3rd wave in Europe - do you think we've done enough?

[Laytwir024]

The EU are so far behind on their vaccine programme and there is a bigger anti-vax belief system there. Do you think we've done enough to avoid a third wave?

[quote MRex]@QuentinInQuarantino - 70% vaccinated with the 85% expected vaccine efficacy is a decent target. We don't really know the ultimate real life efficacy and transmission stats once vaccines reach more younger people (both should improve), we don't know the effects of new variants, nor do we know if or when children can be vaccinated to help increase the vaccinated percentage... So the models have as many assumptions as Swiss cheese has holes. Clearly below 50% vaccinated is going to be incredibly unlikely to give much transmission or hospitalisation impact.[/quote]
Unless you consider that more unvaccinated people will contract the virus and become immune that way so could still reach the herd immunity threshold but with a lower proportion of vaccinated people.

@Thewiseoneincognito - I hope summer holidays abroad will be hard because we'll prevent people from travelling to countries with new variants without mandatory hotel quarantine.

Not knowing the full real life effects of vaccines on transmission and efficacy does not mean they have no impact, it means that the impact can't be easily quantified. The EU is primarily getting much of its increase in cases from the Kent variant, which all the current vaccines work well against.

Oh good, anti-vax @bumbleymummy has come to explain how she's never going to risk to anyone by catching covid, she's somehow performing a public service by doing that instead of being vaccinated. Zero understanding of transmission, zero care for those who are CEV children, pregnant or have weakened immune systems.

[quote MRex]@Thewiseoneincognito - I hope summer holidays abroad will be hard because we'll prevent people from travelling to countries with new variants without mandatory hotel quarantine.

Not knowing the full real life effects of vaccines on transmission and efficacy does not mean they have no impact, it means that the impact can't be easily quantified. The EU is primarily getting much of its increase in cases from the Kent variant, which all the current vaccines work well against.[/quote]
Through 2021 you should need a vaccine certificate to travel abroad at the least.

@MRex

Oh good, anti-vax *@bumbleymummy* has come to explain how she's never going to risk to anyone by catching covid, she's somehow performing a public service by doing that instead of being vaccinated. Zero understanding of transmission, zero care for those who are CEV children, pregnant or have weakened immune systems.

Sure. Lots of ‘anti-vaxxers’ talk about how it’s a good thing that we can vaccinate the more vulnerable and reduce hospitalisations/deaths in those groups. I think you’re confused about what ‘anti-vaxx’ actually means, dear. Being against mandatory/coerced vaccination does not make someone ‘anti-vaxx’. Neither does pointing out that there are other ways for people to gain immunity that can slow community transmission and also contribute to protecting the vulnerable. HTH.

How can you gain immunity if you're not vaccinated?

Immunity after infection, @sherrystrull. Plenty of studies have shown now that immunity after infection lasts for several months (6-8+) and is expected to last longer.

As several of us have tried explaining to you multiple times @bumbleymummy, the issue is not you after infection (though vaccine immunity is likely to last longer), the issue is who you will infect before you get immunity.

Just a few articles for those who are interested. Immunity after recovery from infection:

www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/lasting-immunity-found-after-recovery-covid-19

science.sciencemag.org/content/371/6529/eabf4063

www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/12/two-studies-find-covid-19-antibodies-last-8-months

@MRex

As several of us have tried explaining to you multiple times *@bumbleymummy*, the issue is not you after infection (though vaccine immunity is likely to last longer), the issue is who you will infect before you get immunity.

Yes, @mrex we’ve had this conversation. We can agree to disagree. I don’t feel the need to insult you or call you names for having a different opinion.

Although I’m very interested to see studies that show that vaccine immunity lasts longer. The preprint I posted the other day showed that, so far, immunity after two doses of the vaccine is as good as immunity after natural infection. The fact that immunity has persisted for so long after infection has actually given scientists confidence that the vaccine should provide similar long lasting immunity. (See first link above)

That should say, I would be very interested to see...

Do you have a link @MRex?

I do not believe I've insulted you, nor called you names @bumbleymummy, please link to it if I have. It isn't pro-vaccination to state that vaccines are for other people, but you won't have them. You are against being vaccinated, that means you are quite literally anti vaccination.

Yes, mrex we’ve had this conversation. We can agree to disagree. I don’t feel the need to insult you or call you names for having a different opinion.

What on earth do you mean that you 'disagree'? Do you actually believe that you being infectious to others if you catch covid is something that wouldn't happen?

@MRex

I do not believe I've insulted you, nor called you names *@bumbleymummy*, please link to it if I have. It isn't pro-vaccination to state that vaccines are for other people, but you won't have them. You are against being vaccinated, that means you are quite literally anti vaccination.

I think calling someone ‘anti-vaxx’ and saying that they don’t care about vulnerable people is an insult actually.

This is one particular vaccine, to a disease that it is very mild for the majority and to which many people are already immune. It is not about vaccines in general. You may as well call everyone who doesn’t have the flu vaccine every year ‘anti-vaxx’ too. Or perhaps you do?

Do you have a link to a study that shows that the vaccines are more effective as you stated above?

[quote bumbleymummy]Just a few articles for those who are interested. Immunity after recovery from infection:

www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/lasting-immunity-found-after-recovery-covid-19

science.sciencemag.org/content/371/6529/eabf4063

www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/12/two-studies-find-covid-19-antibodies-last-8-months[/quote]
So let’s say theoretically you could catch this every 8 months, that would explain those during summer into early autumn who tested positive and swear blind they had it November/December 19/January 20 too.

Many of those now have lowering immunity for windows of reinfection opening around April onwards to potentially get it a 3rd time.

I’m wildly hypothesising here but isn’t this our wave pattern?

My question is what does repeated infection do to the body?

@Haffiana

Yes, mrex we’ve had this conversation. We can agree to disagree. I don’t feel the need to insult you or call you names for having a different opinion.

What on earth do you mean that you 'disagree'? Do you actually believe that you being infectious to others if you catch covid is something that wouldn't happen?

It’s in relation to a conversation we’ve had on a previous thread.

@bumbleymummy

That should say, I would be very interested to see...

Do you have a link @MRex?

Examples of vaccines with long proven research that vaccination gives a better response than infection-led immunity: HPV vaccine, Pneumococcal vaccine, Haemophilus influenzaetype b (Hib) vaccine, Tetanus vaccine. Moderna proved higher antibody levels following vaccination than from infection: www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2032195. It is the case with those other vaccines too, so while more time is needed to verify research it's most likely that the covid vaccines will fit in the category of giving a higher immune response than natural infection, of course with far fewer health risks.

The effect will be exaggerated with variant boosters, especially as some variants of covid have proven able to escape natural immunity. It's more of an issue for young and healthy people, because mild infection immunity wanes faster - leaving them vulnerable to reinfection.

@Thewiseoneincognito I don’t think anyone can answer that yet. Incidence of reinfection even after 8 months is still very low though. Scientists seem optimistic that this indicates longer term immunity which would obviously be a good thing. There was a recent study showing that immunity does reduce more in the older population though, and they’re obviously more vulnerable so it does look like there will need to be annual boosters for certain groups.

I think calling someone ‘anti-vaxx’ and saying that they don’t care about vulnerable people is an insult actually.
You are anti-vaccination. When faced with the maths meaning the majority of adults need to be vaccinated to protect the vulnerable from remaining transmission, and when a poster explains to you that their CEV child can't be vaccinated, you stick with your line that only the vulnerable need vaccinating, you'll get natural immunity (but just bad luck to anyone who you infect). You understand the logic, so you clearly do not care about vulnerable people and it is factual to say so.

I think this is a real wait and see situation. I like to think with our rapid rollout of the vaccine programme, that any major rise would he countered by significantly less hospitalizations and deaths.
But I also think it will depend on how free and easy the government are about summer travel. It needs to be essential travel only with strict monitoring of arrivals in self isolation. If they allow for a summer free-for-all it could be hairy.

@MRex and some don’t - eg pertussis, particularly the acellular vaccine, and mumps.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5404361/

www.researchgate.net/publication/7863850_Duration_of_Immunity_Against_Pertussis_After_Natural_Infection_or_Vaccination

www.pnas.org/content/116/38/19071

So we’re just going to have to wait until the studies can be done. Probably best not to state it as a fact until then.

@MRex

I think calling someone ‘anti-vaxx’ and saying that they don’t care about vulnerable people is an insult actually. You are anti-vaccination. When faced with the maths meaning the majority of adults need to be vaccinated to protect the vulnerable from remaining transmission, and when a poster explains to you that their CEV child can't be vaccinated, you stick with your line that only the vulnerable need vaccinating, you'll get natural immunity (but just bad luck to anyone who you infect). You understand the logic, so you clearly do not care about vulnerable people and it is factual to say so.

Well, you’re wrong. I care very much about vulnerable people and have had several vulnerable family members over the years. And I’m not anti-vaxx.

You’re entitled to your opinions though. You don’t seem to require much evidence to form them.

www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200902/how-effective-is-the-flu-vaccine

The flu vaccine is only around 40%- 60% effective isnt it? Even people vaccinated against it still die, I imagine the same will always occur with covid. But the covid vaccine seems to have a higher efficacy with just a first dose which is phenomenal.

The second dose is just a booster. You are vaccinated with one dose, then boosted with the second. The same happens with childhood vaccines, needing a booster isnt new.

Cases are not the issue, hospitalizations is the issue and so far the trend is positive. It doesnt matter if 60,000 people catch covid on a Monday, as long as it doesnt mean that by Tuesday 20,000 people need hospital care. If 59,990 of those people just need a week or two off work/school feeling crook that is nothing to worry about.

But with the vaccine it does look like it prevents some level of transmission so we are unlikely to get back up to 60,000 cases a day hopefully

@bumbleymummy - you asked for the link and clearly didn't read about Moderna, try reading it.