What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

*** OFFICIAL *** COVID-19 CoronaVirus Thread. Fresh epidemic fears as child pneumonia cases surge in Europe after China outbreak. NOW in USA (17 Viewers)

shader said:
Is there really data that proves that the immune response from the vaccine is “sustainable” and stronger than natural immunity? 
 

I’m skeptical of that statement 
Click to expand...
Yeah i am skeptical of that too. What I have read is that the immune response could be weak in a certain % of cases so taking the vaccine could still be beneficial and it doesnt hurt. 

I dont think there is anything that proves the vaccine has a better response than the immunity from infection. I think the only thing they can measure is the levels of antibodies and that isnt the entire picture when it comes to immune response. 

For example I dont think i would still have high levels of chicken pox antibodies. 

 
shader said:
Is there really data that proves that the immune response from the vaccine is “sustainable” and stronger than natural immunity? 
 

I’m skeptical of that statement 
Click to expand...
There is evidence that vaccines produce a stronger and more sustainable immune response in general - not specific to COVID.  Glad to find and share the podcast (Skeptics Guide) which talks about this.  But it isn’t definitive either way - so my initial comment was too certain.

Edit to add:  unlike others on this board who pretend to be more knowledgeable than epidemiologists, I’m not.  Just reading lots of stuff and trying to digest it all.  Ultimately, I’m getting the vaccine either way.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
parasaurolophus said:
Yeah i am skeptical of that too. What I have read is that the immune response could be weak in a certain % of cases so taking the vaccine could still be beneficial and it doesnt hurt. 

I dont think there is anything that proves the vaccine has a better response than the immunity from infection. I think the only thing they can measure is the levels of antibodies and that isnt the entire picture when it comes to immune response. 

For example I dont think i would still have high levels of chicken pox antibodies. 
Click to expand...
Appreciate your comments and thoughts.  Agree that there isn’t definitive proof either way.

Btw, from everything experts have said so far, high levels of antibodies aren’t really the point.  Immune response isn’t just about antibodies.  But you already know that.

 
shader said:
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-12-31/healthcare-workers-refuse-covid-19-vaccine-access?_amp=true&__twitter_impression=true
 

Apologies if this has already been posted, but this is pretty sad.  
Click to expand...
I get Ms. Lu's reluctance to take the vaccine, she's pregnant. I wouldn't be using her as an example of health care workers refusing to get vaccinated. She has a legit concern and we don't have answers. Interview the ones with no pre-existing conditions and find out what their issue(s) are.

"April Lu, a 31-year-old nurse at Providence Holy Cross Medical Center, said she refused to take the vaccine because she was not convinced it was safe for pregnant women. She is six months pregnant."

For them, start educating. From the article it seems there is a degree of mistrust in the vaccine due to not knowing...something. Don't know what that is, especially when you are talking health care workers, but there is something keeping these people from getting the vaccine. A few posts above about the staff at a retirement home that was reluctant to take the vaccine but after some education most signed up illustrate what a little education can do to sway someone who has the ability of cognitive thought.

 
My parents live in a 55+ retirement community in South Florida and were advised this morning that their community is going to be a Moderna vaccination distribution site starting on Tuesday. They both registered and are scheduled to get vaccinated on Tuesday. The only requirements are being a resident of the community and 65+ years old. 

I'm glad my dad has decided to get vaccinated. He's not an anti-vaxxer by any means but he has a host of health problems and has been skeptical about how he was going to respond to the actual vaccination. He's 75+, overweight, diabetic and can't really get around on his own but thankfully, somehow, he decided to get the vaccine now.  

When full, the place has about 8000 residents however many are snow birds from Canada that apparently have chosen to stay home this winter. Their building (64-units) is probably only 30% occupied.

 
shader said:
Ivan, great article. An example of this is just a few weeks ago when it was brought up that people that have had the virus may not need the vaccine (thus helping us hit immunity faster), and that idea was shot down hard and fast on these boards because....WHAT IF

That “what if” question will be big over the next 3-4 months too, and people are going to have to learn to let go of the pandemic restrictions.

If the vaccine is 95% effective, than people that have the vaccines, for all intents and purposes, don’t need masks, don’t need to quarantine, can gather in groups, can travel, etc.

Allowing this “freedom” may be a strong incentive to get vaccinated.

But if we continue to clamp down on the vaccinated because they “might” spread the virus, we are losing the plot.
Click to expand...
I agree with this point once we get to the point where we have enough vaccine to get to the general population. Right now it would be a very poor idea to allowing vaccinated people to go maskless, etc. Imagine going somewhere and the only people without masks are the healthcare workers and high risk elderly people. That will certainly lead to the general public taking their masks off regardless of vaccination status.

It will be a balancing act of what’s more beneficial - the prevention measures or the vaccination rate. Eventually it will become the vaccination rate but it will take several months. And in those months, we should be able to gain more data about how well the vaccine prevents the spread as well as how long antibodies may last after vaccination. Until then it’s more important for us in health care who are lucky enough to get the vaccine early to continue to set good examples for mask usage and other preventative measures.

I think a highly effective campaign will be vaccination events with the message that getting the vaccine is how you get schools open and save local businesses.

 
Biff84 said:
I think a highly effective campaign will be vaccination events with the message that getting the vaccine is how you get schools open and save local businesses.
Click to expand...
Exactly.  Time to get the word out: Do your part - Get jabbed so we can get open safely for all.

 
Alex P Keaton said:
Appreciate your comments and thoughts.  Agree that there isn’t definitive proof either way.

Btw, from everything experts have said so far, high levels of antibodies aren’t really the point.  Immune response isn’t just about antibodies.  But you already know that.
Click to expand...
These armchair immunologists should probably take a step back. While it’s true we don’t know definitively whether SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-induced immunity is better than that acquired naturally, the response you’ll get from vaccination is far more predictable. Moreover, the logistics of vaccine delivery are complicated enough without introducing additional testing prior to vaccination.

And you’re right that immunity is far more than antibody levels. But there are many examples of vaccines which elicit stronger immunologic responses than natural infection.

 
An excerpt from a post of mine in the Shark Pool about the posters you listen to the most. I listed a bunch of FF posters, but truly I listen to everyone in thread more than any FF poster.

Everyone who posted in the Covid thread in the Free For All forum is my hero in 2020. My job brings me in contact with dozens of elderly weekly and a couple of hundred of the same elderly every month, month in and month out. The doctors, nurses, frontline workers and wonderful fantasy football researchers who turned their attention to covid facts all helped me to keep my people as safe as possible. I truly thank each and everyone one of them from the bottom of my heart. I lost many of them to covid, more than I will ever know, but I can rest easy knowing I spared no expense or inconvenience to do my part to keep them from this horrible disease. 

And if I get perma banned for this post, it's been a pleasure reading everyone's thoughts and opinions. Thank you to everyone who posts anywhere in these forums.

Thanks to everyone who posted in this thread. I have read every single post from the beginning. Yall helped me stay in front of this when we had no guidance from our local, state or federal leaders. Thank you again ladies and gentlemen, I truly hope I can continue to read every post in this thread.

 
Just want to point out that for months into this pandemic many epidemiologists used the rate of spread of measles* as the backbone for their assumptions about covid not being airborne. 

If not for other disciplines aka armchair epidemiologists beating them over the head, they might still be stuck there. 

So I really hope immunologists arent using past vaccines like the HPV vaccine to form their recommendations about brand new mrna vaccine rationing.

And furthermore the topic of vaccine rationing isnt something that belongs only to the field of immunology since there are moral/ethical considerations as well, so discussions of strategies for implementation belong to all of us. 

You have to wonder what kind of thought process is involved when somebody acknowledges that the information presented was correct, but they still want you to be quiet. On a message board.

*this has been my favorite little tidbit of this pandemic. Measles was until the eighties incorrectly considered to be spread by droplets before determined to be airborne. Then because measles was airborne, covid became droplet. Science.

 
Pretty sure a bunch of guys on a fantasy football forum second guessing epidemiologists had nothing to do with understanding how SARS-CoV-2 is spread.

Vaccine distribution isn’t going to be perfect, but to assume the best available scientific data and ethical nuances haven’t been considered is obnoxiously arrogant. 

Thankfully, anonymous message boards don’t create public policy.

 
Terminalxylem said:
Pretty sure a bunch of guys on a fantasy football forum second guessing epidemiologists had nothing to do with understanding how SARS-CoV-2 is spread.

Vaccine distribution isn’t going to be perfect, but to assume the best available scientific data and ethical nuances haven’t been considered is obnoxiously arrogant. 

Thankfully, anonymous message boards don’t create public policy.
Click to expand...
People like me (not me personally) did actually get the CDC to rethink their plans for vaccine distribution, after people who understand how math works demonstrated that the CDCs original "equity based" plan would have resulted in more deaths.  

Of course, that's exactly one of those topics where epidemiologists have no special expertise that lots of other quantitatively-trained people don't have.

 
Terminalxylem said:
Pretty sure a bunch of guys on a fantasy football forum second guessing epidemiologists had nothing to do with understanding how SARS-CoV-2 is spread.

Vaccine distribution isn’t going to be perfect, but to assume the best available scientific data and ethical nuances haven’t been considered is obnoxiously arrogant. 

Thankfully, anonymous message boards don’t create public policy.
Click to expand...
Aerosol scientists, hvac engineers, sociologists, journalists, software engineers, etc are who are resposnsible for it. They are all armchair epidemiologists. 

And you forget that the APIC voted unanimously to kill more people, but luckily again, "armchair immunologists" didnt just sit back and listen to their vaccine advice. Thanks to journalists and people like nate silver, they changed their recommendations. 

I am sure you know all about this though. 

 
IvanKaramazov said:
People like me (not me personally) did actually get the CDC to rethink their plans for vaccine distribution, after people who understand how math works demonstrated that the CDCs original "equity based" plan would have resulted in more deaths.  

Of course, that's exactly one of those topics where epidemiologists have no special expertise that lots of other quantitatively-trained people don't have.
Click to expand...
Haha. You beat me to it. 

Eta: although in my defense i wasted a while trying to find the apic vote total. Think it was 14-0 but couldnt find it for sure, just that it was 100% and didnt want to quote a wrong number and give him some little tangent to go off on with the classic nut uh move around this place. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Terminalxylem said:
Pretty sure a bunch of guys on a fantasy football forum second guessing epidemiologists had nothing to do with understanding how SARS-CoV-2 is spread.

Vaccine distribution isn’t going to be perfect, but to assume the best available scientific data and ethical nuances haven’t been considered is obnoxiously arrogant. 

Thankfully, anonymous message boards don’t create public policy.
Click to expand...
I don’t think anyone on this board is looking to create public policy.  But it’s not arrogant to suggest that the medical system of the USA wasn’t 100% prepared for the vaccine distribution in this particular pandemic, especially considering how many failures our healthcare system has had over the past year and continues to have in dealing with the pandemic. 

 So I’m glad that some data guys could get in there and influence public policy in ways that hadn’t previously been considered.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IvanKaramazov said:
People like me (not me personally) did actually get the CDC to rethink their plans for vaccine distribution, after people who understand how math works demonstrated that the CDCs original "equity based" plan would have resulted in more deaths.  

Of course, that's exactly one of those topics where epidemiologists have no special expertise that lots of other quantitatively-trained people don't have.
Click to expand...
Statisticians creating harm minimization mathematical models is one thing; joe public beating his chest criticizing vaccine distribution plans is another. 

But I can at least respect someone who provides an alternative viewpoint based on data, rather than assuming public health/medical experts haven’t been thoughtful or scientific in their approach. Especially when the alternative plan isn’t grounded on anything other than skepticism.

Scientists make mistakes, and new findings cause us to review and revise our understanding of this novel disease. While the process isn’t perfect, I’ll favor it every time over guys spouting off virtual expertise based on concepts they just learned on Twitter.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
shader said:
I don’t think anyone on this board is looking to create public policy.  But it’s not arrogant to suggest that the medical system of the USA wasn’t 100% prepared for the vaccine distribution in this particular pandemic, especially considering how many failures our healthcare system has had over the past year and continues to have in dealing with the pandemic. 

 So I’m glad that some data guys could get in there and influence public policy in ways that hadn’t previously been considered.
Click to expand...
In my state they have literally admitted that they blew it on vaccine distribution.  The system that they have come up with is basically just hoping that if enough people get shots in their arms eventually that it will work out.  We have essentially no distribution system other than for large health care providers.   
 

It’s a monumental failure and most certainly isn’t based on the recommendations of any qualified experts.

 
the rover said:
In my state they have literally admitted that they blew it on vaccine distribution.  The system that they have come up with is basically just hoping that if enough people get shots in their arms eventually that it will work out.  We have essentially no distribution system other than for large health care providers.   
 

It’s a monumental failure and most certainly isn’t based on the recommendations of any qualified experts.
Click to expand...
It’s been a failure on all levels. I’ve seen some things that give me optimism in AZ but most of it is a mess. I’m all scheduled for my second dose but there doesn’t seem to be a plan for distribution, pre-registering or really anything for the next phase. We (retail pharmacy) might be doing something with clinics for essential workers (law enforcement, teachers, etc) but no info on that. Vaccine ordering and scheduling will be controlled on the district level not the store.

After getting constant questions I decided to do what I could to be prepared for what might be coming. I’m going to have people who want the vaccine fill out a short sheet with the info, health conditions and work information. Then I’ll use that info to triage the patients into waiting lists and once they figure out what the heck they’re gonna do, I’ll have a list of people to call to coming in. I just feel like I’ve got to do something to try make this process better.

 
Not all the pharmacies in my area can get the vaccine because there is specialized equipment needed for preparing the vaccine. Out of a couple dozen retail pharmacies only two have whatever equipment it is that's required, both are compounding pharmacies. One pharmacy told me they ordered the equipment 3 or 4 months back and haven't been given a time frame on when they might get it, like everything else the US doesn't have an adequate supply for everyone. I have no idea if the equipment is required everywhere or just in my state. 

Here is the process for preparing the Pfizer vaccine

Follow aseptic technique. Perform hand hygiene before vaccine preparation, between patients, when changing gloves (if worn), and any time hands become soiled.*

Remove vaccine from the freezer or refrigerator. Allow vaccine to come to room temperature. Vials can be held at room temperature for up to 2 hours before mixing. After 2 hours return unmixed vials to the refrigerator.

Before mixing, check the expiration dates of the vaccine and diluent. NEVER use expired vaccine or diluent.

With the vaccine at room temperature, gently invert vial 10 times. Do not shake the vial. If the vial is shaken, discard the vaccine. The vaccine is a white to off-white in color and may contain opaque particles. Do not use if liquid is discolored.

Using a new, sterile alcohol prep pad for each vial, wipe off the stoppers of the diluent and vaccine vials.

Using a 21-gauge (or narrower) needle, withdraw 1.8 mL of 0.9% sodium chloride (normal saline, preservative- free) into a mixing syringe. After use,” discard diluent vial and remaining diluent.

Do NOT use bacteriostatic normal saline or other diluents to mix the vaccine.

Inject 1.8 mL 0.9% sodium chloride (normal saline, preservative-free) diluent into the vaccine vial.

Using the mixing syringe, remove 1.8 mL of air from the vaccine vial to equalize the pressure in the vaccine vial.

Gently invert the vial containing vaccine and diluent 10 times. The vaccine will be off-white in color. Do not use if discolored or contains particulate matter. Do not shake. If the vial is shaken, discard the vaccine.

Note the date and time the vaccine was mixed on the vial.

Keep mixed vaccine at room temperature (2⁰C to 25⁰C [36⁰F to 77⁰F]) and administer within 6 hours. Discard any unused vaccine after 6 hours. Do not return to refrigerator or freezer storage.

*Gloves are not required unless the person administering the vaccine is likely to come in contact with potentially infectious body fluids or has open lesions on the hands. If worn, perform hand hygiene and change gloves between patients.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it was a data logger they couldn't get.

Best Practices: A Guide to Data Loggers Who should use a data logger? All storage units that contain COVID-19 vaccine should have a data logger continuously recording temperatures. What does a data logger do? A data logger is an electronic device that records temperature data over time. Why do I need to have a data logger? A data logger provides more accurate and comprehensive monitoring of temperatures of which vaccines have been exposed. Using a data logger may reduce vaccine loss by providing necessary data when the vaccine would otherwise be lost. Here’s a list of temperature monitoring devices that are not recommended to monitor vaccine: • Thermometers including alcohol or mercury thermometers, even if placed in fluid-filled bio-safe liquid vial • Bi-metal stem temperature monitoring devices • Food temperature monitoring devices • Household mercury temperature monitoring devices • Chart recorders • Infrared temperature monitoring devices Why do I need a back-up data logger? Having a back-up data logger on site assures that there will not be any unmonitored COVID-19 vaccine. Here’s when to activate the back-up data logger: • If the operation of the primary data logger fails, • To monitor the temperature of vaccine that is moved during an emergency, and • When the primary data logger is sent for recalibration. What is a data logger certificate of calibration? Each data logger must have a valid certificate of calibration, also known as a Report of Calibration. All certificates of calibration are required to contain: • Model number, Serial number, and Date of calibration • Measurement results that indicates the unit passed the test and the documented uncertainty is within suitable limits (recommended uncertainty is +/-1F +/-0.5C) and • A statement indicating that it meets International Organization for Standardization/International Electronic Commission (ISO/IEC) 17025 standards.

 
People 65+ showing up at random hospitals and getting in line for the vaccine. They lined up at a hospital and waited in line over 4 hours in SA and the hospital was only vaccinating front line medical folks. Apparently the hospital felt bad and started to inoculate them. But really people, you think you can just show up anywhere, no appointment, and get a vaccine?

 
DallasDMac said:
People 65+ showing up at random hospitals and getting in line for the vaccine. They lined up at a hospital and waited in line over 4 hours in SA and the hospital was only vaccinating front line medical folks. Apparently the hospital felt bad and started to inoculate them. But really people, you think you can just show up anywhere, no appointment, and get a vaccine?
Click to expand...
Sure seems like you can from what you wrote. 

It is incumbent job each state to provide clear guidance on the priority order and how to get a vaccine.  Every state has known for many months that vaccines were likeky going to become available towards the end of the year.  Why they have not made the process clear is beyond me. 

 
We definitely need to have a solid game plan for rolling out the vaccine and they should definitely focus on front line workers and elderly/at-risk.  As someone who doesn’t fall in to any of those categories I just hope they vaccinate anyone and not waste any - every person who gets vaccinated gets us closer to being back to normal.  I’m happy (and fortunate) that I can continue to wait this out at home. 

 
AAABatteries said:
We definitely need to have a solid game plan for rolling out the vaccine and they should definitely focus on front line workers and elderly/at-risk.  As someone who doesn’t fall in to any of those categories I just hope they vaccinate anyone and not waste any - every person who gets vaccinated gets us closer to being back to normal.  I’m happy (and fortunate) that I can continue to wait this out at home. 
Click to expand...
But how was this not already developed? It’s not like this vaccine snuck up on us and all we’ve heard from leadership is how this will roll out at warp speed when available. Well? We’re waiting!

Not getting political but it’s hard for me to loathe any more the people in charge of this rollout or the handling of this entire response since March. Pretty sure we set new records again yesterday. 

 
beer 30 said:
But how was this not already developed? It’s not like this vaccine snuck up on us and all we’ve heard from leadership is how this will roll out at warp speed when available. Well? We’re waiting!

Not getting political but it’s hard for me to loathe any more the people in charge of this rollout or the handling of this entire response since March. Pretty sure we set new records again yesterday. 
Click to expand...
I tried to answer this without getting political, I can't so I won't.

 
beer 30 said:
But how was this not already developed? It’s not like this vaccine snuck up on us and all we’ve heard from leadership is how this will roll out at warp speed when available. Well? We’re waiting!

Not getting political but it’s hard for me to loathe any more the people in charge of this rollout or the handling of this entire response since March. Pretty sure we set new records again yesterday. 
Click to expand...
Asleep at the job plain and simple. Everyone is waiting for the next level above them to make a decision and not starting to make plans until they find out.

 
Biff84 said:
Asleep at the job plain and simple. Everyone is waiting for the next level above them to make a decision and not starting to make plans until they find out.
Click to expand...
Disbanding the pandemic response team has really come back to bite us in the backside. 

 
If I had a say, here’s what my plan would look like:

Split it into two separate groups - those at risk due to their occupation and those at risk because of age and health conditions.

For those with occupational risk (essential workers) have them get vaccinated through mass vaccination clinics like they are doing now at hospitals. Divide them into groups based on exposure risk and work down the line. County health officials will contact employers and they will be responsible for getting their employees registered for the clinics. On-site clinics are also options for places like schools and manufacturing plants.

For the elderly and high risk have that run through the local pharmacy with the Moderna vaccine. The currently plan for nursing homes is good. Beyond that break it down into age groups (70+, 60s, 50s, 40s) and have everyone pre-register with their preferred pharmacy. Patients with high risk health conditions jump an age group. So the first group would be 70+ and 60s with health conditions. Hold enough vaccine for their second doses. Gradually move down groups with registration and scheduling happening while the previous group is getting their 2nd doses.

As you get down to the lower risk groups, consider using a delayed second dose strategy to get as many the first dose as possible.

Many of these vaccinations will be done in a regular pharmacy settings but also consider using parking lots and off-site clinics.

Probably the most important thing is that this entire process of pre-registration should have been started in the weeks before the vaccine got approved. Then you will have people waiting for their turn and already ready to go.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
@Terminalxylem (and others who might want to tackle this)... a couple quick questions about mutations: 

1) Regarding the South African variant now prevalent in the UK and spreading here. Is it still assumed that this vaccine will be similarly effective against this strain? 

2) What is the likelihood (in your professional opinion) we'll be looking at a mutation that moves outside protection from this vaccine? 

3) IF such a mutation occurs, what sort of timeline (realistically) are we looking at to creating a modified/new vaccine that will be administerable. I know sequencing can be done lightning fast now, but how would testing/approval and other red tape go? Manufacturing timelines, etc? 
 

TIA 

 
[icon] said:
@Terminalxylem (and others who might want to tackle this)... a couple quick questions about mutations: 

1) Regarding the South African variant now prevalent in the UK and spreading here. Is it still assumed that this vaccine will be similarly effective against this strain? 

2) What is the likelihood (in your professional opinion) we'll be looking at a mutation that moves outside protection from this vaccine? 

3) IF such a mutation occurs, what sort of timeline (realistically) are we looking at to creating a modified/new vaccine that will be administerable. I know sequencing can be done lightning fast now, but how would testing/approval and other red tape go? Manufacturing timelines, etc? 
 

TIA 
Click to expand...
Based upon my readings as an amateur and if it makes you feel better I can lie about staying at a Holiday Inn Express last night. 

1) YES

2) The mRNA vaccines are aimed specifically at the spike protein attachment to virus shell. It would take one heck of mutation to render that strategy mute. I would put the odds at extremely low in the near future. Over the course of years and decades if this virus is still around the odds go up a bit.

The other vaccines based on dead virus like the flu vaccine are predicted to not need to be tweaked yearly like the flu vaccine but might only need to be changed every 2 or 3 years. However like many things with this virus nobody knows definitely at this point.

3) Supposedly the scientists that developed the mRNA vaccines did so in a single weekend after receiving the genome from China. The problem then becomes the logistics of testing, manufacturing and receiving approval from the FDA. It took what about 8 or 9 months for vaccinations to start this time around and who knows how much longer than that for us to get everyone who wants one to get vaccinated.

These are all a layman's understanding of articles I can understand. The doctors in here read more in depth articles that are beyond my comprehension without spending hours of research trying to figure out what one paragraph might be saying. 

 
Dezbelief said:
The problem then becomes the logistics of testing, manufacturing and receiving approval from the FDA. It took what about 8 or 9 months for vaccinations to start this time around
Click to expand...
There were quite a few parallel operations ongoing for these first vaccines.  Example: manufacturing started before Phase 3 trials had any supporting data on efficacy.  That was a huge $ risk if the vax proved to be ineffective.  Thankfully, it was effective. 

In the situation where a mutated virus renders prevuous vaccinations moot, the timeline would have to be similarly compressed by parallel pathing actions that are typically sequential.  If completed in sequence, I suspect the timeline would double, which is faster than any other vaccine development. 

 
[icon] said:
@Terminalxylem (and others who might want to tackle this)... a couple quick questions about mutations: 

1) Regarding the South African variant now prevalent in the UK and spreading here. Is it still assumed that this vaccine will be similarly effective against this strain? 

2) What is the likelihood (in your professional opinion) we'll be looking at a mutation that moves outside protection from this vaccine? 

3) IF such a mutation occurs, what sort of timeline (realistically) are we looking at to creating a modified/new vaccine that will be administerable. I know sequencing can be done lightning fast now, but how would testing/approval and other red tape go? Manufacturing timelines, etc? 
 

TIA 
Click to expand...
1. Likely, as there is a little flexibility in antibody binding, and one wouldn't expect dramatic structural changes in the spike protein from a point mutation(s). IIRC, there's already some data that suggest the vaccines still work.

2. Unlikely, at least in the near term. A point mutation(s) which simultaneously results in increased virulence/fitness and causes major structural alteration in antibody binding sites could occur, but would be pretty unlucky. Coronaviruses aren't like influenza, which readily recombines entire coding segments of its genome between strains, so called antigenic shift.

3. Probably at least 6+ months, judging by our experience with flu vaccination.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Only 4 million people in US have gotten the first does of the vaccine compared to expectation of 20 million by end of 2020. They are so far behind that they are now considering giving people two half doses. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jobarules said:
Only 4 million people in US have gotten the first does of the vaccine compared to expectation of 20 million by end of 2020. They are so far behind that they are now considering giving people only one dose. 
Click to expand...
I have not read that the second dose would never be given, just not held back in inventory and likely delayed. 

 
parasaurolophus said:
I have not read that the second dose would never be given, just not held back in inventory and likely delayed. 
Click to expand...
It was two half doses. I misread

The US Food and Drug Administration will meet this week to consider giving half-doses of Moderna’s Covid-19 vaccine to people aged 18 to 55.

The move could make the vaccine available to twice as many people in this age group, according to Moncef Slaoui, chief scientific adviser of Operation Warp Speed, the US government's vaccine program.

Slaoui told CNN Chief Medical Correspondent Dr. Sanjay Gupta that the decision to cut the current 100-microgram dose in half, with another half-dose 28 days later, ultimately rests in the hands of the FDA.
Click to expand...

 
The Z Machine said:
Sure seems like you can from what you wrote. 

It is incumbent job each state to provide clear guidance on the priority order and how to get a vaccine.  Every state has known for many months that vaccines were likeky going to become available towards the end of the year.  Why they have not made the process clear is beyond me. 
Click to expand...
I find it difficult to believe that people in this thread don't understand this.  You can sense in many of the posts from the last page that they know who they want to blame, but use the "I' can't get political" excuse.

This entire pandemic we've had states making their own rules on lockdowns, masks, testing, reporting, etc. 

Why would we expect it to be any different when it comes to the vaccine?

There are going to be states that handle this well and states that handle this poorly.  If the federal government and the drug companies have done their job to get vaccines to the 50 states, it then becomes the responsibility of the state health departments to create plans to administer the vaccines.  

Vaccines are going well.  I'll bet this week the numbers of vaccinated start skyrocketing now that processes are in place and the holidays are over.

 
shader said:
I find it difficult to believe that people in this thread don't understand this.  You can sense in many of the posts from the last page that they know who they want to blame, but use the "I' can't get political" excuse.

This entire pandemic we've had states making their own rules on lockdowns, masks, testing, reporting, etc. 

Why would we expect it to be any different when it comes to the vaccine?

There are going to be states that handle this well and states that handle this poorly.  If the federal government and the drug companies have done their job to get vaccines to the 50 states, it then becomes the responsibility of the state health departments to create plans to administer the vaccines.  

Vaccines are going well.  I'll bet this week the numbers of vaccinated start skyrocketing now that processes are in place and the holidays are over.
Click to expand...
Basically three countries in the world are ahead of the US in vaccinations per 100,000 of population.  Israel, England and Bahrain.  The wailing about incompetence comes from two issues, the overoptimistic 20 million by end of 2020 pronouncement and politics.  

 
jobarules said:
It was two half doses. I misread
Click to expand...
That’s the first I’ve seen that mentioned. I’ll wait for some data but I’m not a fan. If we’re going with alternative dosing plans, I’d much rather give a full first dose and delay the second dose for the lower risk groups.

Supply doesn’t appear to be the biggest issue right now, it’s logistics. Lowering the doses given is likely more beneficial than increasing the doses available. Also with the Moderna vaccine, the vials need to be used within 6 hours of the first puncture. Each vial has 10 full doses which is bound to lead to some waste. Increasing it to 20 doses per vial and you will almost certainly create more waste. It will likely lead to pharmacies holding back on some vaccinations because they don’t want to start a new vial knowing they won’t be able  finish the vial.

 
Biff84 said:
That’s the first I’ve seen that mentioned. I’ll wait for some data but I’m not a fan. If we’re going with alternative dosing plans, I’d much rather give a full first dose and delay the second dose for the lower risk groups.

Supply doesn’t appear to be the biggest issue right now, it’s logistics. Lowering the doses given is likely more beneficial than increasing the doses available. Also with the Moderna vaccine, the vials need to be used within 6 hours of the first puncture. Each vial has 10 full doses which is bound to lead to some waste. Increasing it to 20 doses per vial and you will almost certainly create more waste. It will likely lead to pharmacies holding back on some vaccinations because they don’t want to start a new vial knowing they won’t be able  finish the vial.
Click to expand...
Yeah, that doesn't make any sense, especially since the trials were based on a specific dosage.  I can't imagine mass halving of a studied dose as a means to increase vaccination rates.

 
worrierking said:
The wailing about incompetence comes from two issues, the overoptimistic 20 million by end of 2020 pronouncement and politics.  
Click to expand...
That figure could never have been based on anything even halfway concrete. Manufacturing and shipping vaccines to states was never going to be the bottleneck and that should have been known for some time now.

 
New Data on South African strain are "very worrying": 

Earlier in December, the WHO’s Chief Scientist Soumya Swaminathan tried to allay fears over the variants, telling the BBC that it was “very unlikely” that the latest mutations would cause the current vaccines not to work. The WHO has said further investigations are required “to understand the impact of specific mutations on viral properties and the effectiveness of diagnostics, therapeutics and vaccines.”

Regius Professor of Medicine at Oxford University John Bell said on Sunday that the variant identified in South Africa was worrying in this regard, however.

“They both have multiple, different mutations in them, so they’re not a single mutation,” he told Times Radio. “And the mutations associated with the South African form are really pretty substantial changes in the structure of the (virus’ spike) protein.”

He said there were questions as to whether the Pfizer/BioNTech and Oxford University/AstraZeneca vaccines would be “disabled” in the presence of such mutations.

The team behind the Oxford University jab was investigating the effect of the variants on its vaccine, he said, adding that his gut feeling was that it would still be effective against the strain identified in the U.K., but he was more uncertain about the one identified in South Africa.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/04/south-african-coronavirus-variant-more-of-a-problem-than-uk-one.html?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=news_tab&utm_content=algorithm
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Coronavirus prevention
Replies
4
Views
324
JaxBill
JaxBill
nirad3
COVID-19 / CoronaVirus - terms/phrases
Replies
35
Views
623
Galileo
Galileo
Joe Bryant
Scared to ask but don't have anywhere else - Clay Travis Article?
2
Replies
71
Views
3K
roadkill1292
roadkill1292

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 18 (members: 0, guests: 18)
Top