COVID-19 is not going away soon or ever

[polpott]

2 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

That would depend on how much it costs. Front line workers should get it free, but they may require others to pay, depending on country.

Free to everyone in the UK. Astra Zenica have agreed to supply it at cost to all countries whilst the pandemic lasts.

[placnx]

2 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

The actual numbers for the 1918 pandemic are unknown.  There wasn't enough testing and they still don't know enough about the original strain to understand everything.  And that virus is still with us today.

It's generally believed to be tens of millions of deaths. The virus has mutated to less virulence, besides that medical care has improved a lot since then. The 1918 virus has been reconstructed by excavating Eskimo graves where it was frozen.

[placnx]

On 11/5/2020 at 12:48 AM, onebir said:

There is some fairly credible research suggesting that the herd immunity threshold for Covid could be as low as 20% of the population (due to variations in the probability of exposure & susceptibility). As for the US CFR, it's shockingly high for one of the richest countries in the world. But that's the average over the whole period: I'd hope it's come down a lot for recent case (eg because treatment is improving &/ more testing is being done).

 

Antibody data from a very specific group (eg dialysis patients, who presumably have been trying their best to avoid exposure) may not be very representative.

 

(This isn't intended as a justification for a 'let it rip' herd immunity approach, but there's a lack of nuance in the media.)

This research claiming a 20% threshold has been refuted, is no longer worth citing. Consider that an infected person can pass it on when they are not showing symptoms. If anything, a higher immunity threshold will be needed than 50% being suggested by some.

 

It is highly regrettable that the debate has been between shutdown or "let it rip". There is a middle ground.

 

The percent of the population found infected through testing is increasing to a high level in areas in the US which were largely unscathed before the Fall. As you probably know, the US response has been disjointed owing to the lack of a coordinated effort. We are about to have hospitals overwhelmed in more regions than in the Spring, and the inability to care for too many needing hospitalization will result in too many deaths that should have been avoidable. 

[onebir]

3 hours ago, placnx said:

It is highly regrettable that the debate has been between shutdown or "let it rip". There is a middle ground.

There certainly should be. But in many places, implementing some kind of 'middle way' has been hampered by difficulty communicating/lack of public cooperation &/ failure of politicians etc to abide by rules.

 

Right wing commentators also seem to be using the situation to exacerbate distrust in government/civil society. Let's hope they haven't managed totally succeeded by the time it's really needed (eg asteroid heading Earth's way.)

[placnx]

18 hours ago, onebir said:

There certainly should be. But in many places, implementing some kind of 'middle way' has been hampered by difficulty communicating/lack of public cooperation &/ failure of politicians etc to abide by rules.

 

Right wing commentators also seem to be using the situation to exacerbate distrust in government/civil society. Let's hope they haven't managed totally succeeded by the time it's really needed (eg asteroid heading Earth's way.)

Yes, I completely agree as to why the middle way in the US is failing so far. In Montana a hospital with 390 beds is reporting 167% occupancy in their ICU. In a state with low population density there is among the highest rates of infection in the US. Maybe they should go to church by Zoom and wear masks as much as possible. Perhaps in the future Fauci can speak freely, to educate the misinformed.

 

 

[cmarshall]

The only way for the US to control Covid is to impose a national lockdown for eight to twelve weeks. Like China did in Wuhan (eight weeks) and Australia did in Melbourne (seven weeks.)  That is the only method that has been demonstrated to work once the virus has reached exponential growth as it now has in the US where it just went from 100,000 new cases per day to 150,000 new cases per day in a week.

 

But to do a lockdown in the US means that Congress would have to allocate trillions to compensate households, businesses, states, and localities.  Any funding bill has to pass both the House of Representatives and the Senate.  Moscow Mitch will never pass such a funding bill since his goal is for the Biden administration to fail in every respect.  Therefore the US will not control Covid.

[simon43]

[quote]

But to do a lockdown in the US means that Congress would have to allocate trillions to compensate households, businesses, states, and localities.

[/quote]

 

Why?  Everyone is in this together and can't expect free $$$ just for staying at home.  Everyone should tighten their buckles, minimise spending etc.

 

I don't recall Laos throwing money around when we had our lockdown.  Those in poverty were provided with free meals by generous citizens - food is all you need at time of crisis...

[placnx]

3 hours ago, cmarshall said:

The only way for the US to control Covid is to impose a national lockdown for eight to twelve weeks. Like China did in Wuhan (eight weeks) and Australia did in Melbourne (seven weeks.)  That is the only method that has been demonstrated to work once the virus has reached exponential growth as it now has in the US where it just went from 100,000 new cases per day to 150,000 new cases per day in a week.

 

But to do a lockdown in the US means that Congress would have to allocate trillions to compensate households, businesses, states, and localities.  Any funding bill has to pass both the House of Representatives and the Senate.  Moscow Mitch will never pass such a funding bill since his goal is for the Biden administration to fail in every respect.  Therefore the US will not control Covid.

The situation in the US is out of control. There will be deaths that should not have happened, this because ICUs will shortly be overwhelmed. We have to increase the messaging about social distancing and mask wearing. This will mitigate the situation. Some areas might benefit by lockdown, but it's not feasible to apply to the whole country, from and economic or political standpoint.

 

Let's hope that runoff elections in January put Mitch in the Senate minority. There will then be more hope that Covid can be overcome.

[max2u]

On 11/1/2020 at 7:51 PM, thaibeachlovers said:

I'm willing to die if that's what you are getting at. That's no secret as I've said it a few times on TVF. I'd rather die a free man than hiding in my room and wearing a mask everytime I go outside.

 

Sweden rocks.

'thaibeachlovers' --Actually you're willing to be that bipedal vector that brings disease and death to OTHERS--and unlike a malaria mosquito, itself no more than a brainless bloodsucking insect, able to pass along disease while sucking up blood to make countless more of its pestilent presence, in rain pools as small as footprints, or broad as any klong, YOU (likely? ???? ) walk around in the body of a naked ape, a hominid, with no more care for humanity at risk for Covid, than some damnable traitorous sociopath of a U.S. 'ex-President'  .  . .

 

With the greatest number of Covid deaths of all Nations, we 'muricans' recently 86-ed another creature with no more regard for human lives than some bug or  bugged-out doper with a snout full of yaba, and its accompanying delusions of grandeur.

 

Donald T aimed to be a king. failed. Hey, but YOU can get greater traction than 'T' for your deviant ways by touting trumpian ambitions, in the LOS, ---and even be rewarded with LONG term room and board , if you're a lucky f****r--which is what other, *actual* humans would be if YOU are NOT out in the soi, all mask-less, full of yourself on a soused walkabout. Chok dee, eh? ????

[Dart12]

On 11/12/2020 at 5:27 PM, polpott said:

Free to everyone in the UK. Astra Zenica have agreed to supply it at cost to all countries whilst the pandemic lasts.

they used to actually PAY guinea pigs.  

Better marketing now a days I guess?

[max2u]

5 minutes ago, Dart12 said:

they used to actually PAY guinea pigs.  

Better marketing now a days I guess?

False equivalency or trollery..or both.

 

[max2u]

On 11/4/2020 at 12:48 PM, onebir said:

There is some fairly credible research suggesting that the herd immunity threshold for Covid could be as low as 20% of the population (due to variations in the probability of exposure & susceptibility). As for the US CFR, it's shockingly high for one of the richest countries in the world. But that's the average over the whole period: I'd hope it's come down a lot for recent case (eg because treatment is improving &/ more testing is being done).

 

Antibody data from a very specific group (eg dialysis patients, who presumably have been trying their best to avoid exposure) may not be very representative.

 

(This isn't intended as a justification for a 'let it rip' herd immunity approach, but there's a lack of nuance in the media.)

 

Depends on what media.

[Dart12]

14 minutes ago, max2u said:

False equivalency or trollery..or both.

 

not at all.  This is been fast tracked.  This was "emergency" green lighted, and the pharmaceutical companies get a free pass as they cannot be held legally responsible for any conditions that arise.

It is experimental and lacks long-term safety data, as is the case with the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines against COVID-19. The FDA authorized the two vaccines for widespread emergency use based on just two months of clinical data.

https://www.fda.gov/drugs/types-applications/investigational-new-drug-ind-application#Introduction

Are you going to argue against it getting 'emergency use' ok without the typical protocol required of vaccines? 
 

[max2u]

15 minutes ago, Dart12 said:

not at all.  This is been fast tracked.  This was "emergency" green lighted, and the pharmaceutical companies get a free pass as they cannot be held legally responsible for any conditions that arise.

It is experimental and lacks long-term safety data, as is the case with the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines against COVID-19. The FDA authorized the two vaccines for widespread emergency use based on just two months of clinical data.

https://www.fda.gov/drugs/types-applications/investigational-new-drug-ind-application#Introduction

Are you going to argue against it getting 'emergency use' ok without the typical protocol required of vaccines? 
 

I'm at a loss how you might think I'd argue against ANY usage, as side effects in all clinical trials have been to a great extent modest, at worse (i.e., some fevers) or mild (injection site pain, swelling) and only very *rarely* needing epinephrine and recommendation of holding off the 2nd injection)

[max2u]

20 minutes ago, max2u said:

 

 

As the virus is decidedly lethal for immuno-copromised and other major organ-compromised individuals, and ICU facilities are limited even in wealthy metropolitan hubs, and the incidence of 'a-shock'  for the Moderna we received has been 2.5 cases per *million* injections, well, 'more is more better ????

 

 

Edited March 1, 2021 by max2u
whoops

[Jeffr2]

1 hour ago, Dart12 said:

not at all.  This is been fast tracked.  This was "emergency" green lighted, and the pharmaceutical companies get a free pass as they cannot be held legally responsible for any conditions that arise.

It is experimental and lacks long-term safety data, as is the case with the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines against COVID-19. The FDA authorized the two vaccines for widespread emergency use based on just two months of clinical data.

https://www.fda.gov/drugs/types-applications/investigational-new-drug-ind-application#Introduction

Are you going to argue against it getting 'emergency use' ok without the typical protocol required of vaccines? 
 

Understood. But we're in the middle of the worst pandemic in a century. Drastic times require drastic actions. And so far, no problems. So far....

[VBF]

2 hours ago, Dart12 said:

not at all.  This is been fast tracked.  This was "emergency" green lighted, and the pharmaceutical companies get a free pass as they cannot be held legally responsible for any conditions that arise.

It is experimental and lacks long-term safety data, as is the case with the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines against COVID-19. The FDA authorized the two vaccines for widespread emergency use based on just two months of clinical data.

https://www.fda.gov/drugs/types-applications/investigational-new-drug-ind-application#Introduction

Are you going to argue against it getting 'emergency use' ok without the typical protocol required of vaccines? 
 

Bear in mind that most vaccines take so long to test (years sometimes) due to the administrative work usually required, and getting meetings organised.

This wasn't the case with the Covid vaxxes because of the seriousness - showing what can be done if people really want to!

 

Watch BBC iPlayer - Panorama - The Race for a Vaccine  or read Less than a year to develop a COVID vaccine – here's why you shouldn't be alarmed (theconversation.com)

[Jeffr2]

21 minutes ago, VBF said:

Bear in mind that most vaccines take so long to test (years sometimes) due to the administrative work usually required, and getting meetings organised.

This wasn't the case with the Covid vaxxes because of the seriousness - showing what can be done if people really want to!

 

Watch BBC iPlayer - Panorama - The Race for a Vaccine  or read Less than a year to develop a COVID vaccine – here's why you shouldn't be alarmed (theconversation.com)

Agreed. But with that being said, they've got a lot of experience creating jabs similar to this.

[VBF]

24 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Agreed. But with that being said, they've got a lot of experience creating jabs similar to this.

Indeed - what was learned during SARS and MERS research is being applied to Covid....what had been learned from Covid will be applied to the next "nasty" and so on.

Not only the experts' knowledge, but the technology is advancing at a rate hitherto unknown.

Aren't we lucky to be living in the 21st century? 

 

UPDATE - Just seen this https://theconversation.com/covid-19-has-sparked-new-relationships-between-academia-and-policymakers-we-must-maintain-them-156143

Edited March 1, 2021 by VBF

[Jeffr2]

11 minutes ago, VBF said:

Indeed - what was learned during SARS and MERS research is being applied to Covid....what had been learned from Covid will be applied to the next "nasty" and so on.

Not only the experts' knowledge, but the technology is advancing at a rate hitherto unknown.

Aren't we lucky to be living in the 21st century? 

I'm a bit nervous with this mRNA jab. Relatively new!

[VBF]

9 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

I'm a bit nervous with this mRNA jab. Relatively new!

I get that and in an ideal world we wouldn't be seeing it yet.

 

These articles are encouraging

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/different-vaccines/mrna.html

 

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/89998

 

I got the Oxford-AstraZeneca which is what my link above discusses - hopefully there aren't the worries associated with that, but on balance, i still see taking it as a good decision.

Edited March 1, 2021 by VBF

[GroveHillWanderer]

1 hour ago, Jeffr2 said:

I'm a bit nervous with this mRNA jab. Relatively new!

Depends how you look at it. The mRNA technology has been around for decades (and was being constantly improved on and refined during that time).

 

It's true that this is the first time it's been approved for use as a vaccine for a viral disease but it's been used as a cancer treatment for years and if you look at the way it works (the article on the post above explains it well, as do others) and the ingredients it uses (no adjuvants or preservatives for instance) it should if anything, be safer than older-style, more "traditional" vaccines.

Edited March 1, 2021 by GroveHillWanderer

[placnx]

2 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

I'm a bit nervous with this mRNA jab. Relatively new!

Regarding mRNA vaccines with a lipid envelope, there's an advantage over the viral vector vaccines: Sputnik, Sinovac, Oxford/AstraZeneca. With these, if the immune system encounters a new vaccine carried by the same vector virus as a previous vaccination, the new vaccination may be the subject of an immune response that renders the vaccination ineffective. Maybe the Oxford will be more successful since the vector virus affects chimpanzees, not humans, and apparently has not been used previously for vaccines.

[Freeduhdum]

As this  SARS 2 "virus" is being promulgated, why would we ever think that it would ever go away? Did measles go away? Has influenza gone away? Supposedly polio went away, but kids in Africa continue to be stricken. As the "experts" currently define this maladia... it's not EVER going away. 

[placnx]

3 minutes ago, Freeduhdum said:

As this  SARS 2 "virus" is being promulgated, why would we ever think that it would ever go away? Did measles go away? Has influenza gone away? Supposedly polio went away, but kids in Africa continue to be stricken. As the "experts" currently define this maladia... it's not EVER going away. 

If we can eventually vaccinate around 80% of the world's population, and provide boosters to those whose jabs don't protect from new variants, then there's a reasonable chance of containing this virus.

 

Polio is nearly eliminated except in Pakistan and Afghanistan, where there is a lack of trust. 

[Freeduhdum]

3 minutes ago, placnx said:

If we can eventually vaccinate around 80% of the world's population, and provide boosters to those whose jabs don't protect from new variants, then there's a reasonable chance of containing this virus. Annual flu shots have not eradicated influenza A or B, my point stands. 

 

Polio is nearly eliminated except in Pakistan and Afghanistan, where there is a lack of trust. 

Respectfully, Using Measles as just one example,  has been vaccinated well beyond 80% and it still has outbreaks. Influenza A and B have an annual attempt at mitigation... yet it still persists... My point stands. 

Edited March 1, 2021 by Freeduhdum
added content for clarity.

[placeholder]

7 minutes ago, Freeduhdum said:

Respectfully, Using Measles as just one example,  has been vaccinated well beyond 80% and it still has outbreaks. Influenza A and B have an annual attempt at mitigation... yet it still persists... My point stands. 

Measles was pretty much eliminated from the USA until anti-vaxxer hysteria convinced some misguided parents not to vaccinate their kids. Measles also has an R(0) value of about 18. That means it's about 6 times as contagious as Covid.

The influenza vaccines is less effective than most Covid vaccines,  against a person coming down with the flu. But even though the vaccination doesn't stop you from getting the flu, like all the Covid vaccines, it makes the symptoms it a lot milder.

[Jeffr2]

Thanks for the replies!  I'm looking forward to getting a jab here in Thailand perhaps around June. Probably through a private hospital and probably at a high price.

[Jeffr2]

1 hour ago, Freeduhdum said:

As this  SARS 2 "virus" is being promulgated, why would we ever think that it would ever go away? Did measles go away? Has influenza gone away? Supposedly polio went away, but kids in Africa continue to be stricken. As the "experts" currently define this maladia... it's not EVER going away. 

CV19 won't go away in our life time. Just like the Spanish flu is still with us today.

[GroveHillWanderer]

16 hours ago, Freeduhdum said:

As this  SARS 2 "virus" is being promulgated, why would we ever think that it would ever go away? Did measles go away? Has influenza gone away? Supposedly polio went away, but kids in Africa continue to be stricken. As the "experts" currently define this maladia... it's not EVER going away. 

Measles is not a good analogy for CoVID-19. It has been around for over a millennium (probably longer) and has been able to spread unfettered around the world for all but a tiny fraction of that time, before a vaccine became available.

 

Now, if when the very first outbreak of measles in human history occurred, we had been able to develop multiple vaccines with over 90% efficacy while less than 10% of the world's population had been infected - and if measles was about ten times less infectious than it actually is, then we might just possibly have had a chance to eliminate it before it became fully endemic everywhere.

 

Neither of those things is true, however.

 

Flu is also not a good point of comparison. There is as yet (and variants notwithstanding) still really only one SARS-CoV-2 virus - and it can still be effectively combatted by a single set of vaccines all designed to target the same virus.

 

Flu on the other hand, is divided into two main (and quite distinct) families, each with their own sub-varieties, with each requiring their own separately-developed vaccines.

 

Every year, the scientists make a guess as to which 3 or 4 strains (from among the dozens of different kinds) of flu will be in circulation and formulate a trivalent or quadrivalent vaccine to combat just those varieties.

 

If others of the many, many different types of flu are also in circulation, they obviously will not be reached by that year's flu vaccine. There are also different flu vaccines each year for the northern and southern hemispheres with again, each one designed to combat a different set of flu strains.

 

So neither measles nor flu is really comparable to this current pandemic - there are just too many fundamental differences.

Edited March 2, 2021 by GroveHillWanderer