COVID-19/Coronavirus Information and Support Thread (see OP for useful links)

[Stotty]

The answer to both questions is, if not identical, at least overlapping. Are you having trouble answering it for the flu?

The question wasn’t about flu vaccines, it was about the covid vaccine... are you having trouble answering the question?

It's a fair question, but the truth is that no-one really knows for sure how long immunity lasts after either an infection or a vaccination. Evidence so far suggests that protection from a subsequent infection might only last around 6 months, but there's very little evidence (though it is certainly possible) that people can be infected again... it's still too early to say, but vaccination after infection makes as much sense as vaccination without an infection, esp. if one was infected some time ago.

edit: As @Danoff alludes to as well, vaccinations/boosters against future variants of SARS-CoV-2 will almost certainly be needed to prevent new variants from creating new waves of severe illness. There are already booster shots for the Delta variant in the pipeline, for example.

The current vaccine seems to work against all variants we’ve seen so far despite being developed only for the original strain... maybe not for cases, but at least as far as preventing serious illness and death.

I understand boosters and new variant vaccines may follow, but at this stage, why would anyone take the risk of side effects if they have antibodies from prior infection. There’s zero benefit as far as I can see.

Plus, at this stage there also seems no evidence to for the need for boosters other than the lines of Pfizer wanting to make even more money.

 

[Joey D]

A recent paper published in Science Translational Medicine looks at what sort of antibodies you have when you compare being previously infected with COVID to having the vaccine.

AAAS

stm.sciencemag.org

Assuming people don't want to read through the study, the gist of it is that antibodies induced by the vaccine are likely to better thwart strains of COVID and do so in a quicker manner than antibodies induced by infection alone.

If you've had COVID, you should get vaccinated as it will likely give you better protection and help keep you from being reinfected. While reinfection at the moment is relatively uncommon, with the world now entering wave four of COVID it's likely we will see mutations. One of those mutations could cause reinfection.

 

[Touring Mars]

The current vaccine seems to work against all variants we’ve seen so far despite being developed only for the original strain... maybe not for cases, but at least as far as preventing serious illness and death.

Indeed the vaccines are working incredibly well, even against new variants. It's also vitally important to point out that every vaccine used in the UK and US thus far have recorded such tiny numbers of ill effects that can be directly attributed to the vaccine(s) that they are orders of magnitude more safe than a SARS-CoV-2 infection.

I understand boosters and new variant vaccines may follow, but at this stage, why would anyone take the risk of side effects if they have antibodies from prior infection. There’s zero benefit as far as I can see.

But as I said in my previous post, antibodies raised by either an infection or an immunisation don't last forever, hence vaccination is BY FAR the safest way of topping up one's immunity i.e. someone who was infected last year with SARS-CoV-2 may well have very little immunity to the virus now and could easily get reinfected. There is growing evidence of this. The fact that the dominant strain is now different means that it is hard to quantify the risk of someone getting infected twice with the same strain (as the original strain is now completely gone), but the vaccines work against all known strains thus far.

So the question is why wouldn't you get the vaccine? This idea that the side effects of vaccination are even close to being as dangerous as an infection or a reinfection with the virus itself is absolutely absurd.

 

[Jezza819]

Meanwhile in Alabama....

https://whnt.com/news/coronavirus/i...d-patients-ask-for-vaccine-before-intubation/

An Alabama doctor revealed in a social media post over the weekend that one of the last things she has to do before having to intubate her patients who are gravely ill with COVID-19 is often to explain why they can no longer take a vaccine.

Dr. Brytney Cobia, a physician at Grandview Medical Center, says that with the spread of the delta variant she has been admitting “young healthy people” lately with very serious COVID infections."

“One of the last things they do before they’re intubated is beg me for the vaccine,” Cobia wrote. “I hold their hand and tell them that I’m sorry, but it’s too late. A few days later when I call time of death, I hug their family members and I tell them the best way to honor their loved one is to go get vaccinated and encourage everyone they know to do the same.”

“… They tell me they didn’t know. They thought it was a hoax. They thought it was political. They thought because they had a certain blood type or a certain skin color they wouldn’t get as sick. They thought it was ‘just the flu’. But they were wrong. And they wish they could go back. But they can’t.”

When it comes to the percentage of residents who are fully vaccinated against COVID-19, Alabama is tied with Mississippi for the lowest vaccination rate – 34 percent – according to Johns Hopkins data.

As the Delta virus spreads rapidly across the U.S., nearly all of the people who are now being hospitalized or dying from COVID-19 are unvaccinated, according to Associated Press analysis of public data.

Cobia’s heartbreaking post was a reply to another Alabama physician, Dr. David B. Wilhem, who urged people to get vaccinated, saying, “I will repeat my statement from last week: If you haven’t had Covid and are unvaccinated, there is a significant likelihood you’ll get Delta variant Covid in the next 60-90 days.”

 

[Touring Mars]

A quick challenge for anti-vaxxers out there:

193 million confirmed cases of COVID, and over 4 million deaths* (*almost certainly a massive underestimate - India alone has likely had around 4 million deaths due to COVID in the last year alone).

2.1 billion vaccinations globally thus far in just 7 months.

How many people who are currently critically ill in ICUs across the world suffering from side effects of any vaccine compared to those who are critically ill with COVID-19?

 

[Danoff]

The question wasn’t about flu vaccines, it was about the covid vaccine... are you having trouble answering the question?

I did answer it. You get the flu vaccine to boost immunity against the flu for the season. The same is true for covid. My dad is in his mid-70s, overweight, and has high blood pressure. He's a perfect picture of COVID risk. It's also been 6 months since his infection. The delta variant is sweeping through his area, so... just like with the flu... a boost to his immune system seems like a good move does it not? What's the risk? What's the downside? A sore arm? At this point, it doesn't even offset against people (in this country) who want to be vaccinated.

Even if the flu vaccine you get is not perfect for the variant that's coming around in a particular season, it helps boost immunity.

 

[Touring Mars]

I did answer it. You get the flu vaccine to boost immunity against the flu for the season. The same is true for covid. My dad is in his mid-70s, overweight, and has high blood pressure. He's a perfect picture of COVID risk. It's also been 6 months since his infection. The delta variant is sweeping through his area, so... just like with the flu... a boost to his immune system seems like a good move does it not? What's the risk? What's the downside? A sore arm? At this point, it doesn't even offset against people (in this country) who want to be vaccinated.

Even if the flu vaccine you get is not perfect for the variant that's coming around in a particular season, it helps boost immunity.

There are definitely side effects that can and are affecting people in more serious ways that just a sore arm, but what is vitally important here is the statistics on just how many people per number of vaccinations are becoming seriously ill as a direct result of vaccination, and as far as I can see, that number is extremely low.

Indeed, the process of vaccination is probably just as risky if not riskier than the vaccine itself i.e. getting injected with something by someone who may or may not be very experienced at injecting people with things is inherently more risky than not having that done to you, but even with that in mind, vaccinations offer orders of magnitude more benefits than costs.

 

[Stotty]

A recent paper published in Science Translational Medicine looks at what sort of antibodies you have when you compare being previously infected with COVID to having the vaccine.

AAAS

stm.sciencemag.org

Assuming people don't want to read through the study, the gist of it is that antibodies induced by the vaccine are likely to better thwart strains of COVID and do so in a quicker manner than antibodies induced by infection alone.

If you've had COVID, you should get vaccinated as it will likely give you better protection and help keep you from being reinfected. While reinfection at the moment is relatively uncommon, with the world now entering wave four of COVID it's likely we will see mutations. One of those mutations could cause reinfection.

That study is on 14 people. It’s statistically irrelevant.

‘Likely give you better protection’... likely? What sort of science is likely ffs?

Uk shows that vaccination does not protect you from reinfection. Last data I saw was around 40% of Uk cases were in vaccinated people.

Indeed the vaccines are working incredibly well, even against new variants. It's also vitally important to point out that every vaccine used in the UK and US thus far have recorded such tiny numbers of ill effects that can be directly attributed to the vaccine(s) that they are orders of magnitude more safe than a SARS-CoV-2 infection.


But as I said in my previous post, antibodies raised by either an infection or an immunisation don't last forever, hence vaccination is BY FAR the safest way of topping up one's immunity i.e. someone who was infected last year with SARS-CoV-2 may well have very little immunity to the virus now and could easily get reinfected. There is growing evidence of this. The fact that the dominant strain is now different means that it is hard to quantify the risk of someone getting infected twice with the same strain (as the original strain is now completely gone), but the vaccines work against all known strains thus far.

So the question is why wouldn't you get the vaccine? This idea that the side effects of vaccination are even close to being as dangerous as an infection or a reinfection with the virus itself is absolutely absurd.

Antibodies may not show up in testing, but so far no one knows how long T cell protection lasts.

Where is the ‘growing evidence’ that previous infection offers less protection against future infection than a vaccine developed to combat a variant that no longer exists?

You can travel freely in Europe if you’ve been vaccinated and if you can show you’ve recovered from a previous infection.

 

[Joey D]

Meanwhile in Alabama....

https://whnt.com/news/coronavirus/i...d-patients-ask-for-vaccine-before-intubation/

Imagine being @Stotty and being so crass that you think of people dying in the ICU is funny, but here we are.

That kind of crap belongs on Facebook, not GTP.

 

[TexRex]

Imagine being @Stotty and being so crass that you think of people dying in the ICU is funny, but here we are.

That kind of crap belongs on Facebook, not GTP.

Receipt:

 

[Joey D]

That study is on 14 people. It’s statistically irrelevant.

‘Likely give you better protection’... likely? What sort of science is likely ffs?

Uk shows that vaccination does not protect you from reinfection. Last data I saw was around 40% of Uk cases were in vaccinated people.

I said likely because I don't know for sure and didn't want to claim otherwise.

And at least this is scientific evidence, you're just posting conjecture without anything to back it up. Do you have something to actually back up that 40% of UK cases are in vaccinated people because that seems like a huge issue if that's true. There's a ZOE study that says 47% of all cases are among partially vaccinated people:

Almost half of UK COVID infections are in people who are at least partly vaccinated, study suggests. But the cases were much milder.

Cases among vaccinated people could soon overtake cases among unvaccinated, according to data presented by the UK's ZOE COVID Symptom Study.

news.yahoo.com

That's not the same thing as saying "47% of all cases are among fully vaccinated people." The reason some of the vaccines are two doses is so that they are effective. One shot doesn't cut it.

 

[Touring Mars]

That study is on 14 people. It’s statistically irrelevant.

Explain 'statistically irrelevant'.

‘Likely give you better protection’... likely? What sort of science is likely ffs?

Correct science. When talking about probabilities and likelihoods, the word 'likely' is scientifically correct.

Where is the ‘growing evidence’ that previous infection offers less protection against future infection than a vaccine developed to combat a variant that no longer exists?

That's not what I said. I said that immunity either by previous infection or vaccination may reduce over time and hence boosting immunity is a good idea. As @Danoff said, the evidence of this principle is clear and well documented for other viruses such as flu. Given how convinced you skeptics are that SARS-CoV-2 is so like the flu, you are the one that should be explaining why you expect it to be so different...

 

[UKMikey]

Uk shows that vaccination does not protect you from reinfection. Last data I saw was around 40% of Uk cases were in vaccinated people.

It's not 40% of all "Uk cases" who have Covid symptoms that are in vaccinated people, though. It's 40% of the people being admitted to hospital.

Because the overall number of admissions is lower, thanks to the vaccine, that 40% is also lower - around 700 cases compared to 3800 in December 2020. Most of those vaccinated people are in a high risk group so are more likely to be admitted to hospital with symptoms. Their risk is still lower than it would be without the vaccine.

Source:

COVID: the reason cases are rising among the double vaccinated – it’s not because vaccines aren’t working

Most people being hospitalised with COVID-19 in the UK have had both vaccine doses, but this is to be expected as vaccination rates rise.

theconversation.com

 

[Stotty]

There are definitely side effects that can and are affecting people in more serious ways that just a sore arm, but what is vitally important here is the statistics on just how many people per number of vaccinations are becoming seriously ill as a direct result of vaccination, and as far as I can see, that number is extremely low.

I had my 2nd vaccine (Pfizer) 5 weeks ago today.

I'm still a minimum 15% off my pre-vaccine numbers on the bike - and the delta increases as time increases. On a 30 min interval session I'm 15% off, on a 45 mins threshold session I'm at least 18% off. I haven't bothered to attempt a 60 or 90 min session.

I'm not sure I'd bother to get vaccinated given my time again.

Imagine being @Stotty and being so crass that you think of people dying in the ICU is funny, but here we are.

That kind of crap belongs on Facebook, not GTP.

Because the post like is emotional, controlling bollocks... designed to get exactly the reaction it got from you lot

If there was any truth to delta causing serious health issues in young people we would have major issues in the UK given our cases levels and age profile... the UK media aren't exactly reticent in exploiting even 1 case of this type, so we'd know about it if there was a any truth in it.

You're being manipulated.

 

[UKMikey]

I don't know why anyone would compare Alabama numbers to the UK's given the vastly differing percentages (68% vs 33%) of people who've been vaccinated between here and the Deep South.

Unless... you didn't believe in the vaccine and thought those numbers were irrelevant... 💩

 

[Joey D]

Because the post like is emotional, controlling bollocks... designed to get exactly the reaction it got from you lot

It doesn't make your reaction any less crass though. It's a pretty dickish thing to laugh about people being in the ICU and dying.

If there was any truth to delta causing serious health issues in young people we would have major issues in the UK given our cases levels and age profile... the UK media aren't exactly reticent in exploiting even 1 case of this type, so we'd know about it if there was a any truth in it.

As of July 10th, the hospitalizations for people in the age group 25-44 were higher than 45-54, 55-64, and 65-74. The age group 15-24 was higher than 45-54 and on par with 55-64. So tell me again how younger people aren't being affected by this.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) latest insights - Office for National Statistics

The 12-24 age range also makes up the highest percentage of new cases in the UK as well. The 7-11 age range is second with 2-6 and 25-34 being roughly the same.

You're being manipulated.

Am I? I mean I work in healthcare and see our census numbers. The fact that a majority of the patients in our CICU are under the age of 40 seems pretty concrete to me. And the fact that our partner hospital PICU is full of COVID cases only furthers that. Kids are getting sick and ending up in the hospital, some are even dying. But please, laugh about it because you clearly find that sort of stuff amusing. I mean I have a dark sense of humor, but Christ on a biscuit.

 

[Stotty]

It doesn't make your reaction any less crass though. It's a pretty dickish thing to laugh about people being in the ICU and dying.


As of July 10th, the hospitalizations for people in the age group 25-44 were higher than 45-54, 55-64, and 65-74. The age group 15-24 was higher than 45-54 and on par with 55-64. So tell me again how younger people aren't being affected by this.

Coronavirus (COVID-19) latest insights - Office for National Statistics

The 12-24 age range also makes up the highest percentage of new cases in the UK as well. The 7-11 age range is second with 2-6 and 25-34 being roughly the same.


Am I? I mean I work in healthcare and see our census numbers. The fact that a majority of the patients in our CICU are under the age of 40 seems pretty concrete to me. And the fact that our partner hospital PICU is full of COVID cases only furthers that. Kids are getting sick and ending up in the hospital, some are even dying. But please, laugh about it because you clearly find that sort of stuff amusing. I mean I have a dark sense of humor, but Christ on a biscuit.

I'm not laughing at people dying, but at the post, and at anyone who reads that and actually believes it. It's manipulative bollocks.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As for the rest (I'll not quote each post individually)...

Whatever 'likely' or 'growing evidence' means, there's nothing so far to show that vaccines provide any better protection than that from recovered infection.

I'm not a covid denier, nor am I an anti vaxer, nor do I believe in conspiracy theories.

I'll leave you to continue with your circle jerk of doom...

 

[Joey D]

I'm not laughing at people dying, but at the post, and at anyone who reads that and actually believes it. It's manipulative bollocks.

Why would anyone make that up, especially a doctor who's likely working in the hospital 6 days a week? It's not manipulative, it's what's actually happening. You say you aren't a COVID denier or a conspiracy theorist, but thinking that hospitalizations aren't that severe or that people aren't dying frequently is so wrong it's mind-boggling. I work in healthcare, stories like @Jezza819 posted are true whether you believe them or not.

It's not a circle jerk of doom either, it's facing reality instead of living in a fantasy land where everything is sunshine and rainbows. People are dying, young people are dying, and we're in a fourth wave because of people like you refusing to believe it's serious.

Maybe stick to Twitter or Facebook where people post utter garbage about COVID and you can be in an echo chamber. It's been pretty clear since early on in the pandemic that this thread isn't the place for BS.

 

[Touring Mars]

I'm not laughing at people dying, but at the post, and at anyone who reads that and actually believes it. It's manipulative bollocks.

Are you saying it is untrue? Have you read her thread on Facebook and her replies to people's questions, or are you just assuming that it is 'bollocks' because you don't like what she's saying?

Whatever 'likely' or 'growing evidence' means, there's nothing so far to show that vaccines provide any better protection than that from recovered infection.

Who said anything about vaccines providing "better" protection? They don't. The point is that vaccines provide protection with very little cost in terms of side effects/illness caused by the vaccines, whereas infections provide protection but at massive costs in terms of deaths and severe illness.

I'I'm not a covid denier, nor am I an anti vaxer, nor do I believe in conspiracy theories.

Sorry, but if any of that is true, you should really stop speaking like you are/do.

I'll leave

At least you got something right.

 

[Stotty]

Why would anyone make that up, especially a doctor who's likely working in the hospital 6 days a week? It's not manipulative, it's what's actually happening. You say you aren't a COVID denier or a conspiracy theorist, but thinking that hospitalizations aren't that severe or that people aren't dying frequently is so wrong it's mind-boggling. I work in healthcare, stories like @Jezza819 posted are true whether you believe them or not.

It's not a circle jerk of doom either, it's facing reality instead of living in a fantasy land where everything is sunshine and rainbows. People are dying, young people are dying, and we're in a fourth wave because of people like you refusing to believe it's serious.

See, this is just scare mongering... and given you're always reminding me 'I know better because I work in healthcare', you should know better.

Since the beginning of the pandemic (lets call it 18 months), 64 people under the age of 25 have died in the UK, within 28 days of a positive Covid test. That's 'with' Covid, not necessarily 'from' Covid.

64 out of a population of 17.3 million. In 18 months. With virtually no vaccinations.

If you read the Alabama post and can't see what it's really about, you're blind. I agree with its objective - I believe anyone over 30 who hasn't had Covid should get themselves vaccinated. But the post itself it just emotional manipulative bolllocks.

 

[UKMikey]

Whatever 'likely' or 'growing evidence' means, there's nothing so far to show that vaccines provide any better protection than that from recovered infection.

I don't know how many old people recover from Covid well enough to build up super antibodies but I'd rather not test this ghastly hypothesis out on my 84-year-old mum.

 

[Dennisch]

- but, England has made several changes that Scotland has not - abandoned mask mandates completely, opened nightclubs etc.

The same as us.

It seems that we've peaked already, infection numbers are now back to 6k~ish, 436 people now in the hospital, 107 on the IC. Now it is a matter of waiting a couple of more days for the hospitalisation numbers to peak.

 

[Joey D]

Since the beginning of the pandemic (lets call it 18 months), 64 people under the age of 25 have died in the UK, within 28 days of a positive Covid test. That's 'with' Covid, not necessarily 'from' Covid.

64 out of a population of 17.3 million. In 18 months. With virtually no vaccinations.

Once again, deaths are not the main issue of COVID. It's never been the main issue and why you, along with so many others, get hung up on that is beyond me. Yes, children aren't dying in droves but children are dying, as are people under the age of 25. The more worrying statistic is how many are ending up in the hospital and how many very well could have lifelong, adverse effects from COVID or even just long-COVID. The disease hasn't been around long enough for us to answer that question though.

This isn't fearmongering either, it's taking a realistic look at a disease we're continuing to still learn about every day.

If you read the Alabama post and can't see what it's really about, you're blind.

And if you look at it and think, boy this is hysterical enough for me to use the "HAHA" button, then you're crass.

I know what the post is about, it's a story from a healthcare worker about what they're going through. Yes, it's appealing to emotion, but some people need that appeal to their emotion to see that COVID isn't a joke. Just like some people like science and some people need their whacked-out aunt who posts jibberish on Facebook to validate their own BS. But I've heard enough of these stories to know that the one the doctor is telling is likely true. I don't know what it's like in the UK since I don't live there, but here in the US, it's an accepted idea among certain groups of people that COVID is a hoax, that it's all political, that the vaccine is implanting microchips in you, and that it's all nothing more than the flu or even a common cold.

So is it likely that a family in Alabama thought that COVID was just a hoax until their loved one was dead? Absolutely. Alabama has one of the worst vaccine acceptance rates in the US, it's also, not surprisingly, a bastion for the stupid side of the Republican party and evangelicals who think Jesus will cure them. I talk to people working in the ER, ICU, CICU, etc. They all have stories like this and I'm not sure why they'd make it up either.

 

[McLaren]

Ah, that year old-now ironic claim of calling others manipulated (or sheep as is the fan-favorite) whilst putting on full display, your own manipulation.

 

[Touring Mars]

young people are dying

See, this is just scare mongering...

COVID-19 deaths by age U.S. 2023 | Statista

Between the beginning of January 2020 and June 14, 2023, of the 1,134,641 deaths caused by COVID-19 in the United States, around 307,169 had occurred among those aged 85 years and older.

www.statista.com

So, 9729 Covid-related deaths in people under the age of 40 in the US alone, which would translate to 228,000 deaths worldwide assuming the same death rate (and of course, the US will have a lower death rate than alot of countries where healthcare is much more scarce) and that is before the Delta variant has hit most countries, including the US...

So, no. Not scare mongering. Not at all.

And as just about everyone apart from you understands, deaths are only part of the story. It is well known that younger ages are less likely to die from COVID, far less likely, but long-term serious ill health as a direct result of COVID is a major problem, as is the consequences to younger people from ill health or death of older family members.

 

[Outspacer]

I don't see much evidence of that though. People are certainly still being cautious, but definitely not 'more' cautious... if anything, there's more less cautious behaviour (bars, cafes and restaurants are busier, for example) but fortunately mask-wearing in shops and in public places is still mandatory here and people are still abiding by that.

It might also be partially down to the increased numbers of people self-isolating too, though.

Well, you wouldn't 'see' any evidence of caution directly in the same way as evidence of the contrary! Hospitality may be busier, but - when looking at it overall rather than a straw poll - is it even half as busy as non-pandemic times? If not, then a majority have chosen to avoid (individually, or as a side effect of a workplace decision, e.g. WFH). Retrospectively, footfall estimates and trading results etc. will tell the story there.

The other side is how social people are being in their homes, which is pretty hard to gauge. Anecdotally, I could mention people I know who at least bent the rules back in April/May (when cases were relatively low) who now seem to be having fewer visitors in their home / making fewer trips out than then!

Anyway, I'd say it's certainly a factor worth mentioning in the list. It might only be 25% of people that voluntarily adapt their behaviour and it would still, silently, make a noticable difference to case numbers. Personally I suspect >50% of people do so in some imperfect way.

I don't know what it's like in the UK since I don't live there, but here in the US, it's an accepted idea among certain groups of people that COVID is a hoax, that it's all political, that the vaccine is implanting microchips in you, and that it's all nothing more than the flu or even a common cold.

Just assume we're a firmly Democrat state, you'll be close enough

Of course we pride ourselves on having all kinds here, so that also includes covid deniers ("just the flu") and even those who think the election was stolen from Trump. But, thankfully, their tiny numbers make them an irrelevance. Lockdown sceptics are a bigger group, but since they range all the way from outright covid impact deniers ("would've died soon anyway") to somewhat reasoned argument (based on balance of impact) they don't have a singular position to argue - it's a poorly applied moniker and those who adopt it tend to be at the radical end while stealing arguments from the more rational end. In any case, they are still distinctly a minority.

 

[Danoff]

If you read the Alabama post and can't see what it's really about, you're blind. I agree with its objective - I believe anyone over 30 who hasn't had Covid should get themselves vaccinated. But the post itself it just emotional manipulative bolllocks.

Yes, it wants you to get vaccinated. Yes it's using emotion to try to do that. And yes, it's a solid objective. And no, it's not bollocks.

 

[TB]

 

[Blitz24]

So what you are saying is we need to blame the Patriots for this?

 

[TB]

So what you are saying is we need to blame the Patriots for this?

Or TB.

Wait...

That TB.

Totally not this TB.