No vaccine for 5 years? Facing up to how long term this may be...

[Lightbulblight]

Just read this article

www.scientificamerican.com/article/bad-news-about-the-pandemic-were-not-getting-back-to-normal-any-time-soon/

I am starting to face up to the fact that things may not be going back to normal for a very long time. Wondering what I need to reconsider in terms of work, education of my kids, the way I live...

Is anyone else thinking this way? I feel like I’ve been living in a bubble of denial thinking it will all be over in the next year

Conjecture every bit as much as the claims that we will be back to normal by Christmas. No one actually knows but just feel the need to write articles and speculate. For every scientist saying x there is one disagreeing and saying x is wrong and it’s y and vice versa.

@Lightbulblight

I think I find that it actually helps to consider the more pessimistic versions, rather than dismissing them. I’ve been relying on kids back to school in September, vaccine available soon for vulnerable parents etc. Now I’m trying to think carefully about what I can do to prepare if these things don’t happen as quickly as I’d imagined - rather than setting myself up for a series of shocks and disappointments.

But we all have to find our own way, and maybe I’m submitting to gloominess too soon...

Each to their own I suppose! I read this article and tbh it's just another plausible sounding "scientist" talking about what might happen. The truth is that nobody knows what will happen next. I think he, perhaps like you and others, finds comfort on preparing for a worst case scenario. He is ignoring a raft of other factors that can and will improve things in the short term. Improved testing and treatment for example.

I do agree with the idea that we need to embrace some changes and stop wanting everything back "as it was" I think a lot of the mask wearing, distancing, hygiene measures are here to stay and the sooner we adapt to this the more easily we'll cope.

So GP’s have been told to prepare to roll out the vaccine from November.... IMO that is prudent contingency planning, so that IF the trials show it is effective, they are ready to go with the stock which is already being manufactured.

Flip side of that is if the trials show it’s not effective, they will pour the stocks down the drain and not implement the rollout.

Now, I’m an optimist on it working, but even so “Back to Normal by Christmas” is unrealistic given the time it will take to administer to everyone. Next Easter, maybe.

However, the fundamental point of the article that most people fail to make any preparation for the disaster lasting longer than they expect, is true. It could be 5 years. But I think it’s likely to be sooner than that.

Where did you hear that @PuzzledObserver? About GPs being prepared to vaccinate from November?

Dr. Gleb Tsipursky is the CEO of Disaster Avoidance Experts, so I think he's pretty strongly motivated to push the idea that the disaster is going to last for years on end. ;)

It is a very negative piece but it doesn't say 5 years... at the end it does suggest 2021...

"Still, while over a hundred organizations launched projects to develop vaccines, and several have created a viable prototype, it will take many months for the vaccine to go through human trials. In the ideal scenario, if one of the first several vaccines does successfully make it through trials and proves highly effective without any unacceptable side effects—a very big if—we might have a vaccine approved for widespread use by summer of 2021."

@Qasd nailed it. He proved his point by remaining anchored in his own biases from back in February/ March. I'd add that he's also got a book to sell and that book relies on his previous suppositions being correct.

I'm a pragmatic optimist, I exercise caution around risk so we locked down early, but we check cases in our area and adjust according to the risks. The world has changed, but it keeps turning and many aspects will change back when they can. Treatments will make a huge difference, and from my reading I believe the Oxford vaccine will work short term (and frankly let's take short-term right now, anything!!!), plus the Imperial one for longer term immunity. I hope the investment in British science will continue, it's clear that these scientists with their institutions in support stand up with the best in the world. If we're going to get the economy back on track, anything that can be sold overseas is a good start. If we can capitalise on the lockdown enjoyment of clean air by investing in green scientific firms/ solutions to create jobs too, even better! IT innovation has always been strong in the UK, so I'm really looking forward to seeing the next stage in work from home technological improvements too.

@Beebityboo

Where did you hear that *@PuzzledObserver*? About GPs being prepared to vaccinate from November?

Other threads on mumsnet, of the “my relative is a GP and they’ve been told...” variety. Having said that, I’ve just come back from seeing a couple I know well, whose daughter IS a GP, and she’s told them Astra Zeneca expect approval before the end of the year.

So, still second hand, but a little closer than I knew when I posted my previous comment.

Assuming I’m telling the truth, of course.
I am.

Like a lot of new armchair experts I’ve been drawn to articles on vaccines lately. One widely used one (I want to say TB but haven’t got any links to back that up, it might have been polio) isn’t actually that effective, under 50%, but we don’t need it to be. Viruses and diseases become much less of a threat at a relatively low percentage of the population becoming immune and/or unable to transmit infection. The problem occurs when no one has any natural immunity but that lessens as the immune population creeps up.

Chicken pox still has the potential to rip through the country since we don’t vaccinate routinely for it but it doesn’t because we have enough people with antibodies alongside containment measures by isolating at home whilst still contagious and alerting people who we’ve come into contact with. Some people have had the vaccine for chicken pox but no where near the kind of percentages you would need to create herd immunity.

Personally I have to stay positive about the Oxford vaccination - it’s getting me through this. I know it’s unlikely to be a magic bullet or eliminate the threat completely but it will be potentially good enough to speed up an end to current restrictions and allow time for other vaccinations and treatments to be developed.

@NeurotrashWarrior

Regarding efficacy, several people I know high up in the nhs/ research told me that even with a low efficacy (eg 20%) it's worth the shot in the current crisis. One told me they're telling Gp practices to prepare to roll it out in November. Not being reported as clearly it means many wouldn't bother socially distancing.

We don't know how long it lasts but to get through the winter it's worth it. It may be that it ends up being something that you need a regular booster for.

What does 20% effective look like? Reduces the number of people who catch it by 20%? Well, that's no good is it as 80% will still be at the same risk. Or does it mean it will reduce severity of symptoms by 20%? Again, how is that useful? If you are going to get a severe form of it what does a 20% reduction in severity give you? The problem is not being able to predict how it will affect individuals. Would you want a vaccine that might give 20% reduction (of what?) but not know how it would affect you?

@okiedokieme

I know people working on the Oxford vaccine, they are very optimistic (or were 2 weeks ago when I last saw them). There's also advances in treatment already, plus there's still herd immunity which is not a dirty word! Some people are pessimists, I suspect it was to contrast with an optimistic article for balance. I refuse to believe that we can't nail this, and despite the deaths, it's actually not that serious a disease compared to others in the past (I've had c19), just unfortunately it's deadly to a few.

www.ox.ac.uk/news/2020-07-20-new-study-reveals-oxford-coronavirus-vaccine-produces-strong-immune-response

Yes this article indicates that provided it can be proven within the wider community that Oxford have something that appears to work, albeit with two jabs, with no side effects.

To be honest I would take this now if offered.

Even if a vaccine is approved soon it won't be enough to return to normal. If we're really lucky then it might be effective at preventing disease and transmission in 70% of people. If we push really hard then we might persuade 70% of people to get vaccinated. But this probably still won't be enough to achieve herd immunity. So likely ongoing issues with spread of the disease in this country. And that's without the massive issues of rolling out a mass vaccination programme to the whole of the world.

'Normality' is many years away IMHO. Sorry.

People won't comply with restrictions at this level for years in my view. People are already fed up, I really can't see people avoiding hugging their family and friends for years on end. Eventually people will just start doing what they want, vaccine or no vaccine.

My guess is there might be some level of compliance for maybe another 6 months, max.

@Sunshinegirl82 I agree, a lot of people are already throughly fed up.
I give it less than 6 months.
I expect the media will crank up the negative news machine to scare everyone into compliance before that though.

The author I'm sure knows he's stuff. In disaster avoidance. I would trust the people who make vaccines. Even people who are specialists in coronaviruses and epidemiologists don't know about developing a vaccine in intimate detail.

Another one feeling very confident there will be a vaccine

In my experience pharma companies are hugely over optimistic with their drug forecasts. Not that many effective drugs get approved.

But likewise, this guy is very pesimistic.

The answer will lie in the middle.

And for those who want to try an untested vaccine? Vaccines can kill, and they can make the disease worse. You really want it to be tested.

But this probably still won't be enough to achieve herd immunity

With an R in a totally susceptible population of 3ish, then it would be enough

It's the way more infectious disease like measles (R12-18) where you need the very high levels.

That is of course looking at how much to suppress widespread community transfer. There might still be small clusters.

they can make the disease worse

Yes, that's the worrying scenario. Hats off to those who enter the trials when important stuff like that is still unknown

@SexTrainGlue

But this probably still won't be enough to achieve herd immunity

With an R in a totally susceptible population of 3ish, then it would be enough

It's the way more infectious disease like measles (R12-18) where you need the very high levels.

That is of course looking at how much to suppress widespread community transfer. There might still be small clusters.

Really? For a 70% effective vaccine given to 70% of the population (both figures may be optimistic) then over half the population would still be susceptible. My understanding is that for coronavirus with an r number of 3 then you'd need to achieve immunity in at least 60% of the population.

@Sunshinegirl82

People won't comply with restrictions at this level for years in my view. People are already fed up, I really can't see people avoiding hugging their family and friends for years on end. Eventually people will just start doing what they want, vaccine or no vaccine.

My guess is there might be some level of compliance for maybe another 6 months, max.

I very much agree! I don't think we're going to suspend our innate humanness (physical affection, getting together in large groups to celebrate big events or do cultural things, seeking out love and / or sex, letting children play freely etc) beyond a certain point. Governments can either be realistic about that, or they can move in an ever more authoritarian direction (which is my anxiety). The curse of Covid is that it IS serious, but not serious enough to justify shutting down our society...or nearly scary to panic under-60s to put their lives on hold indefinitely. It also very much discriminates.

See what you mean - you do need about 60% receiving an effective jab, but I'm not sure what's counted as 'effective' for that kind of calculation

Sounds like you have it more at your fingertips!

The curse of Covid is that it IS serious, but not serious enough to justify shutting down our society...or nearly scary to panic under-60s to put their lives on hold indefinitely

60,000 excess deaths with lockdown and that's not serious enough?

That said, I think how it goes through the northern hemisphere a/w virus season will have a major impact on how we live with the disease in future.

Anything that takes potential carriers out of the pool makes the virus harder to spread. This is why we have models like the one on schools that just came out, showing the varying scenarios with different % risk to them. If we can knock off a bit of spread with test and trace, and a bit with a partially effective vaccine, and a bit with other measures, it won't be perfect, but it will make lives better. I think this is probably what WHO means when they say "we may not find a magic bullet" in the near future. We may not end up with a perfect "now it's all over" solution, but a raft of measures that when we put them together, make life pretty normal again. That said, I'm still hopeful for an effective vaccine that means that pretty normal is very normal indeed.

Herd immunity is a gradual process. There will be an impact on transmission even at pretty low levels of immunity. So anything is better than nothing.

I do think it's important to be realistic about what is achievable long term. I just don't think you are going to persuade people that they can't hug family and friends, can't have a party, can't form a new relationship or have sex with someone they don't already live with for years on end.

It's contrary to human nature and whilst most people will do it for a while the reality is that if a vaccine doesn't come along fairly soon to compensate for people pretty much giving up on social distancing (and I'm very positive about it so I believe it will) we will see increased case numbers. People will become desensitised to it (I think a lot already are).