Vaccination free for-all

[TexasHusker]

I don't agree with this, and I'll present the other side, briefly. Liberals such as myself believe the following: (1) Government needs to look like the people and serve the people (not profit from them), (2) the system is quite rigged against those not born into the right color, gender, or zip code, (3) we need to care about one another. The 'religion of tolerance' is about being a good, caring person, judging someone by their character, not their color or gender. To many liberals, those who don't share these feelings appear to be, quite frankly, bad people.

Dishonesty and 'control' was never seen at a more pronounced level arguably in the history of the US than with Trump. 'Coersion' as you mention, is telling the public this virus is going to go away, as he did at the start of the pandemic. He lied constantly and tried to prevent votes from being counted, then rallied an insurrection when he didn't win the election.

I'm attempting to meet you more in the middle with COVID discussions, with facts and logic. You have represented the right-wing 'other side' on these forums, and I'm interested in seeing how our discourse plays out, to see if it is truly impossible for Americans to find middle ground on some issues. I do wonder if racism underlies it all and is the real dividing factor.

I'm no Trump defender.

[QuarterMillionMan]

I'm trying to look into the future when we reach 80% to 90% vaccination and/or herd immunity, is testing going to be necessary? Maybe I can see testing for patients who present to the hospital for moderate to severe symptoms but for mild symptoms not needed? This might be a dumb question but with herd immunity will we even see moderate to severe symptoms anymore?

[disneysteve]

I'm trying to look into the future when we reach 80% to 90% vaccination and/or herd immunity, is testing going to be necessary? Maybe I can see testing for patients who present to the hospital for moderate to severe symptoms but for mild symptoms not needed? This might be a dumb question but with herd immunity will we even see moderate to severe symptoms anymore?

Lots of good questions that we don't have answers to yet.

I don't think we're ever going to see 80-90% vaccination. There are far too many people refusing vaccination for that to happen.

We don't yet know how long immunity lasts after vaccination, or after having COVID. The only way to answer that question is with time. If a booster dose of the vaccine is needed on some regular basis, like a flu shot, that will be another hurdle, especially if it becomes a vaccine that changes periodically due to new variants.

I think testing will likely stay around. We test for flu. I see no reason we wouldn't test for COVID.

A high vaccination rate will certainly cut down cases, especially severe cases, but they'll still occur, especially in unvaccinated people (either by choice or due to medical inability to get it).

[Snydley]

Lots of good questions that we don't have answers to yet.

I don't think we're ever going to see 80-90% vaccination. There are far too many people refusing vaccination for that to happen.

We don't yet know how long immunity lasts after vaccination, or after having COVID. The only way to answer that question is with time. If a booster dose of the vaccine is needed on some regular basis, like a flu shot, that will be another hurdle, especially if it becomes a vaccine that changes periodically due to new variants.

I think testing will likely stay around. We test for flu. I see no reason we wouldn't test for COVID.

A high vaccination rate will certainly cut down cases, especially severe cases, but they'll still occur, especially in unvaccinated people (either by choice or due to medical inability to get it).

I suspect testing will be cut way back in scale. I'm still required to be tested every week at work even though I'm vaccinated. Kinda seems like a waste of money do keep doing this.

I think 'herd immunity' in some form will be reached, since ~30% of the country has been infected and we'll see probably 70% vaccinated (maybe?). So pre-existing immunity in the population as a whole will mean far fewer severe cases.

I think vaccine immunity could need a booster in a year; however, the immunity might last longer and maybe no additional shot will be needed for 2-3 years.

[disneysteve]

I suspect testing will be cut way back in scale. I'm still required to be tested every week at work even though I'm vaccinated. Kinda seems like a waste of money do keep doing this.

Oh, I agree with that. I think routine testing of asymptomatic vaccinated people needs to stop. I was referring to symptomatic testing. I don't think that will ever go away.

I think 'herd immunity' in some form will be reached, since ~30% of the country has been infected and we'll see probably 70% vaccinated (maybe?).

Keep in mind that the 30% is largely part of the 70%. Every single person I know who has had COVID has also been vaccinated. I'm sure there are some folks who had COVID and will skip the vaccine but I would hope that most will still get it.

[Snydley]

Keep in mind that the 30% is largely part of the 70%. Every single person I know who has had COVID has also been vaccinated. I'm sure there are some folks who had COVID and will skip the vaccine but I would hope that most will still get it.

I'd guess 20-50% of that 30% (previously infected) is not getting vaccinated and not planning to- they also haven't been social distancing, etc. While COVID induces far lower antibodies than the vaccine in general, reinfections are pretty rare, so decent protection is present in this population.

[QuarterMillionMan]

Will we have to take the COVID vaccine every year for the rest of our lives much like the flu vaccine every year (except those who choose not to get it)?

Why is it that we don't have to take the 1918 Spanish flu vaccine?

[ua_guy]

Will we have to take the COVID vaccine every year for the rest of our lives much like the flu vaccine every year (except those who choose not to get it)?

Why is it that we don't have to take the 1918 Spanish flu vaccine?

From the CDC:

Are current antivirals and vaccines effective against the 1918 H1N1 virus?


Yes. Oseltamivir (Tamiflu® or generic), has been shown to be effective against similar influenza A(H1N1) viruses and is expected to be effective against the 1918 H1N1 virus. Other antivirals (zanamivir, peramivir and baloxavir) have not been tested against this specific virus but are expected to also be effective. Vaccines containing the 1918 HA or other subtype H1 HA proteins were effective in protecting mice against the 1918 H1N1 virus. Vaccination with current seasonal influenza vaccines is expected to provide some protection in humans since seasonal influenza vaccines provided some level of protection against the 1918 H1N1 virus in mice.

[disneysteve]

Will we have to take the COVID vaccine every year for the rest of our lives much like the flu vaccine every year (except those who choose not to get it)?

Possibly. it's too soon to know how often a booster will be needed.

Why is it that we don't have to take the 1918 Spanish flu vaccine?

You do, as noted above. That was an H1N1 flu virus which is a common subset of flu viruses, so the annual flu shot you get protects you against it.

[QuarterMillionMan]

MLK hospital today called me asking why I never showed up for my 2nd shot of Pfizer. I explained that after my 1st shot the check-out lady who was sitting in front of a computer insisted that I didn't need an appt for my 2nd shot and told me just return for my 2nd shot even though I insisted that I would need an appt for my 2nd shot. That was in March when appointments were necessary at the time (no walk-ins). Anyway I explained to the caller today that my work was able to locate another facility where I took the 2nd shot. Vaccinations must be way down for MLK hospital to follow up with me and inquire why I never took their 2nd shot. But it is good that they want to make sure I get my 2nd shot. It got me thinking though if my 1st shot was on March 2, and my 2nd shot was taken today on May 10, would my vaccination still be effective with that long of an interval between 1st and 2nd dose? I guess late is better than only one dose.

[disneysteve]

The gap between doses doesn’t seem to be any problem. Other countries are only giving first doses and not scheduling second doses at all. Canada is doing that.

[TexasHusker]

The gap between doses doesn’t seem to be any problem. Other countries are only giving first doses and not scheduling second doses at all. Canada is doing that.

Well, the two-dose varieties are showing to be 80+ percent effective after one shot, which is in the same realm as one shot from J&J. I can see why people are asking "why" they should get a second shot. I never understood why J&J was granted approval in the U.S. to begin with. It's efficacy was clearly inferior to Moderna and Pfizer. All the J&J shot did was screw this whole thing up, especially after the pause. All of this bully pulpit from the CDC "remember to get your second shot!" after they approved J&J, give me a break.

[ua_guy]

Well, the two-dose varieties are showing to be 80+ percent effective after one shot, which is in the same realm as one shot from J&J. I can see why people are asking "why" they should get a second shot. I never understood why J&J was granted approval in the U.S. to begin with. It's efficacy was clearly inferior to Moderna and Pfizer. All the J&J shot did was screw this whole thing up, especially after the pause. All of this bully pulpit from the CDC "remember to get your second shot!" after they approved J&J, give me a break.

The J&J didn't have the transport/refrigeration issues that Pfizer first had, so it was a critical piece of the initial supply and rollout. It's efficacy is less than pfizer/moderna at this point, but in a single shot that reduces severe complications by almost 100% if you get sick, is pretty dang good.

Also, mRNA vaccines like Pfizer/Moderna are new. Understandably, some people are concerned about haste in developing it, or any possible longer-term effects. J&J/Janssen is developed using older, more common technology, so can be a good alternative to someone who isn't so sure about mRNA vaccines.

[rennigade]

Just remember, DARPA oversaw/funded big pharma to create these mRNA vaccines. Tread with caution. Tin foil hat engaged.

[james.hendrickson]

Well the only comment I have here - is its too bad that there isn't a good commercially available vaccine delivery solution that would let people eat the vaccine in say...candy or a beverage. If you had that, then you could market a product that would help prevent you from getting covid. Like, say original coke with covid 19 protection, or a multivitamin with covid-19 protection, or Doritos chips with covid -19 protection. That would probably sell well, and would address a lot of the public concern about getting vaccinated.