Covid-19 miscellany

[Jimmy Higgins]

Man, asking a person why they don't want to get a shot is a lot like asking them why they support Trump. They have virtually no argument beyond 'you can't live in fear'. Yet, they seem to be the ones afraid of a vaccine. We're doomed. Stupidity needs to become a national export, because the US seems to be leading the world in it.

It's cute that you don't realise how much of it you're already exporting.

Compared to our other main exports of agriculture, devices that explode and kill people, and right-wing finger pointing lecturing as to how other countries shouldn't pollute as much... it isn't up that high.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Man, asking a person why they don't want to get a shot is a lot like asking them why they support Trump. They have virtually no argument beyond 'you can't live in fear'. Yet, they seem to be the ones afraid of a vaccine. {snip}

One of my colleagues, a Hispanic male in his mid 40s is not getting the vaccine. I asked him why and he said his kid (who I assume to be about 20) had "done all the research" and said he didn't need it because he was a youngish fit person and his own immune system would be sufficient. So he's taking his kid's advice. I don't think he is a Trump supporter. A colleague of my wife and her whole family is not getting it because they believe the government are "up to something" and don't think it's safe. Definitely not Trump supporters. But in both cases, they have an argument for not taking it.

What are these arguments? You didn't actually say.
Tom

That was their argument. They are fit, so they won't die. When you counter that BS, it becomes like talking to a Trump supporter. There if nothing else behind their opinion, other than what appears to be fear of a vaccine or possibly a pointy needle.

 

[TSwizzle]

That was their argument. They are fit, so they won't die. When you counter that BS, it becomes like talking to a Trump supporter.

And how do you counter their argument with Jimmy ?

There if nothing else behind their opinion, other than what appears to be fear of a vaccine or possibly a pointy needle.

Seems there is something behind their opinion actually, not the "government is up to something" part or the "pointy needle" part but certainly as to the vaccine's applicability and appropriateness for the individual.

 

[TomC]

That was their argument. They are fit, so they won't die. When you counter that BS, it becomes like talking to a Trump supporter.

And how do you counter their argument with Jimmy ?

What argument? You just keep referring to arguments without saying what they are.

There if nothing else behind their opinion, other than what appears to be fear of a vaccine or possibly a pointy needle.

Seems there is something behind their opinion actually, not the "government is up to something" part or the "pointy needle" part but certainly as to the vaccine's applicability and appropriateness for the individual.

What is behind their opinion? Vague references to anecdotes found on social media?
Tom

 

[Toni]

What argument? You just keep referring to arguments without saying what they are.

There if nothing else behind their opinion, other than what appears to be fear of a vaccine or possibly a pointy needle.

Seems there is something behind their opinion actually, not the "government is up to something" part or the "pointy needle" part but certainly as to the vaccine's applicability and appropriateness for the individual.

What is behind their opinion? Vague references to anecdotes found on social media?
Tom

More reasonable than the anti-Vaxxer (covid only I think) former classmate of mine that I Facebook stalk sometimes. I need to drop that habit because his virulent racism and sexism sickens me even more than it astonished me. Yeah, he’s a Trumpist and I would not be surprised if he kept a white hood in his basement—if he had a basement. I only became aware of his FB page because an actual friend is so appalled and told me he was looney tunes. It boggles my brain because I believe he is actually a college graduate. I always thought he was a dipshit but he did tend to hang out with some of the smarter kids so I figured they just saw something h I was missing and gave him a partial benefit of a doubt. Kind of. But nope, he’s an even bigger idiot than I thought and it turns out our mutual friends are really nice and much more tolerant than I am.

Basically he is one of those left behinds who never made much of himself and resents the hell out of the world for passing him by and outgrowing small town small mindedness.

I find that this is a genuine conundrum for me. Not the dipshit: he’s beyond reasoning. But a lot of people from my home town who never left town or came back to the same county, never made much money, most did not go to college. They are very much the kind of people who form Trump’s base, generally minus the blatant racism. Most were not my close friends but we knew each other and were ‘friendly’ enough. Most were genuinely nice people and are today even nicer and kinder and more open hearted than I remember. If o showed up on their front porch in need, today, they’d invite me in, give me a meal, and a bed if I needed it and offer to change my tire or give me gas or anything I needed. So for me, in most cases, it’s not a easy case of: they’re hopeless idiots and not worth troubling myself over. Some are vaccinated and some are not. I’m not shy about stating my beliefs on Facebook or in person so it’s not like they don’t know we differ strongly. But they are as kind and open hearted in so many ways as anyone I ever knew. We need to find a way to reach them.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

What you didn't find was any evidence that the virus is spread in any significant way outdoors.

First, you seem to have lost track of the exchange. That part of my reply was about what the CDC said. You claimed that the CDC said the risk was negligible, I asked for evidence to support your claim about the CDC, you told me to Google it, so I did and your claimed turned out to be mistaken.

Second, I did, and already gave it.

Still not evidence and you know it.

On the contrary, it's evidence and you should know it - I already explained what it means for something to be evidence.

So if you are trying to get me to change my behavior you have failed.

Previous interactions give me conclusive evidence that you will not change your behavior. So, I wasn't trying to do that. I was just discussing in a discussion board.

I will not wear a mask outdoors until you show actual proof or evidence that the risk of catching/spreading the virus is significant.

I did, but that aside, should I then reckon that you would wear a mask indoors if I showed what you consider evidence that the risk of catching/spreading the virus is significant?

 

[TSwizzle]

First, you seem to have lost track of the exchange.

Entirely possible. But in any event, specifically there is no evidence that outside contact is a significant source of spread.

That part of my reply was about what the CDC
I did, but that aside, should I then reckon that you would wear a mask indoors if I showed what you consider evidence that the risk of catching/spreading the virus is significant?

I already know there is a greater risk of transmission in enclosed, busy places.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Google it. Even the CDC can’t support wearing masks outside.

Read their recommendations again.

How do you explain the pressure on health care systems, the collapse in some places (e.g., India), etc.?

India is a third world shithole with third world health care.

Which doesn't explain it crashing. Healthcare systems only crash when the loads goes up considerably.

They're using armed escorts for tankers bringing oxygen to hospitals--and the hospitals are having to warn families to prepare for the worst as the needles creep down to the E with no confidence a tanker will get their in time. One hospital lost 23 patients because a leak meant the needle reached the E--and who knows what other unreported incidents there are.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Still not evidence and you know it. All the headlines about "super spreader events" was politically motivated and flat out fearmongering. LA County banned outdoor dining based on zero evidence and were taken to court and told by the court to present evidence that showed outdoor dining was risky. They couldn't do it. They didn't even believe their own bullshit anyway. Governor Newsom exposed when he was caught dining with his pals at a restaurant.

Of course they couldn't--there's no way to obtain such evidence.

<Shoves TSwizzle out the airlock with a parachute. Hey, there's zero evidence that a spacesuit isn't enough protection for re-entry, you get the ultimate skydive.>

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Even if the virus were spreading insignificantly everywhere, there's still a collective effect to consider. Spreading it without vaccinations across land over time creates opportunity for new strains that beat the vaccine.

This is Nature vs Technology. Technology would be kicking ass, but idiots decided to ally with the virus and endanger everyone else. Now we'll have to get booster shots every year.

Thanks idiots.

So, is there anyone here who can get even an amateur handle on this paper? (Which is so out of my league as to be calculus for a preschooler)

SARS-CoV-2-derived peptides define heterologous and COVID-19-induced T cell recognition

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41590-020-00808-x.pdf


It seems to be saying that previous infections of non covid-19 viruses are already giving T-cell reactions in many people to covid-19. How many parts of the virus other than the spike protein do people make antibodies to?

Will a previously infected person with the original covid-19 have a better immunity to variants than a vaccinated person who never had covid-19? Is the vaccine a one trick pony in regards to the immune response compared to the virus or the old types of vaccines from attenuated viruses that more closely resembled a live virus?

If these mRNA vaccines are lost opportunity costs for not having many more useful stable across variant segments (epitopes?) of the virus to train the immune system, we should know now.

For one real virus like Covid-19 how many different types of antibodies or other distinct reactions/memories happen with the immune system compared to just the spike proteins from these new vaccines?

There are viruses that have shown some cross protection against Covid. However, in this case the vaccine is better. The problem is that all viruses present multiple targets for the immune system. Some of those targets change much more readily than others. Target something that changes readily and it's not going to provide much protection. That's why the mRNA and viral vector vaccines target a reasonably stable structure--much more likely to actually get a hit.

Note that the Chinese vaccine is simply a killed-virus vaccine. Chop up the virus and inject it. The real-world performance isn't good, especially against the variants. That's the same thing you get from infection.

Incidentally, even more problems with Sputnik: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/04/28/russian-vaccine-behaviorhttps://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/04/28/brazil-rejects-the-gamaleya-vaccine

It seems to be a bit more live than it's supposed to be. (The hazard being infection with the vector, it's not going to cause Covid.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And? Is anybody who's had both even saying that?

I've had both, the disease was much worse.

Me too... and same... insofar as the disease did next to nothing to me besides long term loss of smell, and the vaccination did exactly nothing at all to me (except a bruised arm for 1 day)

Still having smell loss? Have you looked into any treatment for it?

What treatment?? They're only scratching the surface on addressing long covid. Note that there isn't any actual treatment for covid itself, even--the hospital is about keeping you alive while your body does the fighting. (Think of MMORPGs--the hospital is the healer standing there keeping the tank alive.)

 

[Angra Mainyu]

I already know there is a greater risk of transmission in enclosed, busy places.

Yes, I know you know. That is not what I was getting at. Rather, you said:

I will not wear a mask outdoors until you show actual proof or evidence that the risk of catching/spreading the virus is significant.

That implies that if I were to show "actual proof or evidence that the risk of catching/spreading the virus is significant" outdoors, then you would wear a mask outdoors (I already gave evidence of that, but I know you reckon otherwise).

So, if "actual proof or evidence that the risk of catching/spreading the virus is significant" outdoors would persuade you to wear a mask outdoors, my question is whether "actual proof or evidence that the risk of catching/spreading the virus is significant" indoors would persuade you to wear a mask indoors.
If the answer is 'no', then I would ask why the difference? In other words, why would you respond to "actual proof or evidence that the risk of catching/spreading the virus is significant" (in your assessment, clearly) outdoors by wearing a mask outdoors, but you would not respond to "actual proof or evidence that the risk of catching/spreading the virus is significant" (in your assessment, clearly) indoors by wearing a mask indoors.
If the answer is 'yes', then I'd like to know it is.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

So, is there anyone here who can get even an amateur handle on this paper? (Which is so out of my league as to be calculus for a preschooler)



https://www.nature.com/articles/s41590-020-00808-x.pdf


It seems to be saying that previous infections of non covid-19 viruses are already giving T-cell reactions in many people to covid-19. How many parts of the virus other than the spike protein do people make antibodies to?

Will a previously infected person with the original covid-19 have a better immunity to variants than a vaccinated person who never had covid-19? Is the vaccine a one trick pony in regards to the immune response compared to the virus or the old types of vaccines from attenuated viruses that more closely resembled a live virus?

If these mRNA vaccines are lost opportunity costs for not having many more useful stable across variant segments (epitopes?) of the virus to train the immune system, we should know now.

For one real virus like Covid-19 how many different types of antibodies or other distinct reactions/memories happen with the immune system compared to just the spike proteins from these new vaccines?

There are viruses that have shown some cross protection against Covid. However, in this case the vaccine is better. The problem is that all viruses present multiple targets for the immune system. Some of those targets change much more readily than others. Target something that changes readily and it's not going to provide much protection. That's why the mRNA and viral vector vaccines target a reasonably stable structure--much more likely to actually get a hit.

Note that the Chinese vaccine is simply a killed-virus vaccine. Chop up the virus and inject it. The real-world performance isn't good, especially against the variants. That's the same thing you get from infection.

Incidentally, even more problems with Sputnik: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/04/28/russian-vaccine-behavior

It seems to be a bit more live than it's supposed to be. (The hazard being infection with the vector, it's not going to cause Covid.)

Yes, the second dose with adenovirus type 5. It won't make it ineffective against covid, though.

 

[barbos]

So, is there anyone here who can get even an amateur handle on this paper? (Which is so out of my league as to be calculus for a preschooler)



https://www.nature.com/articles/s41590-020-00808-x.pdf


It seems to be saying that previous infections of non covid-19 viruses are already giving T-cell reactions in many people to covid-19. How many parts of the virus other than the spike protein do people make antibodies to?

Will a previously infected person with the original covid-19 have a better immunity to variants than a vaccinated person who never had covid-19? Is the vaccine a one trick pony in regards to the immune response compared to the virus or the old types of vaccines from attenuated viruses that more closely resembled a live virus?

If these mRNA vaccines are lost opportunity costs for not having many more useful stable across variant segments (epitopes?) of the virus to train the immune system, we should know now.

For one real virus like Covid-19 how many different types of antibodies or other distinct reactions/memories happen with the immune system compared to just the spike proteins from these new vaccines?

There are viruses that have shown some cross protection against Covid. However, in this case the vaccine is better. The problem is that all viruses present multiple targets for the immune system. Some of those targets change much more readily than others. Target something that changes readily and it's not going to provide much protection. That's why the mRNA and viral vector vaccines target a reasonably stable structure--much more likely to actually get a hit.

Note that the Chinese vaccine is simply a killed-virus vaccine. Chop up the virus and inject it. The real-world performance isn't good, especially against the variants. That's the same thing you get from infection.

That's correct, vaccines provide better protection than actual virus.

Incidentally, even more problems with Sputnik: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/04/28/russian-vaccine-behavior

It seems to be a bit more live than it's supposed to be. (The hazard being infection with the vector, it's not going to cause Covid.)

Link does not talk about problems with Sputnik vaccine at all.

 

[barbos]

Yes, the second dose with adenovirus type 5. It won't make it ineffective against covid, though.

The thing about adenovirus vectors I don't understand is what if an individual had this virus before vaccination.
Does that make infection ineffective? And what about booster shot of the same vaccine? I heard saying that Sputnik is a one-time vaccine because of the first shot creates life-long immunity against adenovirus too. But then creators of the vaccine said booster shots would work.
I have read in some other (unrelated to Covid-19) study involved with adenoviruses and it implied at least long term immunity after infection.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Yes, the second dose with adenovirus type 5. It won't make it ineffective against covid, though.

The thing about adenovirus vectors I don't understand is what if an individual had this virus before vaccination.
Does that make infection ineffective? And what about booster shot of the same vaccine? I heard saying that Sputnik is a one-time vaccine because of the first shot creates life-long immunity against adenovirus too. But then creators of the vaccine said booster shots would work.
I have read in some other (unrelated to Covid-19) study involved with adenoviruses and it implied at least long term immunity after infection.

I'm no expert, but from what I read, the Sputnik vaccine will protect you against covid and against infection with the viral vector, and that is why they use 2 adenoviruses instead of 1. The first shot uses type 26, and the second type 5, so even if you got some immunity against type 26 from the first shot, that will not likely interfere with the second shot, so the second shot is more effective against covid than it would be if the viruses were repeated. Then again, AZ works reasonably well even though it uses the same virus in both shots. I'm not sure how they'll fare if they have to adapt it to new variants every year.

But good question, what if someone had immunity against the viral vector before?
I don't know. I guess it might make it less effective in theory, but the trials show good results.
AZ wouldn't have that problem, as they used a modified chimp adenovirus, and they're not using it to immunize chimps.

 

[Gun Nut]

And? Is anybody who's had both even saying that?

I've had both, the disease was much worse.

Me too... and same... insofar as the disease did next to nothing to me besides long term loss of smell, and the vaccination did exactly nothing at all to me (except a bruised arm for 1 day)

Still having smell loss?

No, that cleared up on its own after about 2 months. This was a year ago. My shot was 2 weeks ago and my second and last shot will be next week. Also, my smell loss seemed selective... I could smell and taste food... but the garbage and kitty litter had no smell. I didn't miss it.

I have anecdotally heard that those with long term issues that persisted up to the day of their vaccination, their lasting condition cleared up upon getting their first shot, though.

 

[Gun Nut]

Just make sure to apply normal wilderness standards. You can't meet the standards for burying it which means you do it in a bag and take it with you.

unacceptable... thou shall not infringe my god-given INDIVIDUAL freedoms to do what I WANT whenever I WANT! The Bill of rights says I may pursue happiness.. Whatever makes me happy is my right. Whatever makes me unhappy is an infringement of my rights.

 

[repoman]

That's correct, vaccines provide better protection than actual virus.

Incidentally, even more problems with Sputnik: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/04/28/russian-vaccine-behavior

It seems to be a bit more live than it's supposed to be. (The hazard being infection with the vector, it's not going to cause Covid.)

Link does not talk about problems with Sputnik vaccine at all.

you sure?

Antibody Responses in Seropositive Persons after a Single Dose of SARS-CoV-2 mRNA Vaccine
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2101667

Note the semilog scale

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Link does not talk about problems with Sputnik vaccine at all.

Argh! Now what did I do with the link I meant to post?!

Just make sure to apply normal wilderness standards. You can't meet the standards for burying it which means you do it in a bag and take it with you.

unacceptable... thou shall not infringe my god-given INDIVIDUAL freedoms to do what I WANT whenever I WANT! The Bill of rights says I may pursue happiness.. Whatever makes me happy is my right. Whatever makes me unhappy is an infringement of my rights.

Yeah, the idiots don't understand the cooperative use of resources.

Attention covidiots! Your false god T will be on top of Mt. Kilimanjaro for the next 24 hours. No skills are needed, just head up the mountain to be welcomed into his kingdom! Plenty of people have done this, you can to!

(Reality: I would be surprised if any of his followers would make it. The ones in the best shape would die in the attempt, though. The people that have done it are guides who spend enough time at high enough altitude that they are acclimated. It would also be possible for someone in good enough shape who spent enough prep time breathing low-oxygen air--acclimatization is based on the partial pressure of oxygen, not on the air pressure.)