Why is MN the only place that seems to pessimistic about a vaccine?!

[bottomsup00]

Been lurking on this board for a while.

Every time a vaccine is mentioned people seem to dismiss it, or say things like “it’s not a silver bullet” “it won’t save us” “things won’t go back to normal”

In real life, most people I speak to seem so positive about a vaccine.
Everyone I speak to understands it will take take to roll out to everyone and accepts this, but believes the vaccine approval will happen and fairly soon.

What makes a lot of people on here feel the opposite way?

Pessimists? Or anti vaxer?

I’ve got no issue with realism or sounding a cautionary note. It’s “believe me, we’ll never get a vaccine” types that bug me

@MadameBlobby

I’ve got no issue with realism or sounding a cautionary note. It’s “believe me, we’ll never get a vaccine” types that bug me

I know. How exactly do they feel they can be so sure?

I know. How exactly do they feel they can be so sure?

As far as i am concerned, until a vaccine is approved, then there isn't one, its just another drug in trials that may or may not be successful.

Fwiw i have never read on MN that they'll never be a vaccine, just that we cannot assume there will be.

Personally, i hope and pray there will be one very soon, it really cannot come soon enough.

We have a flu vaccine and still have so many thousands die of flu each year.

1. Some eligible people choose not to be vaccinated, it would be interesting to know what proportion of the deaths were among vaccinated/unvaccinated people.

2. Flu vaccines are based on a guess made months in advance of which strains will be in circulation; the guess isn’t always right, and they don’t attempt to protect against all possible strains. This is different for Covid-19, which changes much more slowly.

My concern is that even is there a vaccine it won’t be effective enough for us to go back to normal. Now that governments have taken on the role of ‘saving us from death’ (despite the fact that death is unavoidable) that they will want to keep some level of restrictions.

I really don’t want it to be the case. If the vaccine means death numbers similar to the flu then I think we need to get on the lives we had before all this started.

There is plenty to be positive about regarding Covid vaccinations. There are over 300 in development, and 3 in final stage testing. These vaccines won't be taking 4 more years in testing.
They believe there will possibly be a vaccine available in December. It will take time to roll out. The roll out will be to ppl 18 and over, not just the over 65s or 80 etc. It would not be safe as yet on pregnant women.

The vaccine studies still need more participants if anybody is game to take part. They really need ppl from the black and ethnic minority community.

You can also see a video on results from Stage 1/2 testing from the Oxford vaccine on you tube.
If you cant find it then I've linked to it on the post about the Novovax vaccine.

Yes, we have got vaccines that work against coronaviruses

Only for animals and so they just have to be effective and viable , they don't have to be safe. That is, as long as they don't kill too many animals, they can be used. Human vaccines need to be a little safer than that.

The BBC website has an article today about the drop off in antibodies following infection. Which means there is no certainty that a vaccine will give long-term immunity

But this isn't true. Firstly, we make antibodies on demand. And secondly the immune response from illnesses is different to vaccines.

Well actually it's true that there's no certainly that a vaccine will give long-term immunity but it doesn't mean a vaccine can't work.

@cologne4711

Yes, we have got vaccines that work against coronaviruses

Only for animals and so they just have to be effective and viable , they don't have to be safe. That is, as long as they don't kill too many animals, they can be used. Human vaccines need to be a little safer than that.

The BBC website has an article today about the drop off in antibodies following infection. Which means there is no certainty that a vaccine will give long-term immunity

But this isn't true. Firstly, we make antibodies on demand. And secondly the immune response from illnesses is different to vaccines.

I've not heard it argued that safety is the issue when trying to make a vaccine for Covid, only that we have never had a vaccine for a human coronavirus before.

"The BBC website has an article today about the drop off in antibodies following infection. Which means there is no certainty that a vaccine will give long-term immunity."

mobile.twitter.com/apoorva_nyc/status/1321197153704923141

I do not understand why people are concerned with needing multiple doses? We have flu every year. I’d have it every 6 months if I needed. Obviously, a supply issue could be a thing. But I’m not remotely bothered about needing a jab annually.

I’m hopeful overall. It’s not just a vaccine but treatment options as well. In my opinion, once we bring deaths down in line with flu averages each year, life can resume. We happily accept 20-50,000 a year die of flu. It’s very unpleasant to think about. But we’ve lived life with this happening. Covid should be the same really.

Only for animals and so they just have to be effective and viable , they don't have to be safe. That is, as long as they don't kill too many animals, they can be used. Human vaccines need to be a little safer than that.

Yes, farmers just love watching their expensive livestock dropping dead all over the place.

Thankfully for us and the farmers, veterinary coronavirus vaccines do not actually seem to be killing swathes of animals. Look, this took me about three minutes of Googling: www.bovinevetonline.com/article/new-bovine-corona-virus-vaccine-launch-october "Field safety testing, also required for approval by the USDA, show no adverse health effects in vaccinated cattle relative to those receiving a placebo."

Do you have any actual reason to think that coronavirus vaccines will be particularly dangerous, or that safety will be a huge issue in developing one for humans?

A vaccine will be great but there are other treatments that are effective available already that were not known of last winter eg dexamethasone, remdesivir, plasma.

There’s lots of talk about influenza, which has both a vaccine and a therapeutic (Tamiflu) that reduces severity in early detected cases.

There will be a medical solution to make COVID less dangerous, and based on the research happening now I’m confident it will be available next year.

Does no one actually read the thread? The antibody story has been posted numerous times, and responded to numerous times. This happens constantly with these threads, the same points over and over with seemingly no ability to engage with the responses.

@MadameBlobby

Plenty of people on here just enjoy the misery

Exactly this. And the drama. And the snitching on your neighbours.

Probably because the people in charge are being so cautionary:

The first generation of Covid-19 vaccines "is likely to be imperfect" and "might not work for everyone", the chair of the UK Vaccine Task force has said.

No vaccine in the history of medicine "has been as eagerly anticipated" and it is "widely regarded as the only true exit strategy from the pandemic", Kate Bingham wrote in The Lancet.

However, she cautioned against over-optimism and that any vaccine might not work for everyone, or for very long.

"We do not know that we will ever have a vaccine at all," she wrote. "It is important to guard against complacency and over-optimism.

"The first generation of vaccines is likely to be imperfect, and we should be prepared that they might not prevent infection but rather reduce symptoms, and, even then, might not work for everyone or for long."

www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/coronavirus-news-uk-covid-deaths-cases-lockdown-tier-vaccine/

I already know several people in real life who are weary of the rush vaccines for coronavirus. I often asked them what the difference between this and getting a new flu shot every year because a new strain came out

@Blueberries0112

I already know several people in real life who are weary of the rush vaccines for coronavirus. I often asked them what the difference between this and getting a new flu shot every year because a new strain came out

Do we have even have evidence that flu vaccinations make much of a difference to the deaths and complications from flu🤔

[quote ForBlueSkies]Probably because the people in charge are being so cautionary:

The first generation of Covid-19 vaccines "is likely to be imperfect" and "might not work for everyone", the chair of the UK Vaccine Task force has said.

No vaccine in the history of medicine "has been as eagerly anticipated" and it is "widely regarded as the only true exit strategy from the pandemic", Kate Bingham wrote in The Lancet.

However, she cautioned against over-optimism and that any vaccine might not work for everyone, or for very long.

"We do not know that we will ever have a vaccine at all," she wrote. "It is important to guard against complacency and over-optimism.

"The first generation of vaccines is likely to be imperfect, and we should be prepared that they might not prevent infection but rather reduce symptoms, and, even then, might not work for everyone or for long."

www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/coronavirus-news-uk-covid-deaths-cases-lockdown-tier-vaccine/[/quote]
I'd say it's the telegraph that are being cautionary to be honest. If you look at the source material, you get a much better sense of what is actually being communicated.

www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32175-9/fulltext

They haven’t misrepresented anything she’s said, though? The rest is a fairly straight forward and detailed account of where the U.K. stands in terms of organising a vaccine.

@ForBlueSkies

They haven’t misrepresented anything she’s said, though? The rest is a fairly straight forward and detailed account of where the U.K. stands in terms of organising a vaccine.

They have deliberately cherry picked certain comments in isolation, when put in context (against the enormous investment being put into vaccine development, manufacture and production across diverse technologies) those comments are far less negative in my view. In the context of the lancet article they are sensible acknowledgments of the limitations of our knowledge, alone they appear almost as an announcement of known (or at least suspected) facts (which they are not).

I don’t think the fact her cautionary words precede a discussion of U.K. investment changes their significance. She’s been in the press frequently over the past fortnight, cautioning that too much is expected of this first generation of vaccines, that they will help but likely not be a silver bullet.

Politicians are peddling false hope and her more cautious, balanced message is a necessary corrective IMO.

I cannot stand the it's "not a silver bullet" phase! It means nothing in my view. That and the "new normal".

If the Telegraph wanted to produce a balanced article they could have done so. Instead they picked only negative comments without context and failed to link to the original source material (also very annoying).

I welcome balance, I welcome caution and pragmatism. I remain cautiously optimistic that a vaccine will improve the current situation dramatically in a fairly short space of time. We don't actually need anything spectacularly effective to achieve that.

The media are currently incapable of any of the above and so I have stopped relying on any media reports and always go directly to the source material now

@Sunshinegirl82

I cannot stand the it's "not a silver bullet" phase! It means nothing in my view. That and the "new normal".

If the Telegraph wanted to produce a balanced article they could have done so. Instead they picked only negative comments without context and failed to link to the original source material (also very annoying).

I welcome balance, I welcome caution and pragmatism. I remain cautiously optimistic that a vaccine will improve the current situation dramatically in a fairly short space of time. We don't actually need anything spectacularly effective to achieve that.

The media are currently incapable of any of the above and so I have stopped relying on any media reports and always go directly to the source material now

Fair enough. I do think the Telegraph has done a slightly better job than many when it comes to reporting on the science, but they’ve all got their various agendas.

I understand the worry about people thinking vaccines will work like magic (vaccine approved on Monday, everyone gets it by Wednesday, pandemic over by the weekend!)

At this point though I’m not sure there is that much unfounded optimism around, and I’m more concerned about the effects of squashing down hope. We need hope - not only for our own mental health, but to get people to stick with the restrictions currently in place until we can replace them with a vaccine.

People are currently sticking with restrictions in the awareness that these are temporary, that they won’t be over immediately but that they will be over in the not-too-distant figure, and vaccines are one of the things that will get us there. Too many dire warnings about how vaccines “won’t be a magic bullet”, might not work that well, might not stop infection, might not stop the spread of the pandemic, won’t replace masks and social distancing, and on and on, risks getting people to believe that there’s no point even taking a vaccine (after all, if it won’t even work that well and it won’t replace masks and distancing, why bother?), which is really not going to help. Also, and possibly worse, it’ll lead people to start thinking “well if even the vaccines aren’t going to get us out of this, I am not going along with all these restrictions any more, I’m going to go and hug my mum.”

Yes vaccines probably won’t be perfect, might need yearly injections, might just reduce symptoms and infectivity rather than totally eliminate them. But even that would be brilliant. We could turn Covid into flu, or a cold! We could drastically reduce the rate of people getting infected! That would go a long long way to getting us back to our normal lives.

We don’t need a perfect vaccine, right now, we just need a vaccine that will have some effect (which any of them will or they wouldn’t be licensed). We should not let the perfect be the enemy of the good here, and we shouldn’t kid on to ourselves that nothing will really improve much until perfect arrives.