Infections among fully vaccinated

[BoofTheFloof]

In the last 4 weeks I know of eleven fully vaccinated adults in my wider social circle who have caught covid. Transmission has been either via returning to work or catching it from school aged children (the case rate in our local schools is very high but no one is talking about it. 4 cases in my daughters class of 16)
None of the adults have needed hospital but a couple have been extremely sick for 2-3 weeks and one was triaged in an ambulance.
I know that the vaccine doesn't prevent all cases but is it preventing any? All of the adults infected have it to their whole family. Or is it just making the subsequent covid infection less virulent?

Have I just been unlucky with the people I know or is this about to be a thing? I'm resigned now to probably catching it which is really concerning as I was classified as CEV.

The vaccine was for the most part meant to reduce hospitalisation or Death not to prevent the virus altogether so in your friends circumstances on the whole it's done the job

The vaccine was supposed to stop the virus from infecting us and spreading. Why has that message changed? It's fine to say the initial goal failed and now we're hoping for something else - or achieving something else. But it's a lie and manipulation of the truth to say that it was never meant to stop us getting Covid etc.

Either people have been manipulated into believing this - or are part of the manipulation. Either way - it reduces my faith in science and what we're being told. I'm sure many people feel this way.

My OH came home from 6 days away on Monday and had positive LFT's and a positive PCR. He is now on day 5 and though not feeling 100%, is feeling much better. Had 20 mins contact with him on Monday, mostly masked. Have been apart since and super careful.
Myself and 5yr old tested yesterday, .me positive, 5yr old negative.
I have had a temperature today and felt weak and tired. Can feel a cough coming on.
Both double vaccinated 1st January, 2nd March.

I think you need to step away from anecdotal examples on each side of the debate and research the actual underlying statistics

If 100% people were vaccinated then 100% of cases would be in the vaccinated, for example

Think about the current freedoms we have ( since March 29), think about variants such as alpha and delta. Think about the current case levels…..hhhmmm think vaccines really are quite successful at reducing cases, transmission, hospitalisation and death rates

No vaccine is 100% effective at preventing infection. Some are much better than others - for example the measles vaccine is much more effective than the flu jab (97% vs ~50%). Regardless if you have a large population of unvaccinated individuals, in this case under 18s, then you are definitely going to see some breakthrough infections in vaccinated people. When the vaccine was first being developed they obviously wanted it to be as effective as possible, but I'm fairly sure I remember discussions on the news saying 50% effective while not ideal would be much better than nothing.

You also can't take anecdotal evidence of one person was fine without a vaccine but I'm more ill with covid after having one as evidence it doesn't work. You need to look at the population as a whole. With the current level of restrictions (very minimal) compared to previously the number of cases are much lower than expected. With the current number if cases (pretty high), hospitalisations and deaths are much lower than when cases have been at similar levels. The vaccine is working!

@pontypridd I take exception to what you wrote. I worked in a vaccination centre, vaccinating people December - April. In every single consultation prior to administering the vaccine I explained that the vaccine was effective at preventing serious illness or death but that the person could still catch and transmit the virus. Never was it claimed that the vaccine will prevent people from catching covid, but it will and does go a long way towards preventing hospitalisations and the long term effects of that.

As I recall last year vaccines were very much intended to reduce infections and herd immunity especially when initial trials run out.

Delta has changed the figures somewhat and now it is they still protect against severe disease. I don't doubt this is true as can be seen in current figures but it is also clear that immunity wanes.

I look at it now as the vaccines improve your odds of recovering quickly without the fatigue and other side effects that can last for weeks or months afterwards. They also extend your immunity

It does seem likely that we will all be reinfected by community multiple times and even if milder longer term, there is no guarantee the second or third time will be milder than the first. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence it can be worse the second time but again hopefully the vaccines and boosters will help here

I saw an American study that showed 5-6 months post second vaccine, the vaccines are around 60-70% protective against symptomatic disease but still highly effective against severe disease, so it makes sense that more people will get it now.

They are doing their job though, which is keeping people out of hospital and alive.

We are about to get the booster which will help again surely

I know a few who have it after being double vax but none very ill and all say in normal times would have got a virus about now and gone to work etc with it. We are all now hyper aware of being ill.

Only the over 50s are getting a booster.::

"Only the over 50s are getting a booster.::"

That is the current plan, but the thinking is that younger people won't need one until early next year so depending on data etc this could change in the spring

I think it is clearly a thing. I have colleagues catching it left right and centre now they're back to the office. All double vaccinated, all using public transport to get to the office and then transmitting when at work, or worse, at the client... all have been worse illness wise this time and all have been relatively young.

@pontypridd

The vaccine was for the most part meant to reduce hospitalisation or Death not to prevent the virus altogether so in your friends circumstances on the whole it's done the job

The vaccine was supposed to stop the virus from infecting us and spreading. Why has that message changed? It's fine to say the initial goal failed and now we're hoping for something else - or achieving something else. But it's a lie and manipulation of the truth to say that it was never meant to stop us getting Covid etc.

Either people have been manipulated into believing this - or are part of the manipulation. Either way - it reduces my faith in science and what we're being told. I'm sure many people feel this way.

@pontypridd - what media were you reading/listening to?! It was made perfectly clear from the start that so long as the vaccine was at least 50% effective, it would still be worth it. What part of not 100% effective do you not understand? In the end, the reality is that the vaccines are currently extremely effective at preventing serious illness and death (still not 100%, which was never promised anyway) and still very effective at reducing transmission (more than 50%). It’s not that it was ever mis-sold as something that could eradicate covid 19, just that a lot of people appear to read one thing and understand another.

Why are you pissed off you had the vaccine? Don't you think it might have been even worse without it. Hope you feel better soon anyway.

Thanks.

But there is no reason at all to assume I would have ended up in hospital had I not had the vaccine. When my sister had covid at Christmas she felt unwell for a week, then she was back to normal. I didn't have the vaccine as an altruistic measure to stop all the people around me getting Covid - I live alone and don't have close contact with vulnerable people. I had it to hopefully stop me getting covid, and it didn't. And I think if people were 100% honest, that's why they have the vaccine too, even if they do say worthy things about protecting people they pass in the supermarket. So flame me.

"But there is no reason at all"

Apart from statistics. Millions of infections show that even at younger ages increasingly small proportions getting hospitalised ( the "unlucky" ones as you commented earlier. Of course you could ignore all that for a sample size of one.

Being 109% honest I didn't have the vaccine to stop me getting infected; my work meant I was infected months before they were available, along with hundreds of thousands of others. I got them to make it longer before I get it again ( and hence the risk of my infecting family friends colleagues etc) and to hopefully load the dice slightly more in my favour next time.

@walksen

"But there is no reason at all"

Apart from statistics. Millions of infections show that even at younger ages increasingly small proportions getting hospitalised ( the "unlucky" ones as you commented earlier. Of course you could ignore all that for a sample size of one.

Being 109% honest I didn't have the vaccine to stop me getting infected; my work meant I was infected months before they were available, along with hundreds of thousands of others. I got them to make it longer before I get it again ( and hence the risk of my infecting family friends colleagues etc) and to hopefully load the dice slightly more in my favour next time.

My risk factors are very small. Almost of the younger people who who end up in hospital either have underlying health issues (I have none), or they are very fat (again, I am not). Of course I might have been a statistical anomaly, who knows?

But I guess people on MN know more about my health than I do.

@YukoandHiro

Only the over 50s are getting a booster.::

Yes as someone else said, that's the current plan. As recently as December last year, the lead for vaccines was saying there was no plan to vaccinate the under 50s at all! They're just taking it one step at a time and I'm sure they'll give boosters to the rest of the population early next year.

@marieantoinehairnet

I think it is clearly a thing. I have colleagues catching it left right and centre now they're back to the office. All double vaccinated, all using public transport to get to the office and then transmitting when at work, or worse, at the client... all have been worse illness wise this time and all have been relatively young.

Would be interested to know what parts of the illness are worse. I would expect vaccinated people to have lower fevers and shorter illness duration, but worse symptoms of congestion, sore throat etc due to higher mucosa-level immune response.

"My risk factors are very small. Almost of the younger people who who end up in hospital either have underlying health issues (I have none), or they are very fat (again, I am not). Of course I might have been a statistical anomaly, who knows?"

So what you are saying is you did your own risk assessment and decided you were at no risk. Things did not pan out as per your assessment.
Rather than accept your risk assessment was flawed because you underestimated the small , but non zero risk to health individuals you blame the vaccine?

I guess people on Mumsnet know more about analysing vaccine effects too....

@pontypridd

The vaccine was for the most part meant to reduce hospitalisation or Death not to prevent the virus altogether so in your friends circumstances on the whole it's done the job

The vaccine was supposed to stop the virus from infecting us and spreading. Why has that message changed? It's fine to say the initial goal failed and now we're hoping for something else - or achieving something else. But it's a lie and manipulation of the truth to say that it was never meant to stop us getting Covid etc.

Either people have been manipulated into believing this - or are part of the manipulation. Either way - it reduces my faith in science and what we're being told. I'm sure many people feel this way.

Thank goodness I'm not the only one who remembers that covid vaccines were supposed to stop infection spread.

I really wish the govt/vaccine manufacturers would be straight with us and stop denying this. I for one who have more respect for them and be more inclined to listen if they did as otherwise it just makes everything else they say look dubious.

Back in spring 2020 I remember Chris Whitty saying covid was a mild disease for most. Not anymore it isn't. Last week I read comments online saying he only said that because he was trying to reassure people knowing it wasn't true 😕

What I'm saying is that, given my age (mid 40s) I decided to have the vaccine because I could do without missing work , and there was the small risk of having lasting post viral effects, which I would want to avoid if possible. I am self employed.

However I never thought I was particularly at risk of being hospitalised because of the virus even if I remained unvaccinated, based on the evidence I was seeing and reading about. As I said, I am normally in robust good health, and am a healthy weight, and fit.

But the vaccine didn't prevent me from catching it, feeling shitty from it and being off work for a few weeks, which is ongoing.

I'm saying I was unlucky.

That's allowed.

UCL dynamic causal modelling data from 13th September:
Current estimates of the vaccination efficacy are:
preventing infection: 10.2% (CI 6.2 to 14.1)
preventing transmission following infection 89.7% (CI 88.9 to 90.4)
preventing serious illness when symptomatic (age 15-34) 78.5% (CI 77.9 to 79.1)
preventing serious illness when symptomatic (age 35-70) 52.7% (CI 51.5 to 54.0)
preventing fatality when seriously ill 56.2% (CI 55.3 to 57.2)
The corresponding cumulative (vaccinated vs. unvaccinated) risks are:
relative risk of infection 89.8%
relative risk of mild illness 38.5%
relative risk of severe illness 13.0%
relative risk of fatality 5.7%
For example, vaccination reduces the risk of being infected and developing a severe illness to 13.0% of the risk prior to vaccination.

The vaccines are really not preventing infection in the vast majority of cases (89%) and we should not be expecting them to do that. The majority of people hospitalised in the UK are double vaccinated. This is because the majority of these hospitalisations are of the more vulnerable (elderly) and although the vaccine is reducing the likelihood of hospitalisation significantly, if you were in a group where 20% of unvaccinated people were going to end up in hospital that still means 0.20.13100=2.6% of vaccinated people are going to be hospitalised in your age category. The majority of people in the country, particularly the vulnerable, are double vaccinated now. This means more vaccinated people are in hospital by overall numbers, but if you look as a proportion of the total population of vaccinated/unvaccinated then of course you see a much higher proportion of the unvaccinated end up in hospital (because they still have the 20% risk (although this is likely higher with delta than the data published for alpha/WT)).

So with all of this in mind, we know despite being fully vaccinated we can still get, transmit and feel quite unwell, why then are we only giving the 12-15 age group one vaccine? How much protection does that offer them? And how long before Immunity from the first vaccine wanes? Leaving them as if they were never vaccinated in the first place.

The vaccine was supposed to stop the virus from infecting us and spreading. Why has that message changed? It's fine to say the initial goal failed and now we're hoping for something else - or achieving something else. But it's a lie and manipulation of the truth to say that it was never meant to stop us getting Covid etc

I remember this, too.

If it comforts anyone, earlier in the Summer both my DC had covid (caught in school of course). We had to self isolate, overall for 2 weeks. Neither dh nor myself (both double jabbed) ever tested positive - 4 negative tests.

Vaccination has not failed. It was designed using the Alpha variant. And as such most of us in health care who were vaccinated early have been seeing patients face to face and have avoided reinfection.
Like the common cold the newer variants of Covid are sufficiently different from the original alpha variant to allow reinfection. Fortunately they are sufficiently similar to the alpha variant to allow our immune system to react quickly.
The vaccine was necessary to expose our immune systems safely to the alpha variant in order that it would hopefully convey enough immunity to prevent a serious infection. Unfortunately by imposing lockdowns and strict isolation most people were not exposed to the virus so were sitting ducks without a vaccine.
The information coming from ICUs is that patients who are seriously ill are mainly unvaccinated or immunosuppressed. They are younger than in previous waves. This is because older patients are not becoming as sick when they are reinfected.
I think we have always known that this virus would become endemic and be like a common cold.
Fortunately because of the global vaccine effort a booster will be available rapidly that will hopefully be active against emerging variants.
It will be an individuals choice whether they have it.
Having recovered from my second dose of Covid I will definitely be having an annual booster.

I heard that R4 More or Less Programme.

They said... One way to estimate the relative risk, based on ONS data, found that UK unvacc'd were 2x more likely to be hospitalised with covid than the vaxx'd. I also read that 70% of people in Israel in hospital with covid -- were unvaxx'd.

So basically, in a population with high vaccination rate, 1/3 of those in hospital are still tending to be vacc'd. Is my impression.

I found that sobering. Yet Recall that a large minority % of the elderly frail who got covid -- they got it mildly, even when unvaxx'd. All we can try to do is make that large minority % into a large majority %. Boosters.