Covid-19 miscellany

[Elixir]

(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.)

My business partner summited Kili about 5 years ago at age 60. Took 7 days (and lots of meds) and he got a little sick from the altitude, even though he was acclimated to years of living here at 7-8000 feet. For a walk-up, "non-technical climb", it's a bitch.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

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

I don't know, but I took it as a reference to the Brazilian decision.
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireS...ts-sputnik-vaccine-russia-cries-foul-77349025
https://arstechnica.com/science/202...says-its-tainted-with-replicating-cold-virus/

 

[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.

And your guess was right it seems: there is evidence that previous immunity to the adenoviruses makes a vaccine based on them less effective.

https://arstechnica.com/science/202...says-its-tainted-with-replicating-cold-virus/

 

[Loren Pechtel]

(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.)

My business partner summited Kili about 5 years ago at age 60. Took 7 days (and lots of meds) and he got a little sick from the altitude, even though he was acclimated to years of living here at 7-8000 feet. For a walk-up, "non-technical climb", it's a bitch.

I tried it 40 years ago--got stopped by ice + sun. Global warming has changed things enough that I would have succeeded. 5-day route, no meds. I fully agree it's a bitch, but it's in the realm I would like another try at--but not on the 5-day route! For a copper-plated basically walk-up bitch: Aconcagua. That one would require a hell of a lot of training before I would even consider it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

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

I don't know, but I took it as a reference to the Brazilian decision.
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireS...ts-sputnik-vaccine-russia-cries-foul-77349025
https://arstechnica.com/science/202...says-its-tainted-with-replicating-cold-virus/

Found it again:

https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/04/28/brazil-rejects-the-gamaleya-vaccine

 

[Toni]

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

I don't know, but I took it as a reference to the Brazilian decision.
https://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireS...ts-sputnik-vaccine-russia-cries-foul-77349025
https://arstechnica.com/science/202...says-its-tainted-with-replicating-cold-virus/

Found it again:

https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2021/04/28/brazil-rejects-the-gamaleya-vaccine

Thanks. Interesting.

 

[Trausti]

 

[barbos]

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?

Yes, I am 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


View attachment 33256

First this NEW link does not talk about sputnik, it talks about pfizer/moderna vaccines. Second, it does not talk about problems with these vaccines.

 

[lpetrich]

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.

Do they walk across streets without checking if there are any cars headed their way because they don't want to live in fear of being hit by a car? Do they leave their homes unlocked because they don't want to live in fear of burglary? Do they leave their car keys in their car ignitions because they don't want to live in fear of car theft? ...

But on a positive note,

Rep. Pramila Jayapal on Twitter: "Being vaccinated means you can finally hug your friends. Great to see you @SenSanders! (pic link)" / Twitter
Showing PJ and Bernie Sanders hugging in a Congress chamber.

 

[lpetrich]

Ammon Bundy won't wear mask in court so judge has him arrested for failure to appear - CNN

Ammon Bundy, who was to go on trial after being charged with trespassing in the Idaho Statehouse last year, was arrested Monday after he refused to wear a mask in court.

According to Ada County Sheriff spokesperson Patrick Orr, the Idaho Supreme Court has a mask mandate for anyone entering a courthouse, but when Bundy showed up Monday morning for the first day of his jury trial he wouldn't wear one and was denied entry.

Magistrate Judge David Manweiler then issued a warrant for failure to appear, a misdemeanor.

Bundy was arrested and taken to the Ada County Jail where he is being held on $10,000 bond, Orr said.

Nice to see that prick getting cut down a notch.

Bundy faces misdemeanor charges of trespassing and resisting arrest linked to the August incident at the Idaho Statehouse. He was arrested for refusing to leave the Capitol in Boise during a special session of the legislature.

"Troopers were forced to physically remove Bundy from the Senate Gallery," police said at the time.

Back in 2016, he and some like-minded people took over some Federal land in a wildlife refuge in Oregon. Their armed takeover lasted 41 days.

Earlier, in 2014, his father Cliven had an armed showdown with Federal agents over grazing rights for his cattle.

 

[TSwizzle]

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).

You actually can’t so it’s a moo point.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

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).

You actually can’t so it’s a moo point.

I already did as I explained, but even assuming that you are correct and that I can't, it is not a moot point because it raises a significant issue involving your position on the matter, specifically involving what you would do if I showed "actual proof or evidence that the risk of catching/spreading the virus is significant" indoors (more details in my previous reply to you).

 

[Loren Pechtel]

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?

I posted the wrong link. What I posted was talking about how Russia is responding to the situation rather than the link I meant to post talking about the problems.

 

[repoman]

you sure?

Yes, I am 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


View attachment 33256

First this NEW link does not talk about sputnik, it talks about pfizer/moderna vaccines. Second, it does not talk about problems with these vaccines.

I was replying to THIS statement :

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

You see that one shot of vaccine to seropositive people gives more antibodies than two shots to seronegative people. While also giving a lot more symptoms to the seropositive people. But even if you are of the mindset that negative symptoms means the immune is working, then this is even more evidence that the parroted assertion from you is tenuous.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Reaching ‘Herd Immunity’ Is Unlikely in the U.S., Experts Now Believe

Well it looks like the idiots have won.

 

[southernhybrid]

It's doubtful that herd immunity will ever be reached in the US.

This has been all over the news this morning, but for those who haven't had a chance to see or read the news, here's the article that describes the problem.


https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/03/health/covid-herd-immunity-vaccine.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage

Early in the pandemic, when vaccines for the coronavirus were still just a glimmer on the horizon, the term “herd immunity” came to signify the endgame: the point when enough Americans would be protected from the virus so we could be rid of the pathogen and reclaim our lives.

Now, more than half of adults in the United States have been inoculated with at least one dose of a vaccine. But daily vaccination rates are slipping, and there is widespread consensus among scientists and public health experts that the herd immunity threshold is not attainable — at least not in the foreseeable future, and perhaps not ever.

Instead, they are coming to the conclusion that rather than making a long-promised exit, the virus will most likely become a manageable threat that will continue to circulate in the United States for years to come, still causing hospitalizations and deaths but in much smaller numbers.

The primary problem is that far too many people are refusing to be vaccinated.

“The virus is unlikely to go away,” said Rustom Antia, an evolutionary biologist at Emory University in Atlanta. “But we want to do all we can to check that it’s likely to become a mild infection.”

The shift in outlook presents a new challenge for public health authorities. The drive for herd immunity — by the summer, some experts once thought possible — captured the imagination of large segments of the public. To say the goal will not be attained adds another “why bother” to the list of reasons that vaccine skeptics use to avoid being inoculated.

Yet vaccinations remain the key to transforming the virus into a controllable threat, experts said.

But as vaccines were developed and distribution ramped up through the winter and into the spring, estimates of the threshold began to rise. That is because the initial calculations were based on the contagiousness of the original version of the virus. The predominant variant now circulating in the United States, called B.1.1.7 and first identified in Britain, is about 60 percent more transmissible.

As a result, experts now calculate the herd immunity threshold to be at least 80 percent. If even more contagious variants develop, or if scientists find that immunized people can still transmit the virus, the calculation will have to be revised upward again.

Polls show that about 30 percent of the U.S. population is still reluctant to be vaccinated. That number is expected to improve but probably not enough. “It is theoretically possible that we could get to about 90 percent vaccination coverage, but not super likely, I would say,” said Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.

.

If the herd immunity threshold is not attainable, what matters most is the rate of hospitalizations and deaths after pandemic restrictions are relaxed, experts believe.

By focusing on vaccinating the most vulnerable, the United States has already brought those numbers down sharply. If the vaccination levels of that group continue to rise, the expectation is that over time the coronavirus may become seasonal, like the flu, and affect mostly the young and healthy.

“What we want to do at the very least is get to a point where we have just really sporadic little flare-ups,” said Carl Bergstrom, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Washington in Seattle. “That would be a very sensible target in this country where we have an excellent vaccine and the ability to deliver it.”

Over the long term — a generation or two — the goal is to transition the new coronavirus to become more like its cousins that cause common colds. That would mean the first infection is early in childhood, and subsequent infections are mild because of partial protection, even if immunity wanes.

Though children spread the virus less efficiently than adults do, the experts all agreed that vaccinating children would also be important for keeping the number of Covid cases low. In the long term, the public health system will also need to account for babies, and for children and adults who age into a group with higher risk.

Unnerving scenarios remain on the path to this long-term vision.

Over time, if not enough people are protected, highly contagious variants may develop that can break through vaccine protection, land people in the hospital and put them at risk of death.

“That’s the nightmare scenario,” said Jeffrey Shaman, an epidemiologist at Columbia University.

How frequent and how severe those breakthrough infections are have the potential to determine whether the United States can keep hospitalizations and deaths low or if the country will find itself in a “mad scramble” every couple of years, he said.

So, at least primarily related to the large number of people who refuse to be vaccinated as well as the development of mutant strains that may be more contagious means that we may likely have this virus around for a long time to come. The article goes into a lot more detail, but if you aren't a NYT subscriber, I'm sure you can find similar information somewhere else.

 

[southernhybrid]

I just saw that Don and I posted the same thing at nearly the same time.

 

[Ruth Harris]

Well I hope this makes all those anti-vaxxers/covidiots/Qanoners happy. They have destroyed our chance to return to normalcy anytime in the near future by spreading their conspiracy theories about the vaccine.

This makes me so angry I could spit nails. We had a chance to virtually eliminate this miserable disease and their complete lack of common sense has made that impossible. I live in a test bed for the people who are the source of the issue; my county just now hit 20% of the population having gotten their FIRST vaccine. The numbers for completed vaccination are about 15%. And it has nothing to do with vaccine supply; there are appointments/vaccine clinics freely available across the county. These people are petri dishes for any variant that might develop.

Ruth

 

[TSwizzle]

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).

You actually can’t so it’s a moo point.

I already did as I explained, but even assuming that you are correct and that I can't, it is not a moot point because it raises a significant issue involving your position on the matter, specifically involving what you would do if I showed "actual proof or evidence that the risk of catching/spreading the virus is significant" indoors (more details in my previous reply to you).

 

[repoman]

100% coverage of medical bills/lost income incurred from the very rare vaccine side effects would go a long way to obliterating vaccine hesitancy.

Even if there is a, who knows, 10,000 or 100,000x greater chance of medical bills from even contacting covid when unvaccinated than from a vaccine.

Being vaccinated means there is a 100% chance of having a one in million shot of getting fucked up from it. This makes no sense statistically, but in human nature it does.