COVID Vaccine Thread, the Sequel | Page 28 | The Boneyard

COVID Vaccine Thread, the Sequel

Status
Not open for further replies.
LOL

#1 - Homework assignment: Seek out REPUTABLE scientific research that unequivically & irrefutably shows that that SARS-CoV-2 is a man made virus. Do not, I repeat, DO NOT come back to the 'yard until you find and produce this evidence. Tweets from twitterbots and shared rambling conspiracy posts from Facebook do not count as reputable scientific research.

#2 - Every time a virus or bacteria mutates, it DOES NOT become stronger. Viruses and bacteria mutate literally millions of times over the course of their "life" and replication cycles. Nearly all mutations are harmful to them...and thus result in non-functional viruses/bacteria. Occasionally one happens that confers a survival advantage.

#3 - It is the height of ignorance and disingenuity to contend that the COVID-19 vaccines aren't going to help long term.



white men cant jump basketball GIF
You’re basing your info on a regular virus, not a virus that was created in a lab.
 
People need to start being punished for this disinformation. There are limits to freedom of speech. lying about public health should be one

That or the guillotine
 
Anyone take the class about the Wu-Tang Clan? Wasn't an easy A but I loved it.
With Jeffrey Ogbar? I took African American history with him and it was one of my favorite classes. He taught history of hip hop but it was only offered as a summer class when I was there otherwise I would have taken it.
 
It literally resembles an entire class of viruses. Coronaviruses.

And none of them were this transmissible.

Our knowledge of coronaviruses only goes back about 55 years.

SARS and MERS had every opportunity to spread globally and never did.

I'm very interested in reading/learning more of how and why COVID was so much more spreadable.

Also very interested post pandemic of how long it took COVID to Peter out like the other coronaviruses have.
 
I can't believe there's people out there who can say this with a straight face and actually believe what they're spewing

Because people like that only think of how their choices affect themselves anyways. Their sense of community and social responsibility goes as far as is convenient for them.
 
Watched "In the same breath" on HBO tonight. A film made by a Chinese American woman about the start of covid in China and the US. Highly recommend it. Wow is China a shined up version of North Korea.
 
.-.
With Jeffrey Ogbar? I took African American history with him and it was one of my favorite classes. He taught history of hip hop but it was only offered as a summer class when I was there otherwise I would have taken it.
My professor was Lee Aggison, he was a microbiology professor that just loved the clan haha.
 
And none of them were this transmissible.

Our knowledge of coronaviruses only goes back about 55 years.

SARS and MERS had every opportunity to spread globally and never did.

I'm very interested in reading/learning more of how and why COVID was so much more spreadable.

Also very interested post pandemic of how long it took COVID to Peter out like the other coronaviruses have.
SARS and MERS didn’t transmit as much as Cov2 because they were much more lethal. A virus of a similar class behaving differently than closely related viruses doesn’t mean that it was created in a laboratory.
 
SARS and MERS didn’t transmit as much as Cov2 because they were much more lethal. A virus of a similar class behaving differently than closely related viruses doesn’t mean that it was created in a laboratory.

I never said it was created in a lab. That's beyond a weird comment.

Even if SARS and MERS were more deadly, those who had it had plenty of time to interact and pass it on to others. Speed of death between catching it and dying is one leg affecting how broadly a virus is transmitted. It's not the only reason.
 
I never said it was created in a lab. That's beyond a weird comment.

Even if SARS and MERS were more deadly, those who had it had plenty of time to interact and pass it on to others. Speed of death between catching it and dying is one leg affecting how broadly a virus is transmitted. It's not the only reason.
My b, my original comment that you responded to was to someone saying it was created in a lab so I thought you were arguing that insanity.
 
Interesting. I have a few thoughts regarding it. Maybe it makes sense to wait until the study is peer reviewed before putting too much faith in it? Wasn’t Oxford University partnered with Astra Zeneca in the development of the UK vaccine? As I read that story their claim isn’t that the Pfizer vaccine is ineffective, but only that after 90 days it drops to the same level of effectiveness of the AZ vaccine in cases of high viral load of the Delta variant. Those are some very specific claims that are different than the headline.

FWIW.

(But yeah, I will get the booster as soon as it’s available to me.)
 
Interesting. I have a few thoughts regarding it. Maybe it makes sense to wait until the study is peer reviewed before putting too much faith in it? Wasn’t Oxford University partnered with Astra Zeneca in the development of the UK vaccine? As I read that story their claim isn’t that the Pfizer vaccine is ineffective, but only that after 90 days it drops to the same level of effectiveness of the AZ vaccine in cases of high viral load of the Delta variant. Those are some very specific claims that are different than the headline.

FWIW.

(But yeah, I will get the booster as soon as it’s available to me.)

I've found throughout this whole pandemic that headline writers either 1) really suck at writing headlines, or more cynically, 2) write the headlines to drive fear and therefore clicks. For example, an earlier post in this thread links to a story with the headline:

Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection​

But when you read the article, everyone in the study previously contracted Covid, even those that got the vaccine. The real question of "What is more effective: getting the vaccine, or getting natural immunity from previous infection?" is not answered in the article. The headline is misleading.

It's really frustrating to read misleading headlines like that, because anti-vaxxers use them as ammo in their disinformation campaign.
 
.-.
I've found throughout this whole pandemic that headline writers either 1) really suck at writing headlines, or more cynically, 2) write the headlines to drive fear and therefore clicks. For example, an earlier post in this thread links to a story with the headline:

Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection​

But when you read the article, everyone in the study previously contracted Covid, even those that got the vaccine. The real question of "What is more effective: getting the vaccine, or getting natural immunity from previous infection?" is not answered in the article. The headline is misleading.

It's really frustrating to read misleading headlines like that, because anti-vaxxers use them as ammo in their disinformation campaign.

Why would an anti-vaxxer use a headline of "Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection" as ammo?
 
And none of them were this transmissible.

Our knowledge of coronaviruses only goes back about 55 years.

SARS and MERS had every opportunity to spread globally and never did.

I'm very interested in reading/learning more of how and why COVID was so much more spreadable.

Also very interested post pandemic of how long it took COVID to Peter out like the other coronaviruses have.

Short version, SARS and MERs were way more deadly, so killed the host, which hurts transmission and virus survivability. The other key is that they were large droplet spread. We used those as our early basis for Covid-19, hence the early guidance on hand washing and 2 meters away etc. Also, masks are highly effective with large droplet spread. This is the article that really helped. Transmissibility and transmission of respiratory viruses | Nature Reviews Microbiology

A study recently found that SARS-Cov-2 appears in higher concentrations in smaller water droplets rather than larger ones (85% small, 15% large). Viral Load of SARS-CoV-2 in Respiratory Aerosols Emitted by COVID-19 Patients while Breathing, Talking, and Singing | Clinical Infectious Diseases | Oxford Academic (oup.com) The result being that while it certainly can be spread by droplets (somebody sneezes near you), that may not be the primary mode of transmission (although many older studies say it is). It's also why surfaces aren't significant (everyone now agrees). If this is correct, spread may be mostly by aerosols, which accumulate over time (for which cloth masks do less). It helps explain why people who work outside the house and live in smaller homes in dense areas have borne much of the pandemic. Air circulation, ventilation, filtration and of course, being outside, that does a lot. A study from Japan showed opening two windows once an hour dramatically reduced concentrations.

My suggestion would be to end all the expensive cleaning activity, invest that Covid relief money immediately into air quality improvement in schools and all public buildings, including mass transit. Aircraft are already fine, which is why spread there is minimal. Private businesses should focus on the same, and perhaps relief funds can be targeted to that end. Unlike all the money we've wasted, those changes would have lasting impact and would reduce flu cases as well.
 
I never said it was created in a lab. That's beyond a weird comment.

Even if SARS and MERS were more deadly, those who had it had plenty of time to interact and pass it on to others. Speed of death between catching it and dying is one leg affecting how broadly a virus is transmitted. It's not the only reason.

Supplement to my long comment. They make you sick faster as well. Onset of symptoms after infection is faster. Sick people stay home (fever, chills vs just a cough or sneeze like a cold). Very sick people go to the hospital. Also, not aerosol spread.

Covid-19, especially Delta, is often spread in the pre-symptomatic period. Delta’s rise is fuelled by rampant spread from people who feel fine (nature.com)

As a result, 74% of infections with Delta took place during the presymptomatic phase — a higher proportion than for previous variants. This high rate “helps explain how this variant has been able to outpace both the wild-type virus and other variants to become the dominant strain worldwide”, says Barnaby Young, an infectious-disease clinician at the National Centre for Infectious Diseases in Singapore.
 
Why would an anti-vaxxer use a headline of "Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection" as ammo?

I'm saying that the content of the article doesn't always line up with the headline. It feeds the whole "the media lies about everything" narrative and is used to discredit them.
 
Supplement to my long comment. They make you sick faster as well. Onset of symptoms after infection is faster. Sick people stay home (fever, chills vs just a cough or sneeze like a cold). Very sick people go to the hospital. Also, not aerosol spread.

Covid-19, especially Delta, is often spread in the pre-symptomatic period. Delta’s rise is fuelled by rampant spread from people who feel fine (nature.com)
What is the mortality rate of the Delta variant versus the wild type or other variants?
 
I'm saying that the content of the article doesn't always line up with the headline. It feeds the whole "the media lies about everything" narrative and is used to discredit them.
That is an interesting point. It reminds me of saying from a marketing professor at UConn (Hempel, maybe?) used at UConn regarding deceptive advertising. It was "Borrowed interest is very expensive" with the notion being that people react negatively to being deceived. If you gain interest with a false claim (or headline) the impact isn't merely that you are back to square one when it is discovered.
 
.-.
I've found throughout this whole pandemic that headline writers either 1) really suck at writing headlines, or more cynically, 2) write the headlines to drive fear and therefore clicks. For example, an earlier post in this thread links to a story with the headline:

Vaccination Offers Higher Protection than Previous COVID-19 Infection​

But when you read the article, everyone in the study previously contracted Covid, even those that got the vaccine. The real question of "What is more effective: getting the vaccine, or getting natural immunity from previous infection?" is not answered in the article. The headline is misleading.

It's really frustrating to read misleading headlines like that, because anti-vaxxers use them as ammo in their disinformation campaign.

I've seen that one. The shame is that the overwhelming likelihood is that the statement is true. Particularly with mRNA vaccines, immunity from previous infection will likely be less effective against variants, unless the very specific portion of the spike protein that the vaccine imitates is modified in the virus variant.

Note -- I'm not the expert here, but I am married to one. She also taught a course at Yale that, in major part, covered the misrepresentation of scientific and medical research in media.
 
What is the mortality rate of the Delta variant versus the wild type or other variants?

So far, seems no different.
 
So far, seems no different.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) figures suggest that the Delta variant and its subtypes accounted for more than 90 percent of new U.S. COVID cases surveyed in the two weeks to July 31.

Daily trends in the number of COVID deaths show the death rate per 100,000 people in the U.S. is currently around 185 since the very start of the pandemic, the CDC said as of August 10, and about 0.92 per 100,000 over the previous seven days.

But this is not Delta-specific.
Newsweek article

The "data" I've seen suggests a lower death rate, but I'm not sure that's due to a difference in mortality per se. Keep in mind that 1) the "wild-type" virus took a huge chunk of the most vulnerable and 2) the original figures were in an unvaccinated population. So anyone who is exposed to the Delta variant is a) likely not to be at as high a risk (i.e., less than age 60 when mortality figures climb significantly), b) may be vaccinated, and/or c) may have natural immunity due to known or unknown prior exposure. I don't know if anyone has broken down the numbers quite that way but it seems logical.
 
It usually takes about 10 years for a drug to be developed and approved for prescription. I wouldn't expect it to come anytime soon, if it comes at all (looking less likely to me). The Drug Development Process | FDA I don't think the issue is "finding the time".
It’s a good thing the coronavirus vaccine has been in research since 2003 then.
 
It’s a good thing the coronavirus vaccine has been in research since 2003 then.

Are you talking about the mRNA platform? The vaccine is a bit more than a year old. Platform has been used for several things, including cancer drugs under clinical trials since 2011. But the platform is not the vaccine, in fact each company's is reviewed independently.
 
Are you talking about the mRNA platform? The vaccine is a bit more than a year old. Platform has been used for several things, including cancer drugs under clinical trials since 2011. But the platform is not the vaccine, in fact each company's is reviewed independently.
I think the reference was that the vaccine is very closely related to one that had been in development for MERS for years because of how similar the viruses are. This American Life did a really interesting piece on it (starts at about 38 minutes in the link below), where they talk to one of the folks who worked on that MERS vaccine and said that within an hour of seeing the COVID-19 genetic sequencing, knew that the technology would work for COVID-19.

 
.-.
I think the reference was that the vaccine is very closely related to one that had been in development for MERS for years because of how similar the viruses are. This American Life did a really interesting piece on it (starts at about 38 minutes in the link below), where they talk to one of the folks who worked on that MERS vaccine and said that within an hour of seeing the COVID-19 genetic sequencing, knew that the technology would work for COVID-19.

Thank you
 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) figures suggest that the Delta variant and its subtypes accounted for more than 90 percent of new U.S. COVID cases surveyed in the two weeks to July 31.

Daily trends in the number of COVID deaths show the death rate per 100,000 people in the U.S. is currently around 185 since the very start of the pandemic, the CDC said as of August 10, and about 0.92 per 100,000 over the previous seven days.

But this is not Delta-specific.
Newsweek article

The "data" I've seen suggests a lower death rate, but I'm not sure that's due to a difference in mortality per se. Keep in mind that 1) the "wild-type" virus took a huge chunk of the most vulnerable and 2) the original figures were in an unvaccinated population. So anyone who is exposed to the Delta variant is a) likely not to be at as high a risk (i.e., less than age 60 when mortality figures climb significantly), b) may be vaccinated, and/or c) may have natural immunity due to known or unknown prior exposure. I don't know if anyone has broken down the numbers quite that way but it seems logical.
Vaccination status should be a key element. I’m not sure we have enough data on deaths/mortality rates by vaccination status.
 
Vaccination status should be a key element. I’m not sure we have enough data on deaths/mortality rates by vaccination status.
That would be a very useful metric, wouldn't it?
 
That would be a very useful metric, wouldn't it?

They're gathering it. It's likely going to show that the mortality rate of Delta for unvaccinated folks is less than the overall mortality rate at the outset of the pandemic, but higher than it was overall at the beginning of this year. Mortality rate for vaccinated folks is going to be nearly nonexistent.
 
Short version, SARS and MERs were way more deadly, so killed the host, which hurts transmission and virus survivability. The other key is that they were large droplet spread. We used those as our early basis for Covid-19, hence the early guidance on hand washing and 2 meters away etc. Also, masks are highly effective with large droplet spread. This is the article that really helped. Transmissibility and transmission of respiratory viruses | Nature Reviews Microbiology

A study recently found that SARS-Cov-2 appears in higher concentrations in smaller water droplets rather than larger ones (85% small, 15% large). Viral Load of SARS-CoV-2 in Respiratory Aerosols Emitted by COVID-19 Patients while Breathing, Talking, and Singing | Clinical Infectious Diseases | Oxford Academic (oup.com) The result being that while it certainly can be spread by droplets (somebody sneezes near you), that may not be the primary mode of transmission (although many older studies say it is). It's also why surfaces aren't significant (everyone now agrees). If this is correct, spread may be mostly by aerosols, which accumulate over time (for which cloth masks do less). It helps explain why people who work outside the house and live in smaller homes in dense areas have borne much of the pandemic. Air circulation, ventilation, filtration and of course, being outside, that does a lot. A study from Japan showed opening two windows once an hour dramatically reduced concentrations.

My suggestion would be to end all the expensive cleaning activity, invest that Covid relief money immediately into air quality improvement in schools and all public buildings, including mass transit. Aircraft are already fine, which is why spread there is minimal. Private businesses should focus on the same, and perhaps relief funds can be targeted to that end. Unlike all the money we've wasted, those changes would have lasting impact and would reduce flu cases as well.

So what part of the creation of COVID or any coronavirus determines the size
- droplet vs vapor??

Just curious as to why they are called corona viruses because the commonality of the crowns or spikes yet they are different sized.
 
There's an anti-mask protest outside my school today. No one is working, even the admin. Literally the only people there are the constructionn workers renovating a wing. Imagine going through life this stupid.

Also district policy (I think state too) is now that you go 10 days without pay if you have to quarantine for the unvaxxed. 1 guy quit on principle already.

Bye Felicia!
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,256
Messages
4,560,135
Members
10,448
Latest member
MillerLitEd


Top Bottom