The vaccines, while good, are not 100% effective

[Dandylioness1]

This is what Borris has said.

I’m so confused by that statement.

I know the vaccine isn’t 100% effective at preventing Covid, but I read an article a few days ago which said the vaccine (Oxford) was 100% effective at preventing severe disease and death.

So is the vaccine effective or not!! 🤷🏻‍♀️

Read the context of my comment before judging it.

Where was I judging? If you aren't breaking the rules, then clearly, I'm not referring to you. My point was that there will be many grandparents who are still not hugging their grandchildren because it would be against the rules for them to do so.

@HolmeH

We know this. We always knew they wouldn’t be 100%. Before there were vaccines, it was ‘we just need them to be 60-70% effective, that’s good enough to get us out of this mess’ .. now it’s like ‘ohh they aren’t 100%, sorry guys. It’s 100% or nothing’ 😫 I’m on the sciences side. I’m not on BoJo’s but I could have put money on them wheeling this out today to warn people to keep following the rules! Do they really think kids aren’t hugging grandparents already? Mine never stopped. My neighbours kid is having a sleepover at his tonight. Grandparents have been used for childcare across the country for months so people can work.. but obviously not hugging them. C’mon, get real!

Those families who love their grandparents won't be.

But of course there's plenty who don't give a sh*t.

@DaysAreGettingLongerNow

How does a vaccine stop a virus from infecting someone?

Your immune system has already produced antibodies in response to the weak or dead virus in the vaccine. So when you encounter the virus in the wild, you’re already ready to fight it off. Essentially.

Nope

Vaccines just mean you fight it off quicker. You're still infected. Same if you had a disease once and got immunity that way. Doesn't stop reinfection although it may appear that way as the virus is often eliminated BEFORE symptoms show.

@HolmeH

We know this. We always knew they wouldn’t be 100%. Before there were vaccines, it was ‘we just need them to be 60-70% effective, that’s good enough to get us out of this mess’ .. now it’s like ‘ohh they aren’t 100%, sorry guys. It’s 100% or nothing’ 😫 I’m on the sciences side. I’m not on BoJo’s but I could have put money on them wheeling this out today to warn people to keep following the rules! Do they really think kids aren’t hugging grandparents already? Mine never stopped. My neighbours kid is having a sleepover at his tonight. Grandparents have been used for childcare across the country for months so people can work.. but obviously not hugging them. C’mon, get real!

My kids have not clapped eyes on one set of grandparents since Dec 2019 and March 2020 respectively. They saw the others last in Dec 2019 and July 2020 respectively. They have only hugged the July Granny and not seen her since July.

I’m sure there was some news on Twitter today about a larger real world study that found one of the vaccines was 90% effective in preventing covid infection after 2 doses and 80% after one dose. So not only in reducing or preventing symptoms, but the latest evidence suggests that the vaccines also prevent infection too.

@Dandylioness1

This is what Borris has said.

I’m so confused by that statement.

I know the vaccine isn’t 100% effective at preventing Covid, but I read an article a few days ago which said the vaccine (Oxford) was 100% effective at preventing severe disease and death.

So is the vaccine effective or not!! 🤷🏻‍♀️

I can see where you’re coming from but your comparing two different ideas. A seat belt won’t prevent a crash but you’ll be more likely to survive it.

That’s vaccines for you though, we had to have blood tests to prove Hep B immunity because it can vary human to human.

Plus it’s zoonotic so we’re bloody stuck with it now like influenza.

Plus very low uptake in some quarters is another spanner in the works. You have zero protection if you don’t have the vaccine. You’ve just got your immune system saying “wtf is this? I have never seen this before”.

@2boysand1princess

I’m sure there was some news on Twitter today about a larger real world study that found one of the vaccines was 90% effective in preventing covid infection after 2 doses and 80% after one dose. So not only in reducing or preventing symptoms, but the latest evidence suggests that the vaccines also prevent infection too.

I'd love to see a link to that as it would quite literally be a massive scientific breakthrough!

@Bordois
Lemme see if I can find it. Sure I saw it somewhere today.....

I genuinely don’t care if covid mutates into the bubonic plague, I will never support another lockdown. It’s time we all got in with our lives.

@Bordois

www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-29/pfizer-moderna-vaccines-prevent-infections-in-real-world-study

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/03/29/cdc-study-shows-single-dose-of-pfizer-or-moderna-covid-vaccines-was-80percent-effective.html

twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1376552520215052293?s=20

@2boysand1princess

I’m sure there was some news on Twitter today about a larger real world study that found one of the vaccines was 90% effective in preventing covid infection after 2 doses and 80% after one dose. So not only in reducing or preventing symptoms, but the latest evidence suggests that the vaccines also prevent infection too.

The missing word is symptomatic

That is the headline figure for all vaccines - the extent to which they prevent symptomatic infection - i.e. an infection LONG ENOUGH for symptoms to develop.

It is biologically impossible for them to prevent infection - vaccines stimulate your adaptive immune system which is only triggered POST infection!

[quote 2boysand1princess]@Bordois

www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-29/pfizer-moderna-vaccines-prevent-infections-in-real-world-study

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/03/29/cdc-study-shows-single-dose-of-pfizer-or-moderna-covid-vaccines-was-80percent-effective.html

twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1376552520215052293?s=20[/quote]
Interesting, but scientifically vague - suprisingly from the CDC. They are defining "infected" as "testing +ve". We know it takes 1-2 days after infection for an individual to test +ve to covid, so it would appear that the mRNA vaccines are eliminating the infection within this time frame, which is fantastic news!

WIth covid we know that typically after infection it takes 1-2 days to develop sufficient virus to test +ve, and a further 3 days to develop symptoms. During this 3 day window though people are often contagious. If the vaccines are effective within 2 days then it means they will be highly effective at reducing transmission!

I suspect the journalists covering the story either misunderstood what was being said or are putting it into lay terms.

As said above, the way vaccines work is to prime your immune system to recognise a pathogen so it can be neutralised if you were to be infected. If you are not infected then there is nothing for your immune system to work against.

Vaccines are very short-lived in the body anyway. They don't fight pathogens directly, just train your own immune system on how to do it.

I just had brief read. Don’t really fully understand the science behind it. I thought they meant that the vaccine prevented covid infection. Infection, as in covid spreading and reproducing inside your body like other viruses do.

@Halloweenrainbow

I get what you mean OP. We've been told repeatedly that vaccines prevent 100% of hospitalisations and deaths (not infections) but they stood there today with a graph showing all the hospitalisations that we can expect in people who have had the vaccine! I think like PPs have said, the message is that the vaccine is still extremely effective for most but there will always be people who get very ill and even die of covid. I think.

@Halloweenrainbow

It’s just slightly confusing.

@Tigerchips

I'm confused that there are still people who can't spell Boris after reading his stupid name five million times over the past year but there you go.

@Tigerchips

My Grandpa was called Borris (named after the place, where he was born)
Force of habit.... 🙄

To note that efficacy is not the same as effectiveness. See links below about understanding what is meant by 'efficacy'.

www.gavi.org/vaccineswork/what-difference-between-efficacy-and-effectiveness

www.livescience.com/covid-19-vaccine-efficacy-explained.html

www.livescience.com/covid-19-vaccine-efficacy-explained.html

@Dandylioness1

This is what Borris has said.

I’m so confused by that statement.

I know the vaccine isn’t 100% effective at preventing Covid, but I read an article a few days ago which said the vaccine (Oxford) was 100% effective at preventing severe disease and death.

So is the vaccine effective or not!! 🤷🏻‍♀️

Whilst the definition of a 'true' vaccine would prevent you from getting the disease AND prevent you from transmitting it, none of the current offerings do that, so not true vaccines as we know them. Obviously it would be better from a mutation stand that they did but to the NHS it's definitely better than nothing. All of the current vaccines are only licenced for (EUA)The main aim of these emergency use only to protect the NHS and our ability to cope with the numbers of severe cases. This is what these vaccines do and they do it well. Being able to put 100% in any sentence connected to the jabs breeds confidence as the risk of you getting severely sick or dying are reduced substantially and this relieves the pressure off our health service, allowing them to focus more on all the other areas that have been neglected because of the pandemic.

I did feel the Government were back tracking a bit in tonight's bulletin. What they seemed to be saying now is as much as we are protected from whatever variant we were jabbed for, they can not be so sure we are protected from the new variant, s that will come over. The slightly worrying part was he said they expect them to come over so we still have to take protective measures.

So yes it is 100% effective at stopping death, severity and symptoms only. This does not transfer to catching it or transferring it. Take all necessary precautions and don't let your guard down.

@MinnieMous3

I genuinely don’t care if covid mutates into the bubonic plague, I will never support another lockdown. It’s time we all got in with our lives.

That sentiment makes you very unpopular on mnet

@MinnieMous3

I genuinely don’t care if covid mutates into the bubonic plague, I will never support another lockdown. It’s time we all got in with our lives.

This is highly unlikely to happen, since Covid-19 is caused by a virus and bubonic plague is caused by a bacterium. But I get what you’re saying.

Would you feel the same if the fatality rate was 10%? Or if it affected all ages equally?

Just curious, really.

The vaccines arent 100% effective though they are high even with one dose. They all protect over 55% after first dose and over 75% if not more with the second dose.

The flu vaccine as of last year was only 42% effective.

They do still offer high protection. I think what Boris was trying to say to the panickers, there will always be deaths, just not as many.

*Would you feel the same if the fatality rate was 10%? Or if it affected all ages equally?

Just curious, really.*

I would. People die every year of preventable illnesses. 10s of thousands die every year due to the flu. This year with the vaccines, the death toll will be a lot smaller.
There is no justification for another lockdown.

10s of thousands die every year due to the flu.

Think it’s around 10,000 most years, with 20,000 being a really bad flu year.

So, to be clear, if a new virus came along which was going to kill 10% of the population (i.e. 6.7 million people), across all age brackets, you wouldn’t support a lockdown.

I think you might change your mind if that happened. I think my only point, really, is that we change what we consider acceptable when the circumstances change. We are not rational beings.

Until the majority are vaccinated and therefore significantly reducing transmission risk, there's a need to remain cautious. The vaccine trials took place mostly during some form of lockdown. We can't know for certain if they really are 100% effective at preventing serious illness or death.

Also do we know if they prevent long haul covid? The government are concerned no doubt because of the reported cost to the NHS expected from long term long covid patients.

Boris expresses himself very badly. “Effective” isn’t a helpful word here because people will interpret it differently.

A vaccine doesn’t stop you catching the virus. In that sense it isn’t 100% “effective”. In trials, the vaccines completely prevented serious illness and death. Some people still got mild disease. So the vaccines we have are very effective. We shouldn’t be thinking in terms of 100% anything.

If you’re vaccinated and you respond well, i.e. you have a good immune response to it, if you are then exposed to the virus you will clear it very quickly from your body. It won’t sit in your nose and throat replicating for long, because you get rid of it. So you won’t be walking round for days shedding virus in your snot and saliva, so you are much less likely to infect other people. That’s how it works to slow down and eventually stop transmission in the community, and it looks like that’s happening.