Measles vaccine is 96% effective and lasts a lifetime. Despite that, when people don't get vaccinated in pockets, they will frequently get measles. A super vaccine isn't able to eliminate a highly contagious airborne virus. No way a mediocre vaccine could do it.

Last note: Get vaccinated, stay up on boosters if you are in an eligible group. Hopefully they will approve the nasal vaccines they are working on. None of what I am saying is advocating some type of "hey, we are screwed so don't do anything" approach. I'm just pointing out the science.

[dougthonus]

There is a study out there that they looked at the coronavirus 299e. It mutates at a rate such that antibodies from 18 years ago no longer work against it.

Beyond that, antibody levels fall rather rapidly for this class of virus. This isn't measles. Once antibody levels fall enough, a person can get infected again even if their adaptive immune system responds robustly. That would mean a mild infection but you would still be able to pass it on.

Based on the science I have seen, eliminating covid via vaccination is impossible.

Just as an example: Measles vaccine is 96% effective and lasts a lifetime. Despite that, when people don't get vaccinated in pockets, they will frequently get measles. A super vaccine isn't able to eliminate a highly contagious airborne virus. No way a mediocre vaccine could do it.

Last note: Get vaccinated, stay up on boosters if you are in an eligible group. Hopefully they will approve the nasal vaccines they are working on. None of what I am saying is advocating some type of "hey, we are screwed so don't do anything" approach. I'm just pointing out the science.

Sounds like this dives into a lot of Semantics, and maybe we're saying the same thing.

I'm not defining herd immunity as eliminating and killing the virus, but effectively being immune enough that it doesn't meaningfully spread and cause an outbreak. I think you could do that if you get a high vaccination rate, a Delta variant vaccine, and there isn't a meaningful mutation away from Delta that causes significant breakthrough cases.

COVID would still exist, I agree it won't become zero, much like Measles isn't zero, but it could become well contained. For all the reasons you outlined, likely not as well maintained as Measles, but maintained enough that case counts could get much lower than the flu each year in regions where they can maintain antibody levels through regular vaccination.

[coldfish]

There is a study out there that they looked at the coronavirus 299e. It mutates at a rate such that antibodies from 18 years ago no longer work against it.

Beyond that, antibody levels fall rather rapidly for this class of virus. This isn't measles. Once antibody levels fall enough, a person can get infected again even if their adaptive immune system responds robustly. That would mean a mild infection but you would still be able to pass it on.

Based on the science I have seen, eliminating covid via vaccination is impossible.

Just as an example: Measles vaccine is 96% effective and lasts a lifetime. Despite that, when people don't get vaccinated in pockets, they will frequently get measles. A super vaccine isn't able to eliminate a highly contagious airborne virus. No way a mediocre vaccine could do it.

Last note: Get vaccinated, stay up on boosters if you are in an eligible group. Hopefully they will approve the nasal vaccines they are working on. None of what I am saying is advocating some type of "hey, we are screwed so don't do anything" approach. I'm just pointing out the science.

Sounds like this dives into a lot of Semantics, and maybe we're saying the same thing.

I'm not defining herd immunity as eliminating and killing the virus, but effectively being immune enough that it doesn't meaningfully spread and cause an outbreak. I think you could do that if you get a high vaccination rate, a Delta variant vaccine, and there isn't a meaningful mutation away from Delta that causes significant breakthrough cases.

COVID would still exist, I agree it won't become zero, much like Measles isn't zero, but it could become well contained. For all the reasons you outlined, likely not as well maintained as Measles, but maintained enough that case counts could get much lower than the flu each year in regions where they can maintain antibody levels through regular vaccination.

https://www.newsweek.com/cdc-over-83-percent-americans-covid-antibodies-before-delta-surge-1625738

I'm not sure if this has been discussed on this board but BEFORE the delta surge, 83% of the country had covid antibodies. That's from the CDC.

Regardless, here is the study I am talking about:
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.17.423313v1

and its implications
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00396-2

Coronaviruses re infect you every 6 to 12 months
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1083-1

As I said before, the experts getting in front of cameras for the last year or so have been lying to us. Experts knew at some point early on that this was going endemic and that vaccines weren't going to stop it.

We really aren't on the same page. We are so far off that I am having difficulty organizing my thoughts. Measles doesn't mutate like other viruses because it is trapped. That's why the same vaccine works with near 100% effectiveness decades later. Coronaviruses aren't anything like that. They shift and the antibody response they generate fades fast. As a result, you get infected over and over and over throughout your entire life. Our technology has no ability whatsoever to stop this.

The good news is that our adaptive immune system sticks around forever. Once it has been trained, it will jump on a virus well before it gets a chance to turn our lungs into swiss cheese.

[Dresden]

There is a study out there that they looked at the coronavirus 299e. It mutates at a rate such that antibodies from 18 years ago no longer work against it.

Beyond that, antibody levels fall rather rapidly for this class of virus. This isn't measles. Once antibody levels fall enough, a person can get infected again even if their adaptive immune system responds robustly. That would mean a mild infection but you would still be able to pass it on.

Based on the science I have seen, eliminating covid via vaccination is impossible.

Just as an example: Measles vaccine is 96% effective and lasts a lifetime. Despite that, when people don't get vaccinated in pockets, they will frequently get measles. A super vaccine isn't able to eliminate a highly contagious airborne virus. No way a mediocre vaccine could do it.

Last note: Get vaccinated, stay up on boosters if you are in an eligible group. Hopefully they will approve the nasal vaccines they are working on. None of what I am saying is advocating some type of "hey, we are screwed so don't do anything" approach. I'm just pointing out the science.

Sounds like this dives into a lot of Semantics, and maybe we're saying the same thing.

I'm not defining herd immunity as eliminating and killing the virus, but effectively being immune enough that it doesn't meaningfully spread and cause an outbreak. I think you could do that if you get a high vaccination rate, a Delta variant vaccine, and there isn't a meaningful mutation away from Delta that causes significant breakthrough cases.

COVID would still exist, I agree it won't become zero, much like Measles isn't zero, but it could become well contained. For all the reasons you outlined, likely not as well maintained as Measles, but maintained enough that case counts could get much lower than the flu each year in regions where they can maintain antibody levels through regular vaccination.

https://www.newsweek.com/cdc-over-83-percent-americans-covid-antibodies-before-delta-surge-1625738

I'm not sure if this has been discussed on this board but BEFORE the delta surge, 83% of the country had covid antibodies. That's from the CDC.

Regardless, here is the study I am talking about:
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.17.423313v1

and its implications
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00396-2

Coronaviruses re infect you every 6 to 12 months
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1083-1

As I said before, the experts getting in front of cameras for the last year or so have been lying to us. Experts knew at some point early on that this was going endemic and that vaccines weren't going to stop it.

We really aren't on the same page. We are so far off that I am having difficulty organizing my thoughts. Measles doesn't mutate like other viruses because it is trapped. That's why the same vaccine works with near 100% effectiveness decades later. Coronaviruses aren't anything like that. They shift and the antibody response they generate fades fast. As a result, you get infected over and over and over throughout your entire life. Our technology has no ability whatsoever to stop this.

The good news is that our adaptive immune system sticks around forever. Once it has been trained, it will jump on a virus well before it gets a chance to turn our lungs into swiss cheese.

I don't know if I fully understand this issue, but claiming that our public health officials have been "lying" to us seems pretty extreme to say. Not that I put it past public officials to lie to us (see Iraq war, Vietnman War, etc...), but I have a hard time believing people like Dr. Fauci, Dr. Brix, etc., would outright lie to the American people.

[Dresden]

the study from the CDC is saying that people with Covid antibodies was at 83% before Delta hit. But that was after the vaccine was rolled out. Prior to the rollout, the rate was only 20%.

Also, in the article you link to, it says " If these results extrapolate to other coronaviruses". So they aren't sure if those results apply to COvid 19 yet.

The Nature article says that "More than one-third of the respondents to Nature’s survey thought that it would be possible to eliminate SARS-CoV-2 from some regions while it continued to circulate in others. In zero-COVID regions there would be a continual risk of disease outbreaks, but they could be quenched quickly by herd immunity if most people had been vaccinated. "

So they use the term "herd immunity" here. And 1/3 of those surveyed thought it could indeed be eliminated from some regions, just as we no longer have yellow fever or malaria in the US, but it is still found in other parts of the world.

[coldfish]

Sounds like this dives into a lot of Semantics, and maybe we're saying the same thing.

I'm not defining herd immunity as eliminating and killing the virus, but effectively being immune enough that it doesn't meaningfully spread and cause an outbreak. I think you could do that if you get a high vaccination rate, a Delta variant vaccine, and there isn't a meaningful mutation away from Delta that causes significant breakthrough cases.

COVID would still exist, I agree it won't become zero, much like Measles isn't zero, but it could become well contained. For all the reasons you outlined, likely not as well maintained as Measles, but maintained enough that case counts could get much lower than the flu each year in regions where they can maintain antibody levels through regular vaccination.

https://www.newsweek.com/cdc-over-83-percent-americans-covid-antibodies-before-delta-surge-1625738

I'm not sure if this has been discussed on this board but BEFORE the delta surge, 83% of the country had covid antibodies. That's from the CDC.

Regardless, here is the study I am talking about:
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.17.423313v1

and its implications
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00396-2

Coronaviruses re infect you every 6 to 12 months
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1083-1

As I said before, the experts getting in front of cameras for the last year or so have been lying to us. Experts knew at some point early on that this was going endemic and that vaccines weren't going to stop it.

We really aren't on the same page. We are so far off that I am having difficulty organizing my thoughts. Measles doesn't mutate like other viruses because it is trapped. That's why the same vaccine works with near 100% effectiveness decades later. Coronaviruses aren't anything like that. They shift and the antibody response they generate fades fast. As a result, you get infected over and over and over throughout your entire life. Our technology has no ability whatsoever to stop this.

The good news is that our adaptive immune system sticks around forever. Once it has been trained, it will jump on a virus well before it gets a chance to turn our lungs into swiss cheese.

I don't know if I fully understand this issue, but claiming that our public health officials have been "lying" to us seems pretty extreme to say. Not that I put it past public officials to lie to us (see Iraq war, Vietnman War, etc...), but I have a hard time believing people like Dr. Fauci, Dr. Brix, etc., would outright lie to the American people.

Fauci is on the record as saying that he intentionally lied about the efficacy of masks with the intent of trying to protect the small stockpiles of masks for use by healthcare workers.

A white lie, but a lie no matter less.

Perhaps the same would be true with a lot of the effort to get people vaccinated and stay socially distanced. Holding out a carrot of eliminating covid when they knew it wasn't possible. You would have to ask him yourself because I'm only speculating as to his reasoning. I can say for certain that many, many professionals, scientists and experts thought that covid would go endemic by February of 2020 and that sterilizing immunity would be short lasting. Hell, people were talking about the need for booster shots long before the vaccines were even out. Those pushing the idea that if we just did XXX that covid would go away in the middle of last year were either fools or lying and I don't think these people are fools.

[coldfish]

the study from the CDC is saying that people with Covid antibodies was at 83% before Delta hit. But that was after the vaccine was rolled out. Prior to the rollout, the rate was only 20%.

Prior to delta, 83% of the population had some form of immunity to covid. That's a really big number if we are talking about a herd immunity threshold.

Just as a side note, the CDC's numbers there don't make a lot of sense, do they? You would have to never vaccinate anyone who had a prior infection to get close to that 83% number, which is patently ridiculous but hey, its the CDC.

Also, in the article you link to, it says " If these results extrapolate to other coronaviruses". So they aren't sure if those results apply to COvid 19 yet.

The Nature article says that "More than one-third of the respondents to Nature’s survey thought that it would be possible to eliminate SARS-CoV-2 from some regions while it continued to circulate in others. In zero-COVID regions there would be a continual risk of disease outbreaks, but they could be quenched quickly by herd immunity if most people had been vaccinated. "

So they use the term "herd immunity" here. And 1/3 of those surveyed thought it could indeed be eliminated from some regions, just as we no longer have yellow fever or malaria in the US, but it is still found in other parts of the world.

And 2/3 did not. If someone presents an opinion that is in the 1/3 area, they would be misleading the public if they didn't present it as such. It would almost be like they were . . .. lying.

[dougthonus]

And 2/3 did not. If someone presents an opinion that is in the 1/3 area, they would be misleading the public if they didn't present it as such. It would almost be like they were . . .. lying.

Presumably, 1st world countries, such as this one, with the wealth and distribution networks to manage vaccination of their entire populations and do boosters would be the 1/3rd area wouldn't they?

Also, if you agree with the above statement, then why didn't you provide that context? Isn't your point then misleading?

83% of blood donors having anti-bodies is also ignoring the idea that almost none of them had Delta specific anti-bodies. If there is a new dominant variant every year, then I agree it will probably stick around. I just don't think it's a given Delta will be replaced in 6 months or that there will be a new variant every year that we can't keep ahead of with vaccines.

What you are saying to me is also totally viable and reasonable to me. Just not the only viable outcome IMO.

[micromonkey]

I'm more optimistic

The CDC and FDA are approvers of treatments and information, the real work is done elsewhere IMO.

The good research coming out of this is going to be possibly a sea-tide change in vaccination and disease control. Money is being firehosed at research.

The army has already tested a SARS-COV-2-Spike-Ferritin-Nanoparticle (SpFN) Vaccine on mice
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8132231/

And has an ongoing trial in humans.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04784767

They are calling it a

second-generation COVID-19 or pan-sarbecovirus vaccine

This will elicit a very broad immunity inclusive of all sarbecoviruses-- the original SARS, COVID and others.

Natural Delta immunity gives you a broad defense (variable based on the person/infection however), Current vaccines gives you a super targeted one (that may be eventually evaded). This aims to basically do a little of both--targeting the specific binding domains of the virus and activating more memory B cells (longer lasting). Since it targets the entire way this family of coronaviruses attach - it should be universal for sarbecoviruses.

I mean given that Moderna took all of a weekend to design they vaccine (and the fact that it seems the best) I think they did a bang up job. But with more time, knowledge and money - much more can be done.

In addition to the Army-UNC has one in preclinical/animal studies
https://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2021/08/university-universal-vaccine

UVA has one targeting the "fusion peptide" that is in everything from Sars1 to Covid to MERS and a lot in between. it would be "nearly" universal across coronavirus families.
https://www.cvilletomorrow.org/articles/scientists-at-uva-believe-they-have-found-the-key-to-creating-a-universal-coronavirus-vaccine/

And Northwestern
https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2021/10/one-coronavirus-vaccine-may-protect-against-other-coronaviruses/

But there may be a path forward for developing a vaccine for each coronavirus family (Sarbecovirus, Embecovirus and Merbecovirus), they said.

“Our study helps us re-evaluate the concept of a universal coronavirus vaccine,” Penaloza-MacMaster said. “It’s likely there isn’t one, but we might end up with a generic vaccine for each of the main families of coronaviruses, for example a universal Sarbecovirus vaccine for SARS-CoV-1, SARS-CoV-2 and other SARS-related coronaviruses; or a universal Embecovirus for HCoV-OC43 and HKU1 that cause common colds.”

A universal per family would still be pretty good. But the Fusion peptide approach is also interesting.

It's likely big pharma has an eye on all these and more and will snap up anything promising and push it over the goal line.

Yeah take what is available now obviously, boosters yes--but we may have some really interesting options in a year or so.
It may be that there is no way around a booster--but the new stuff potentially might even eliminate the cold virus and a host of other diseases.

[Dresden]

https://www.newsweek.com/cdc-over-83-percent-americans-covid-antibodies-before-delta-surge-1625738

I'm not sure if this has been discussed on this board but BEFORE the delta surge, 83% of the country had covid antibodies. That's from the CDC.

Regardless, here is the study I am talking about:
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.12.17.423313v1

and its implications
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00396-2

Coronaviruses re infect you every 6 to 12 months
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-1083-1

As I said before, the experts getting in front of cameras for the last year or so have been lying to us. Experts knew at some point early on that this was going endemic and that vaccines weren't going to stop it.

We really aren't on the same page. We are so far off that I am having difficulty organizing my thoughts. Measles doesn't mutate like other viruses because it is trapped. That's why the same vaccine works with near 100% effectiveness decades later. Coronaviruses aren't anything like that. They shift and the antibody response they generate fades fast. As a result, you get infected over and over and over throughout your entire life. Our technology has no ability whatsoever to stop this.

The good news is that our adaptive immune system sticks around forever. Once it has been trained, it will jump on a virus well before it gets a chance to turn our lungs into swiss cheese.

I don't know if I fully understand this issue, but claiming that our public health officials have been "lying" to us seems pretty extreme to say. Not that I put it past public officials to lie to us (see Iraq war, Vietnman War, etc...), but I have a hard time believing people like Dr. Fauci, Dr. Brix, etc., would outright lie to the American people.

Fauci is on the record as saying that he intentionally lied about the efficacy of masks with the intent of trying to protect the small stockpiles of masks for use by healthcare workers.

A white lie, but a lie no matter less.

Perhaps the same would be true with a lot of the effort to get people vaccinated and stay socially distanced. Holding out a carrot of eliminating covid when they knew it wasn't possible. You would have to ask him yourself because I'm only speculating as to his reasoning. I can say for certain that many, many professionals, scientists and experts thought that covid would go endemic by February of 2020 and that sterilizing immunity would be short lasting. Hell, people were talking about the need for booster shots long before the vaccines were even out. Those pushing the idea that if we just did XXX that covid would go away in the middle of last year were either fools or lying and I don't think these people are fools.

Maybe I missed this, but where exactly did Fauci go on record saying he lied to people about wearing masks? Factcheck.org doesn't seem to think he lied in the first place, let alone admitted to it:

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/02/scicheck-video-wrong-about-fauci-covid-19/

[Dresden]

the study from the CDC is saying that people with Covid antibodies was at 83% before Delta hit. But that was after the vaccine was rolled out. Prior to the rollout, the rate was only 20%.

Prior to delta, 83% of the population had some form of immunity to covid. That's a really big number if we are talking about a herd immunity threshold.

Just as a side note, the CDC's numbers there don't make a lot of sense, do they? You would have to never vaccinate anyone who had a prior infection to get close to that 83% number, which is patently ridiculous but hey, its the CDC.

Also, in the article you link to, it says " If these results extrapolate to other coronaviruses". So they aren't sure if those results apply to COvid 19 yet.

The Nature article says that "More than one-third of the respondents to Nature’s survey thought that it would be possible to eliminate SARS-CoV-2 from some regions while it continued to circulate in others. In zero-COVID regions there would be a continual risk of disease outbreaks, but they could be quenched quickly by herd immunity if most people had been vaccinated. "

So they use the term "herd immunity" here. And 1/3 of those surveyed thought it could indeed be eliminated from some regions, just as we no longer have yellow fever or malaria in the US, but it is still found in other parts of the world.

And 2/3 did not. If someone presents an opinion that is in the 1/3 area, they would be misleading the public if they didn't present it as such. It would almost be like they were . . .. lying.

Being mistaken about something (because you were basing your answer on incomplete data, or incorrect data), is not the same thing as lying. This is like people saying Obama lied to the American public that they could keep their own doctors. He really thought that was the case. Turns out he was wrong (although the number affected was actually very small). That doesn't mean he lied.

Fauci may have been wrong at times, but that's not the same as intentionally lying about something.

[waffle]

I don't think he lied. Covid has been a moving target, in reality and in the press. so incorrect due to lack of information does not equal "lied"

And it has been a GOTCHA for the rightist media to claim that for months now, and I never thought they had any traction there.

There is a good article in the NYT EDIT - Make that the WAPO. about where covid might be going/what makes it concerning. Very detailed

[DuckIII]

anybody heard anything regarding herd immunity vaccination rate? scientists were speculating around 70% based on prior viruses, but i have heard that higher than that will be required for COVID-19. i would guess that delta complicates any estimates given that a large number of people got vaxxed prior to its appearance

Fauci upped that months ago, as a projection, to 80%. That’s the last I heard of it.

Just found out some freedom fighters in my hometown filled a lawsuit to bar the school’s mask mandate, which will be successful as it has been multiple times around the state already, and that as a consequence our conference schools will not play us in indoor sports, effectively ruining all three of my sons’ basketball seasons. My oldest son is a senior and a varsity starter.

But I’m sure he’ll be appreciative all the freedom he’ll enjoy from not wearing a mask far more than he would have enjoyed getting to play his final year of his favorite sport. Yay freedom.

Seems like there ought to be a countersuit in there somewhere against the anti-vaxxers for damage to your sons and others enjoyment of sports?

Unfortunately no, there is not.

[coldfish]

And 2/3 did not. If someone presents an opinion that is in the 1/3 area, they would be misleading the public if they didn't present it as such. It would almost be like they were . . .. lying.

Presumably, 1st world countries, such as this one, with the wealth and distribution networks to manage vaccination of their entire populations and do boosters would be the 1/3rd area wouldn't they?

Also, if you agree with the above statement, then why didn't you provide that context? Isn't your point then misleading?

83% of blood donors having anti-bodies is also ignoring the idea that almost none of them had Delta specific anti-bodies. If there is a new dominant variant every year, then I agree it will probably stick around. I just don't think it's a given Delta will be replaced in 6 months or that there will be a new variant every year that we can't keep ahead of with vaccines.

What you are saying to me is also totally viable and reasonable to me. Just not the only viable outcome IMO.

Please don't mix conversations that I'm having with Dresden. He isn't interested in serious conversations and is just trying to play for "gotcha" type moments. Anyone who is even vaguely aware of our pandemic response is aware that authorities have intentionally lied at times with the intent of manipulating the public.

The "malaria" type outcome isn't one that I have ever read for covid. That doesn't happen for rhinovirus / influenza / coronavirus type diseases where they stay localized.

Again, I really don't think we are on the same page and I'll take a lot of the blame for that because I'm organizing my thoughts poorly. I think there is a STRONG chance that we will be able to stay in front of this with vaccines if people choose to participate. I highly recommend that everyone get vaccinated.

Even in absence of that, eventually everyone is going to get natural immunity to covid. Coronaviruses mutate slowly so once you have that immunity, you tamp down severity.

This is an older article but it covers a lot of the scientific basics:

“By far the most likely scenario is that the virus will continue to spread and infect most of the world population in a relatively short period of time,” says Stöhr, meaning one to two years. “Afterwards, the virus will continue to spread in the human population, likely forever.” Like the four generally mild human coronaviruses, SARS-CoV-2 would then circulate constantly and cause mainly mild upper respiratory tract infections, says Stöhr. For that reason, he adds, vaccines won’t be necessary.

Some previous studies support this argument. One10 showed that when people were inoculated with the common-cold coronavirus 229E, their antibody levels peaked two weeks later and were only slightly raised after a year. That did not prevent infections a year later, but subsequent infections led to few, if any, symptoms and a shorter period of viral shedding.

The OC43 coronavirus offers a model for where this pandemic might go. That virus also gives humans common colds, but genetic research from the University of Leuven in Belgium suggests that OC43 might have been a killer in the past11. That study indicates that OC43 spilled over to humans in around 1890 from cows, which got it from mice. The scientists suggest that OC43 was responsible for a pandemic that killed more than one million people worldwide in 1889–90 — an outbreak previously blamed on influenza. Today, OC43 continues to circulate widely and it might be that continual exposure to the virus keeps the great majority of people immune to it.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-01315-7

There is a lot of hedging at points in that article but a lot of people point to the section I just quoted as a likely long term outcome. That was May 2020 btw and Nature is a highly regarded scientific publication.

[coldfish]

Spoiler:

I'm more optimistic

The CDC and FDA are approvers of treatments and information, the real work is done elsewhere IMO.

The good research coming out of this is going to be possibly a sea-tide change in vaccination and disease control. Money is being firehosed at research.

The army has already tested a SARS-COV-2-Spike-Ferritin-Nanoparticle (SpFN) Vaccine on mice
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8132231/

And has an ongoing trial in humans.
https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04784767

They are calling it a

second-generation COVID-19 or pan-sarbecovirus vaccine

This will elicit a very broad immunity inclusive of all sarbecoviruses-- the original SARS, COVID and others.

Natural Delta immunity gives you a broad defense (variable based on the person/infection however), Current vaccines gives you a super targeted one (that may be eventually evaded). This aims to basically do a little of both--targeting the specific binding domains of the virus and activating more memory B cells (longer lasting). Since it targets the entire way this family of coronaviruses attach - it should be universal for sarbecoviruses.

I mean given that Moderna took all of a weekend to design they vaccine (and the fact that it seems the best) I think they did a bang up job. But with more time, knowledge and money - much more can be done.

In addition to the Army-UNC has one in preclinical/animal studies
https://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2021/08/university-universal-vaccine

UVA has one targeting the "fusion peptide" that is in everything from Sars1 to Covid to MERS and a lot in between. it would be "nearly" universal across coronavirus families.
https://www.cvilletomorrow.org/articles/scientists-at-uva-believe-they-have-found-the-key-to-creating-a-universal-coronavirus-vaccine/

And Northwestern
https://news.northwestern.edu/stories/2021/10/one-coronavirus-vaccine-may-protect-against-other-coronaviruses/

But there may be a path forward for developing a vaccine for each coronavirus family (Sarbecovirus, Embecovirus and Merbecovirus), they said.

“Our study helps us re-evaluate the concept of a universal coronavirus vaccine,” Penaloza-MacMaster said. “It’s likely there isn’t one, but we might end up with a generic vaccine for each of the main families of coronaviruses, for example a universal Sarbecovirus vaccine for SARS-CoV-1, SARS-CoV-2 and other SARS-related coronaviruses; or a universal Embecovirus for HCoV-OC43 and HKU1 that cause common colds.”

A universal per family would still be pretty good. But the Fusion peptide approach is also interesting.

It's likely big pharma has an eye on all these and more and will snap up anything promising and push it over the goal line.

Yeah take what is available now obviously, boosters yes--but we may have some really interesting options in a year or so.
It may be that there is no way around a booster--but the new stuff potentially might even eliminate the cold virus and a host of other diseases.

Good post. Just to note, I have made a lot of comments but it is with the qualifier "given existing technology".

I know that experts are working on super vaccines for everything from the flu to the common cold that create long term durable immune responses. That said, we have been reading about cancer breakthroughs for decades and the results in the field frequently don't match the initial promise.

I sure hope this stuff pans out but I'm not going to guarantee it.

Side note: There are a lot of studies that link common infections to some cases of MS, Parkinson's, dementia, etc. Getting rid of these viruses would be huge.
https://www.healthline.com/health-news/another-reason-to-get-flu-shot-study-finds-it-may-decrease-risk-of-alzheimers

The evidence, which was presented at the virtually-held Alzheimer’s Association International Conference in July, suggests that people who got at least one flu shot cut their risk of Alzheimer’s by about 17 percent, and those who regularly get vaccinated against the flu had an even lower risk of developing the disease.

[dougthonus]

Again, I really don't think we are on the same page and I'll take a lot of the blame for that because I'm organizing my thoughts poorly. I think there is a STRONG chance that we will be able to stay in front of this with vaccines if people choose to participate. I highly recommend that everyone get vaccinated.

Even if we aren't on the same page it is fine.

But to spell things out from my view, I'd say there are a few possibilities:
1: It is something that is around forever, but everyone via vaccine or exposure has base immunity to it, and it becomes more like a normal flu with regular mutations of which some are worse than others depending on the year and regular shots to ward it off that people will choose to get or not get like the flu shot. (this seems to be your base case if I understand correctly)

2: We are able to effectively wipe it out at least in many areas due to variant specific vaccinations and slow enough mutations and permanent controls over entering/exiting the country. Pockets of it pop up, but they are small enough that I would view it as effectively wiped out in the US.

3: It continues to mutate into more and more deadly forms and is a persistent pain in our ass forever, and we can never stay ahead of it with vaccines because by the time we develop a new variant vaccine it has mutated into something that breaks through it.

If ordered these in my personal view of their likelihood. It seems to me you are mostly arguing that thing #1 is what is going to happen, to which, I agree that it is the most likely outcome in my opinion as well, which is why I said we're mostly on the same page. When I have stated I think #2 (and to a much lesser extent #3) are possibilities, that is a side path. I still agree that #1 is most likely. Maybe you even define #2 as a subgroup of #1, because it never really goes away but is just effectively controlled really well.

So unless I have wildly misread what you have written, we're only talking about degrees of separation here, and you have taken some of my discussion points about why I think #2 is possible and seemed to have confused it as me thinking it is the base case or most likely thing. You think #2 is impossible isn't really relevant for my percentage of agreement with you. You can completely disagree with that, but the fact that I think it's 65-70% likely we land in state #1 still means I mostly agree with you. (again, not that agreeing with you is particularly important, two random people philosophizing on the internet over what will happen isn't too relevant really towards what will really happen, whatever that is, we'll both roll with it as best we can I'm sure).

There is a lot of hedging at points in that article but a lot of people point to the section I just quoted as a likely long term outcome. That was May 2020 btw and Nature is a highly regarded scientific publication.

Using the phrase "likely" here, I agree. I also think this is most likely.

[coldfish]

Again, I really don't think we are on the same page and I'll take a lot of the blame for that because I'm organizing my thoughts poorly. I think there is a STRONG chance that we will be able to stay in front of this with vaccines if people choose to participate. I highly recommend that everyone get vaccinated.

Even if we aren't on the same page it is fine.

But to spell things out from my view, I'd say there are a few possibilities:
1: It is something that is around forever, but everyone via vaccine or exposure has base immunity to it, and it becomes more like a normal flu with regular mutations of which some are worse than others depending on the year and regular shots to ward it off that people will choose to get or not get like the flu shot. (this seems to be your base case if I understand correctly)

2: We are able to effectively wipe it out at least in many areas due to variant specific vaccinations and slow enough mutations and permanent controls over entering/exiting the country. Pockets of it pop up, but they are small enough that I would view it as effectively wiped out in the US.

3: It continues to mutate into more and more deadly forms and is a persistent pain in our ass forever, and we can never stay ahead of it with vaccines because by the time we develop a new variant vaccine it has mutated into something that breaks through it.

If ordered these in my personal view of their likelihood. It seems to me you are mostly arguing that thing #1 is what is going to happen, to which, I agree that it is the most likely outcome in my opinion as well, which is why I said we're mostly on the same page. When I have stated I think #2 (and to a much lesser extent #3) are possibilities, that is a side path. I still agree that #1 is most likely. Maybe you even define #2 as a subgroup of #1, because it never really goes away but is just effectively controlled really well.

So unless I have wildly misread what you have written, we're only talking about degrees of separation here, and you have taken some of my discussion points about why I think #2 is possible and seemed to have confused it as me thinking it is the base case or most likely thing. You think #2 is impossible isn't really relevant for my percentage of agreement with you. You can completely disagree with that, but the fact that I think it's 65-70% likely we land in state #1 still means I mostly agree with you. (again, not that agreeing with you is particularly important, two random people philosophizing on the internet over what will happen isn't too relevant really towards what will really happen, whatever that is, we'll both roll with it as best we can I'm sure).

There is a lot of hedging at points in that article but a lot of people point to the section I just quoted as a likely long term outcome. That was May 2020 btw and Nature is a highly regarded scientific publication.

Using the phrase "likely" here, I agree. I also think this is most likely.

Fair enough. You organized it better than I did.

I want to explain a little more on #1. If you look at the 229 study referenced in these articles it infects people quite regularly as their antibodies fall off. That said, the immune response is still there in a manner that it can whack it down pretty quickly. Most of those people don't even know they had an infection. #1 might not mean constant covid19 flu infections for the rest of eternity.

OTOH, covid19 isn't identical to the other commonly circulating coronaviruses. There might be something that inherently makes it more dangerous. It might be more effective at suppressing cellular immunity or ACE2 receptors might be a more dangerous receptor to bind to, etc.

Only somewhat related: Influenza B has several sub strains that alternate. One spikes up and then the other, probably because they create imperfect immunity for the other competitor as they are spiking. The same thing happens with coronaviruses, particularly the closely related ones. OC43 is a betacoronavirus like covid19 and shares a lot of common features. We may fall into a cycle of alternating infections.