COVID-19/Coronavirus Information and Support Thread (see OP for useful links)
- Thread starter baldgye
- 13,285 comments
- 644,863 views
- 29,337
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
It has long been speculated that COVID vaccines may only produce short-term protection, so 6 months is a lot better than nothing, but yeh... I can see vaccination programs being virtually non-stop things, where everybody should get a shot (or even two shots) every six months for the foreseeable future - this will be a challenge even for the richest countries, but it is at least possible. But with some luck, herd immunity should start to take effect after just one full vaccination cycle, and this effect alone will hopefully cut the amount of virus in circulation - however this could also be counteracted by the spread of new variants that current vaccines may be less effective against.
Countries with poor healthcare systems are really going to struggle, and alas even if these countries are flooded with vaccines from donors, it won't matter unless there is an efficient way to actually get the vaccines into people fast enough to not only reach herd immunity, but to maintain it. There is, however, talk of oral vaccines becoming available, and that could well be a game changer - people being able to be vaccinate themselves and have stable vaccines stored and shipped to people's homes would be massively beneficial, and not just in countries with poor healthcare systems.
Countries with poor healthcare systems are really going to struggle, and alas even if these countries are flooded with vaccines from donors, it won't matter unless there is an efficient way to actually get the vaccines into people fast enough to not only reach herd immunity, but to maintain it. There is, however, talk of oral vaccines becoming available, and that could well be a game changer - people being able to be vaccinate themselves and have stable vaccines stored and shipped to people's homes would be massively beneficial, and not just in countries with poor healthcare systems.
Last edited:
- 20,956
- NJ/USA
- Blitzbay
- Blitzbay
This might also massively reduce any type of vaccine surplus if they have to re-up shots.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,014
- Mile High City
Is the standard preventing a COVID infection after 6 months, or is it preventing hospitalization from COVID after 6 months? We know that the vaccines are good at preventing infection, especially the 2-dose versions, in the short term. And they're all good at preventing hospitalization. But if we get to a point where 6 months from now we can get infected with COVID but that it's not generally life-threatening, that would still not be the more dire vaccination situation we're in now.
Last edited:
- 4,559
- Minnesota
- TJ136
So it appears that the efficacy after the 2nd dose and 6 months later is 91.4%
So it appears that the vaccine is still effective at 6 months but it is unsure on how long it will actually be.
Here is the article in better
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/01/health/pfizer-covid-vaccine-efficacy-six-months-bn/index.html
So it appears that the vaccine is still effective at 6 months but it is unsure on how long it will actually be.
Here is the article in better
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/01/health/pfizer-covid-vaccine-efficacy-six-months-bn/index.html
- 2,677
- UK
- Outspacer
Relax
They're only saying 6 months because that's how long they've been able to show results for, so far.Rather than protection wearing off I think the bigger question is variants, and how many boosters we'll need to handle them. At least one for South Africa & Brazil variants is very likely. After that who knows, but I'm kinda optimistic since there hasn't been a new headline-making scary variant for quite a while now.
- 2,677
- UK
- Outspacer
It is, but still not as good as against the original strain and I didn't want to bog the post down with lots of detail. Then there's whatever variant might arise purely because of widespread vaccination (I mean, the hope is that it's a much less harmful one, but still a question mark). I think Moderna is starting (trials?) with its revised vaccine, AstraZeneca has one in development, presumably others have too.
Joey D
Premium
- 47,451
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
We're seeing that Pfizer and Moderna likely provide good protection against the South African variant. I haven't seen any data that suggests how it protects against the UK or Brazilian variant, but I suspect they both work decently well. The good news is that the vaccines will likely provide protection from severe illness even if they don't protect you fully from new variants. We see this with the flu shot and even when they get it wrong, those who get the flu shot tend to have a lower chance of developing a severe case of influenza than those who didn't get the shot. People still get the flu, but it's a couple of days on the couch instead of a week or two in the hospital.
====
Speaking of variants, a potential new variant has been found in Arizona, called E484K, which was uncovered by ASU. Their findings are still in the pre-print stage and haven't undergone full peer-review, but it seems plausible.
Emergence of a SARS-CoV-2 E484K variant of interest in Arizona
- 29,337
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
I'd imagine it's both - in the long term anyway.
I don't believe the effects of long COVID are anywhere near to being realised fully yet, but some figures out today in the UK paint a pretty grim picture.
The biggest single threat posed by COVID is overwhelming healthcare systems, and hence stopping people from requiring immediate hospital care is a top priority. But the effects of long COVID could be more insidious insomuch as it will also increase the burden on healthcare systems, just not as quickly. Long COVID seems to include a large number of people who have not required hospital treatment, but who are still very sick and who may end up needing a lot more care than they otherwise would have needed.
- 2,677
- UK
- Outspacer
The question then is how much transmission would still occur, and therefore how much chance further variants - that might evade the vaccines more - have of establishing themselves. Not trying to cause alarm (actually I'm optimistic about it), it's just an unknown at this point.
It really would be nice if the USA did more sequencing, especially now that reasonable numbers have been vaccinated!
Otherwise this is actually a somewhat comforting find, in that it doesn't have any notable previously unseen mutations.
On the flip side, there have been stories run that vaccination can clear long covid, and the majority of the most affected age groups hadn't had their first dose by the time of the study period (6th Feb - 6th Mar). So the next report on this will be very interesting indeed; we'd hope to see a marked difference in the 50-69 years age group.
Last edited:
- 29,337
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
A virologist friend of mine linked to this Twitter thread, about a new (pre-print) study showing that the Russian Sputnik vaccine shows very poor performance against the B.1.351 variant (otherwise known as the South African variant) of SARS-CoV-2, and the thread also speculates that the AstraZeneca vaccine might also be less effective against this particular variant.
I guess we get no choice as to which vaccine we are given, but it is unfortunate that any 'preference' of one vaccine over another would probably be construed as irrational bias based on some debunked news story i.e. the supposed link between the AZ vaccine and blood clots.
I guess we get no choice as to which vaccine we are given, but it is unfortunate that any 'preference' of one vaccine over another would probably be construed as irrational bias based on some debunked news story i.e. the supposed link between the AZ vaccine and blood clots.
- 2,677
- UK
- Outspacer
AstraZeneca vaccine is only about 10% effective against preventing any infection of the SA variant, but no data on severe disease since the trial participants were quite young (and it was quite a small trial). I remember reading an article a few months ago when the numbers were first released, and one point they discussed was how vaccine makers had to choose - long ago - which variants to target in their vaccines. They had to make an educated guess. With hindsight, AZ picked the wrong ones - it does protect against some variants, just not ones that have risen to be variants of concern.
The same could yet happen with the Pfizer vaccine. In fact it's very likely that a variant will arise that evades it, what's unknown is whether it would be a dangerous one. It could turn out that AZ (2 doses) plus variant booster gives broader protection than Pfizer, in the end.
Overall, at country scale, I think it would be a bad strategy to pick the best vaccine and only use that (even if we could). It follows from that that allowing personal preference would also be 'bad' (never mind the fact that half of Brits don't even know the main telltale symptoms yet, let alone have the ability to make an educated choice of vaccine, let alone the desire to do what's best for the greater good).
Wish we knew more about these blood clots with low platelet counts, especially now we're giving first doses to the age group supposedly at risk. I'd like to see the Danish advice to aspirate before injecting taken up across Europe, if only to rule out accidental intravenous injection as the cause. It only adds a second or two when giving the jab and sounds like a very sensible precaution regardless. It does seem though that there is some link specific to AZ, although the risk is very low compared to COVID risk, by current figures.
Last edited:
CodeRedR51
Premium
- 55,312
- United States
Requested the day off for my 2nd dose on the 27th and of course my boss is hard pressed to let me have it. Even though emails went out months ago telling us we could. (But we have to use our vacation time...)
- 29,337
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
After a fast start, the UK vaccination program is slowing down...
As someone in their 40s, I currently have no idea when I will get my first shot. Even my parents who are both in their 70s have not had their 2nd shots yet, and I think they are both scheduled for the first week in May... so, I reckon I can expect to not have two shots done until September
As someone in their 40s, I currently have no idea when I will get my first shot. Even my parents who are both in their 70s have not had their 2nd shots yet, and I think they are both scheduled for the first week in May... so, I reckon I can expect to not have two shots done until September
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
After a fast start, the UK vaccination program is slowing down...
As someone in their 40s, I currently have no idea when I will get my first shot. Even my parents who are both in their 70s have not had their 2nd shots yet, and I think they are both scheduled for the first week in May... so, I reckon I can expect to not have two shots done until September
I was lucky and got my first shot as part of a use-them-or-lose-them batch at my local centre, they were basically ringing everybody on the surgery's books to try to get the vials used before they expired. Meanwhile my parents have just had their second jab (early June) cancelled, and I'm quite worried.
- 29,337
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
That makes me so mad - cancelling a second shot is simply unacceptable.
Ironically, I live right next to Glasgow's main vaccination hub - it is literally 100 yards from my apartment, and yet I haven't heard of any 'spare shots' going begging.
Personally I can probably live without the vaccine for a while yet, but I don't think it is fair or sensible to allow people of my age (who typically have kids at school) to go unvaccinated for too long while their unvaccinated kids are back in school... that is a recipe for disaster.
Last edited:
Similar threads
