CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 13)

CV19 - Cure worse than the disease? (Vol 13)

TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED
Author
Discussion

Andy888

624 posts

162 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
Carl_Manchester said:
Andy888 said:
grumbledoak said:
Andy888 said:
Still trying to quantify how much better off I would be if I was vaccinated.
...

So am I right in thinking that the vaccination means a reduction in the likelihood of hospitalisation by a mere 0.26% for the under 50s ?
That doesn't seem unlikely. The absolute risk reductions are quite small because the absolute risks are not that great, e.g.
"Pfizer/BioNTech - relative risk reduction, 95.1%; absolute risk reduction, 0.7%"

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC79965...
Yeah, I remember that being discussed in here a while ago when the press were latching on the 95% headline and we were saying "whoa hold on", but that was based on trial data. Be nice if we could prove it right with actual data.
If you go back in the thread, it was, via Israeli heath service data. The vaccines are approx 93% effective or, as was posted approx 9x less likely to be seriously ill or, die.

Unfortunately this is what happens when the anti-science crew keep steam-rolling the thread with nonsense, the good stuff gets lost.
Except Israel are now saying Pfizer is supposedly only 39% effective! Ah sure!

APontus

1,935 posts

4 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
Andy888 said:
Except Israel are now saying Pfizer is supposedly only 39% effective! Ah sure!
Different regions may see different efficacy at different times depending on the local strains' ability to overcome the vaccines.

Boringvolvodriver

4,225 posts

12 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
APontus said:
Andy888 said:
Except Israel are now saying Pfizer is supposedly only 39% effective! Ah sure!
Different regions may see different efficacy at different times depending on the local strains' ability to overcome the vaccines.
Have a look at this and let me know what it means because I am confused!

https://www.jpost.com/%20israel-pfizer-news/is-isr...


cymatty

478 posts

39 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
APontus said:
Different regions may see different efficacy at different times depending on the local strains' ability to overcome the vaccines.
The truth seems close to that.

https://mobile.twitter.com/dvir_a/status/142005912...


APontus

1,935 posts

4 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
cymatty said:
Reading that thread, it seems eerily close to what Geert Vanden Bossche was predicting back in May. With mass vaccination the virus becomes more infectious and is spread asymptomatically amongst the vaccinated. This then begins to affect the unvaccinated who are more likely to become infected and suffer illness (the Twitter thread asks why it switched to the unvaccinated- this may be why). His prediction is then that the virus will further mutate and become vaccine resistant, at which point the vaccinated will be most at risk (as they will be reliant on the now ineffective vaccine antibodies, whilst the unvaccinated will be able to create their own ones that are specific to the new strain).

Scary stuff.

Andy888

624 posts

162 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
Ahahaha, that's brilliant.

I think I have answered my own question now anyway. Will be grand.

chrisgtx

1,055 posts

179 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
APontus said:
cymatty said:
Reading that thread, it seems eerily close to what Geert Vanden Bossche was predicting back in May. With mass vaccination the virus becomes more infectious and is spread asymptomatically amongst the vaccinated. This then begins to affect the unvaccinated who are more likely to become infected and suffer illness (the Twitter thread asks why it switched to the unvaccinated- this may be why). His prediction is then that the virus will further mutate and become vaccine resistant, at which point the vaccinated will be most at risk (as they will be reliant on the now ineffective vaccine antibodies, whilst the unvaccinated will be able to create their own ones that are specific to the new strain).

Scary stuff.
Christ on a bike!, if that comes true we are royally screwed.

APontus

1,935 posts

4 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
chrisgtx said:
Christ on a bike!, if that comes true we are royally screwed.
I'm not qualified to know who is likely right or wrong. Nothing is a certainty.

isaldiri

12,970 posts

137 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
APontus said:
Reading that thread, it seems eerily close to what Geert Vanden Bossche was predicting back in May. With mass vaccination the virus becomes more infectious and is spread asymptomatically amongst the vaccinated. This then begins to affect the unvaccinated who are more likely to become infected and suffer illness (the Twitter thread asks why it switched to the unvaccinated- this may be why). His prediction is then that the virus will further mutate and become vaccine resistant, at which point the vaccinated will be most at risk (as they will be reliant on the now ineffective vaccine antibodies, whilst the unvaccinated will be able to create their own ones that are specific to the new strain).

Scary stuff.
No it bloody well doesn't for goodness sake. your continued insistence in 'vaccine resistant mutants' etc is so far utterly irrational and pointlessly scaremongering.

The PHE and Israel data is very clear on this - efficacy vs severe illness and death remains extremely high. A lot of various studies irrespective of variant (and including the SA variant thought to be the most immune escape variant) has clearly shown t cell and neutralising antibodies being effective such that said severe illness is very considerably reduced. That is ultimately the medical end point that should be the measure of success rather than symptomatic illness.

Boringvolvodriver

4,225 posts

12 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
APontus said:
chrisgtx said:
Christ on a bike!, if that comes true we are royally screwed.
I'm not qualified to know who is likely right or wrong. Nothing is a certainty.
The fact that they use the word “think” is a concern. I accept that it is a changing situation but if they don’t know, then they should say so.

The article I linked from the Jerusalem Post was a typical example.

Venturist

3,421 posts

164 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
APontus said:
Reading that thread, it seems eerily close to what Geert Vanden Bossche was predicting back in May. With mass vaccination the virus becomes more infectious and is spread asymptomatically amongst the vaccinated. This then begins to affect the unvaccinated who are more likely to become infected and suffer illness (the Twitter thread asks why it switched to the unvaccinated- this may be why). His prediction is then that the virus will further mutate and become vaccine resistant, at which point the vaccinated will be most at risk (as they will be reliant on the now ineffective vaccine antibodies, whilst the unvaccinated will be able to create their own ones that are specific to the new strain).

Scary stuff.
I’ve heard this argument before and where I get lost is: in the case of a variant that dodges the vaccine, why a vaccinated person would be any worse off than an unvaccinated person?

Assuming for the sake of simplicity that neither person has encountered the wild virus beforehand, both people’s immune systems are starting from a blank sheet. The fact that Mr. Vaxxer’s immune system holds a memory for antibodies targeted at a different variant than the one he’s facing is irrelevant. His body holds memory for antibodies for thousands of types of viruses he’s not encountering at the present moment, what’s one more?

isaldiri

12,970 posts

137 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
Boringvolvodriver said:
The fact that they use the word “think” is a concern. I accept that it is a changing situation but if they don’t know, then they should say so.

The article I linked from the Jerusalem Post was a typical example.
Er... isn't the use of the word 'think' sufficient to show that they are admitting they don't know but in their judgement it's the best guess for the moment? Damning people for not being certain about something seems a little odd I'd have thought especially given it's been various people insisting that they were actually certain about various things which were far from certain that's caused all manner of trouble with the way the pandemic response has been shaped by the various authorities.....

Venturist said:
I’ve heard this argument before and where I get lost is: in the case of a variant that dodges the vaccine, why a vaccinated person would be any worse off than an unvaccinated person?
Antibody dependent enhancement was initially thought to be a possibility (given some of the ferret research done for sars1).

But that as far as sars-cov2 is concerned has been repeatedly shown not to be an issue. It's just not at the moment anyway a relevant worry worth bothering about.


Edited by isaldiri on Wednesday 28th July 23:33

APontus

1,935 posts

4 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
isaldiri said:
No it bloody well doesn't for goodness sake. your continued insistence in 'vaccine resistant mutants' etc is so far utterly irrational and pointlessly scaremongering.

The PHE and Israel data is very clear on this - efficacy vs severe illness and death remains extremely high. A lot of various studies irrespective of variant (and including the SA variant thought to be the most immune escape variant) has clearly shown t cell and neutralising antibodies being effective such that said severe illness is very considerably reduced. That is ultimately the medical end point that should be the measure of success rather than symptomatic illness.
Forgive me, I'm paraphrasing people I believe are more qualified than you or I who have described in reasonable detail the process.

The end point appears to be a virus that is vaccine resistant. If those people are wrong, and we should hope they are, then so be it.

Boringvolvodriver

4,225 posts

12 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
isaldiri said:
Boringvolvodriver said:
The fact that they use the word “think” is a concern. I accept that it is a changing situation but if they don’t know, then they should say so.

The article I linked from the Jerusalem Post was a typical example.
Er... isn't the use of the word 'think' sufficient to show that they are admitting they don't know but in their judgement it's the best guess for the moment? Damning people for not being certain about something seems a little odd I'd have thought especially given it's been various people insisting that they were actually certain about various things which were far from certain that's caused all manner of trouble with the way the pandemic response has been shaped by the various authorities.....

Venturist said:
I’ve heard this argument before and where I get lost is: in the case of a variant that dodges the vaccine, why a vaccinated person would be any worse off than an unvaccinated person?
Antibody dependent enhancement was initially thought to be a possibility (given some of the ferret research done for sars1).

But that as far as sars-cov2 is concerned has been repeatedly shown not to be an issue. It's just not at the moment anyway a relevant worry worth bothering about.


Edited by isaldiri on Wednesday 28th July 23:33
Fair point - I guess I would prefer it if some of the experts were perhaps a bit more open about not fully knowing the situation.

When I was a lad way back, one of my managers (very old school) used to have a right go at anyone who, when asked a question, would reply with “I think…..”! His expletive ridden reply was something along the lines of “ if you don’t know, just tell me you don’t know and go and find out”!





bodhi

6,748 posts

198 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
Venturist said:
I’ve heard this argument before and where I get lost is: in the case of a variant that dodges the vaccine, why a vaccinated person would be any worse off than an unvaccinated person?

Assuming for the sake of simplicity that neither person has encountered the wild virus beforehand, both people’s immune systems are starting from a blank sheet. The fact that Mr. Vaxxer’s immune system holds a memory for antibodies targeted at a different variant than the one he’s facing is irrelevant. His body holds memory for antibodies for thousands of types of viruses he’s not encountering at the present moment, what’s one more?
In answer to your first question they aren't, in fact assuming neither have ever contracted Covid before, the vaccinated person will still be better off as their immune system will in some way know how to deal with it, for the unvaccinated it will be all new. The only way the scales would be tipped is if the unvaccinated person and already had Covid, as it's looking pretty clear now by the low number of reinfections everywhere natural immunity is pretty robust.

Also, the chances of a variant appearing that can evade the vaccines is vanishingly small - there was a great interview with Sarah Gilbert who headed up the Oxford team, and she said that if SARS 2 mutated enough to evade the protection given by the vaccines, then it would cease to function as a virus.

It would effectively have to be a new strain rather than a variant from what I can tell. Unless Fauci has been pissing about in his lab again I would say SARS 2 mutating into a new strain would, in the context of previous Coronaviruses, be.. unprecedented..

APontus

1,935 posts

4 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
isaldiri said:
Antibody dependent enhancement was initially thought to be a possibility (given some of the ferret research done for sars1).

But that as far as sars-cov2 is concerned has been repeatedly shown not to be an issue. It's just not at the moment anyway a relevant worry worth bothering about.
Malone has responded today, on the news that titres are *reportedly* higher in Pfizer vaccinated than unvaccinated, suggesting this may be the early evidence of ADE.

Interestingly, the Wall Street Journal has today published an opinion piece questioning the FDA's blocking of Ivermectin. Possibly the first mainstream media outlet to even discuss it openly.

I wonder if the worm is turning?

isaldiri

12,970 posts

137 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
APontus said:
isaldiri said:
No it bloody well doesn't for goodness sake. your continued insistence in 'vaccine resistant mutants' etc is so far utterly irrational and pointlessly scaremongering.

The PHE and Israel data is very clear on this - efficacy vs severe illness and death remains extremely high. A lot of various studies irrespective of variant (and including the SA variant thought to be the most immune escape variant) has clearly shown t cell and neutralising antibodies being effective such that said severe illness is very considerably reduced. That is ultimately the medical end point that should be the measure of success rather than symptomatic illness.
Forgive me, I'm paraphrasing people I believe are more qualified than you or I who have described in reasonable detail the process.

The end point appears to be a virus that is vaccine resistant. If those people are wrong, and we should hope they are, then so be it.
Well, pick your 'expert' who says whatever you want to believe and constantly repeat it if you like. Doesn't make it any more plausible or likely to be right.

There's been literally hundreds of thousands of medical papers being written/published and equally heaps of them even being supposedly peer reviewed. lots of them have been pretty bloody abysmal. Vanden Bossche had better be more qualified by you or me to comment but equally given some of the supposed 'expert' stuff published or cited on covid so far, until or unless it's also been raised as an issue by at least a few other reasonably sensible/reliable covid medical commentators who don't have an obvious axe or agenda to grind, it'll go into the 'possible but as yet unproven' pile of other covid 'expert' opinions.

APontus

1,935 posts

4 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
bodhi said:
In answer to your first question they aren't, in fact assuming neither have ever contracted Covid before, the vaccinated person will still be better off as their immune system will in some way know how to deal with it, for the unvaccinated it will be all new. The only way the scales would be tipped is if the unvaccinated person and already had Covid, as it's looking pretty clear now by the low number of reinfections everywhere natural immunity is pretty robust.

Also, the chances of a variant appearing that can evade the vaccines is vanishingly small - there was a great interview with Sarah Gilbert who headed up the Oxford team, and she said that if SARS 2 mutated enough to evade the protection given by the vaccines, then it would cease to function as a virus.

It would effectively have to be a new strain rather than a variant from what I can tell. Unless Fauci has been pissing about in his lab again I would say SARS 2 mutating into a new strain would, in the context of previous Coronaviruses, be.. unprecedented..
The vaccinated would possibly fare worse than the unvaccinated due to antigenic sin. They would apparently be reliant on the vaccine spike antibody, which would be ineffective against the more infectious virus and suppress the immune system's ability to create a new, more relevant one of its own. Unvaccinated people wouldn't have the vaccine spike antibody, so could develop one of their own that we relevant.

APontus

1,935 posts

4 months

Wednesday 28th July
quotequote all
isaldiri said:
Well, pick your 'expert' who says whatever you want to believe and constantly repeat it if you like. Doesn't make it any more plausible or likely to be right.

There's been literally hundreds of thousands of medical papers being written/published and equally heaps of them even being supposedly peer reviewed. lots of them have been pretty bloody abysmal. Vanden Bossche had better be more qualified by you or me to comment but equally given some of the supposed 'expert' stuff published or cited on covid so far, until or unless it's also been raised as an issue by at least a few other reasonably sensible/reliable covid medical commentators who don't have an obvious axe or agenda to grind, it'll go into the 'possible but as yet unproven' pile of other covid 'expert' opinions.
I think that's fair comment all round.

I'm trying very hard to avoid confirmation bias and read opinions with an open mind. We've a few months on from the early days of vaccine delivery, so the predictions made by some can begin to be tested.

At present what's happening in Israel now seem similar to what Vanden Bossche predicted back in May (take a look through the FAQ here
( https://www.geertvandenbossche.org/faq ). Equally Malone's worries appear to have the beginnings of legs with the news coming out of the States.

Venturist

3,421 posts

164 months

Thursday 29th July
quotequote all
APontus said:
The vaccinated would possibly fare worse than the unvaccinated due to antigenic sin. They would apparently be reliant on the vaccine spike antibody, which would be ineffective against the more infectious virus and suppress the immune system's ability to create a new, more relevant one of its own. Unvaccinated people wouldn't have the vaccine spike antibody, so could develop one of their own that we relevant.
Ah “original antigenic sin”, that’s the term I was looking for. Thank you!
TOPIC CLOSED
TOPIC CLOSED