Coronavirus prep

Options
1639640642644645747

Replies

  • LiveOnceBeHappy
    LiveOnceBeHappy Posts: 432 Member
    Options
    jenilla1 wrote: »
    I still don't see how wearing a mask hurts the economy. We have to wear shirts and shoes when we go inside a business. What's one more item of clothing?

    Some people will choose to go to other businesses or states if they would be required to wear a mask.


    Going to another state every time you want a coffee at a Cafe or items from the supermarket seems a tad impractical.

    Sure. For many. However, I live in a historically democratic state and live about 8 miles from a republican state. So there is that! Summer 2020 looked very different just 8 miles away.

    In some cases, it's not about moving states. There are cities that have one set of rules and another very nearby that has a different set. If a person is against wearing a mask to shop, it's very easy to drive a few more miles to go to a location without the rule.

    Those people who reject wearing masks would be very much less likely to visit a place for vacation with a mask mandate.

  • Fuzzipeg
    Fuzzipeg Posts: 2,298 Member
    Options
    Thank you Kimny 72. You put it so much better than I.

    Once the body knows about a virus it has the ability to let numbers decline but ramp up production should they be required again.

    Thank you too for the other information.
  • lynn_glenmont
    lynn_glenmont Posts: 9,964 Member
    Options
    kimny72 wrote: »
    So in the latest TWIV they interviewed Paul Bieniasz and Theodora Hatziiouannou, virologists who are renowned for working on HIV but obviously right now are focused on covid. This one was really fascinating and I'll probably listen to it again because it was more conversational and I def missed some stuff. Anyway...

    They noted that declining antibodies months after vaxx is normal. The point of vaxx is not to have permanently circulating antibodies but for your body to know how to make the antibodies. They said that if your goal is just to reduce hospitalizations, then skip boosters and make sure everyone gets their two shots, but if your goal is to reduce transmission, boosters are a good idea. If I'm understanding correctly, they were saying that if you get the standard dose and 8 months later you don't have antibodies, you may become infected and be contagious for a short time before your body creates antibodies to keep you from getting really sick. But if you get a booster and have circulating antibodies when you get infected, they will eliminate the infection before you have a chance to spread.

    Basically, every time you get vaxxed or get infected, it prompts your body to create more antibodies, and every time your body gets better and faster at doing so. So they expect that people who get vaxxed and then get a breakthrough infection, that infection is like a booster, except of course there is the risk that the infection may still be powerful enough to do damage in a small percentage of people.

    The confounding factor is the high percentage of unvaxxed people. They said the possibility of more dangerous variants emerging as the unvaxxed continue to incubate the virus makes boosters to provide ex"ftra protection for the vaxxed an even better idea.

    The other point that stuck with me was that covid tests are measuring viral RNA load in the nose, but they don't believe viral RNA load is a good way to measure transmissibility. In a vaxxed person, that RNA being measured could be in deactivated virus, not contagious viral particles. And the viral RNA load declines much more rapidly in a vaxxed person. They think time will show that vaxxed people are much less infectious and only for a short period of time, and that a vaxxed person infecting another vaxxed person is not much of a danger.

    I think they touched on the case of Israel, but I don't remember what they be said. It doesn't seem from the stuff I do remember that they feel it is an accurate picture of vaccine effectiveness though.

    A big focus on every episode of TWIV now is that almost all widely available vaccines do NOT stop infection, they prevent illness and greatly reduce spread. Their almost total effectiveness is reached because of herd immunity. If we want to stop having to worry about COVID-19, we need more people vaxxed asap. Which is a sobering thought. I will happily get a booster whenever it's recommended until more people come around.

    I don't follow this stuff as closely as you do, and obviously don't want to argue with the actual experts you listened to (although I'm curious what "focused on covid" actually means -- have they been doing research on covid, or just talking about it on podcasts?) -- but, anyway, the impression I had in the discussions I've seen about the possible need for boosters was that epidemiologists and public health officials, as well as researchers following the early-vaccinated subjects from the clinical trials, were seeing a falling efficacy in terms of preventing infections and, in the face of the delta variant, a falling efficacy in terms of preventing varying degrees of symptomatic cases. I don't recall hearing or reading any suggestion that experts considering the need for boosters were doing so based on antibody levels, which as you say and which, even with my limited knowledge, I knew was to be expected and not a cause for concern.
  • Fuzzipeg
    Fuzzipeg Posts: 2,298 Member
    Options
    I would suggest like many scientist on realising the international community required assistance in getting through this pandemic they have set aside their original interest in HIV or other speciality for the time being and taken their scientific knowledge and applied it to COVID.
  • callsitlikeiseeit
    callsitlikeiseeit Posts: 8,627 Member
    Options
    jenilla1 wrote: »
    I still don't see how wearing a mask hurts the economy. We have to wear shirts and shoes when we go inside a business. What's one more item of clothing?

    Some people will choose to go to other businesses or states if they would be required to wear a mask.

    i know its not the case for everyone who lives near a state border, but i live just north of the NC state border, and the nearest town (with any shopping) would be 45 minutes from our town. for routine shopping, a bit impractical.

    now, i go down there all the time, and twice as far, because i dont like that town, but not for routine shopping of any kind. For healthcare and 'fun' shopping or specialized shopping, yes.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,013 Member
    Options
    kimny72 wrote: »
    So in the latest TWIV they interviewed Paul Bieniasz and Theodora Hatziiouannou, virologists who are renowned for working on HIV but obviously right now are focused on covid. This one was really fascinating and I'll probably listen to it again because it was more conversational and I def missed some stuff. Anyway...

    They noted that declining antibodies months after vaxx is normal. The point of vaxx is not to have permanently circulating antibodies but for your body to know how to make the antibodies. They said that if your goal is just to reduce hospitalizations, then skip boosters and make sure everyone gets their two shots, but if your goal is to reduce transmission, boosters are a good idea. If I'm understanding correctly, they were saying that if you get the standard dose and 8 months later you don't have antibodies, you may become infected and be contagious for a short time before your body creates antibodies to keep you from getting really sick. But if you get a booster and have circulating antibodies when you get infected, they will eliminate the infection before you have a chance to spread.

    Basically, every time you get vaxxed or get infected, it prompts your body to create more antibodies, and every time your body gets better and faster at doing so. So they expect that people who get vaxxed and then get a breakthrough infection, that infection is like a booster, except of course there is the risk that the infection may still be powerful enough to do damage in a small percentage of people.

    The confounding factor is the high percentage of unvaxxed people. They said the possibility of more dangerous variants emerging as the unvaxxed continue to incubate the virus makes boosters to provide ex"ftra protection for the vaxxed an even better idea.

    The other point that stuck with me was that covid tests are measuring viral RNA load in the nose, but they don't believe viral RNA load is a good way to measure transmissibility. In a vaxxed person, that RNA being measured could be in deactivated virus, not contagious viral particles. And the viral RNA load declines much more rapidly in a vaxxed person. They think time will show that vaxxed people are much less infectious and only for a short period of time, and that a vaxxed person infecting another vaxxed person is not much of a danger.

    I think they touched on the case of Israel, but I don't remember what they be said. It doesn't seem from the stuff I do remember that they feel it is an accurate picture of vaccine effectiveness though.

    A big focus on every episode of TWIV now is that almost all widely available vaccines do NOT stop infection, they prevent illness and greatly reduce spread. Their almost total effectiveness is reached because of herd immunity. If we want to stop having to worry about COVID-19, we need more people vaxxed asap. Which is a sobering thought. I will happily get a booster whenever it's recommended until more people come around.

    I don't follow this stuff as closely as you do, and obviously don't want to argue with the actual experts you listened to (although I'm curious what "focused on covid" actually means -- have they been doing research on covid, or just talking about it on podcasts?) -- but, anyway, the impression I had in the discussions I've seen about the possible need for boosters was that epidemiologists and public health officials, as well as researchers following the early-vaccinated subjects from the clinical trials, were seeing a falling efficacy in terms of preventing infections and, in the face of the delta variant, a falling efficacy in terms of preventing varying degrees of symptomatic cases. I don't recall hearing or reading any suggestion that experts considering the need for boosters were doing so based on antibody levels, which as you say and which, even with my limited knowledge, I knew was to be expected and not a cause for concern.

    I "think" the issue is that the declining efficacy is anecdotal.
    Public health officials have to run with anecdotal because they don't have the luxury of waiting for verified data. But the declining efficacy has to be caused by something, and the point of a vaccine is antibodies, and I guess the press at least has linked the two? I get confused on whether I've heard stuff from the CDC, local health dept, on the news, something I've read, etc lol.

    So they think that the unproven idea that efficacy is waning is coming from testing picking up "dead" viral RNA in vaxxed people while hospitals are filling up with unvaxxed people. But they think that a booster will probably keep more vaccinated people from getting sick at all from the possibly more dangerous variants, so it's a good plan anyway. If I'm following them correctly :grimace:
  • Dnarules
    Dnarules Posts: 2,081 Member
    Options
    kimny72 wrote: »
    So in the latest TWIV they interviewed Paul Bieniasz and Theodora Hatziiouannou, virologists who are renowned for working on HIV but obviously right now are focused on covid. This one was really fascinating and I'll probably listen to it again because it was more conversational and I def missed some stuff. Anyway...

    They noted that declining antibodies months after vaxx is normal. The point of vaxx is not to have permanently circulating antibodies but for your body to know how to make the antibodies. They said that if your goal is just to reduce hospitalizations, then skip boosters and make sure everyone gets their two shots, but if your goal is to reduce transmission, boosters are a good idea. If I'm understanding correctly, they were saying that if you get the standard dose and 8 months later you don't have antibodies, you may become infected and be contagious for a short time before your body creates antibodies to keep you from getting really sick. But if you get a booster and have circulating antibodies when you get infected, they will eliminate the infection before you have a chance to spread.

    Basically, every time you get vaxxed or get infected, it prompts your body to create more antibodies, and every time your body gets better and faster at doing so. So they expect that people who get vaxxed and then get a breakthrough infection, that infection is like a booster, except of course there is the risk that the infection may still be powerful enough to do damage in a small percentage of people.

    The confounding factor is the high percentage of unvaxxed people. They said the possibility of more dangerous variants emerging as the unvaxxed continue to incubate the virus makes boosters to provide ex"ftra protection for the vaxxed an even better idea.

    The other point that stuck with me was that covid tests are measuring viral RNA load in the nose, but they don't believe viral RNA load is a good way to measure transmissibility. In a vaxxed person, that RNA being measured could be in deactivated virus, not contagious viral particles. And the viral RNA load declines much more rapidly in a vaxxed person. They think time will show that vaxxed people are much less infectious and only for a short period of time, and that a vaxxed person infecting another vaxxed person is not much of a danger.

    I think they touched on the case of Israel, but I don't remember what they be said. It doesn't seem from the stuff I do remember that they feel it is an accurate picture of vaccine effectiveness though.

    A big focus on every episode of TWIV now is that almost all widely available vaccines do NOT stop infection, they prevent illness and greatly reduce spread. Their almost total effectiveness is reached because of herd immunity. If we want to stop having to worry about COVID-19, we need more people vaxxed asap. Which is a sobering thought. I will happily get a booster whenever it's recommended until more people come around.

    I don't follow this stuff as closely as you do, and obviously don't want to argue with the actual experts you listened to (although I'm curious what "focused on covid" actually means -- have they been doing research on covid, or just talking about it on podcasts?) -- but, anyway, the impression I had in the discussions I've seen about the possible need for boosters was that epidemiologists and public health officials, as well as researchers following the early-vaccinated subjects from the clinical trials, were seeing a falling efficacy in terms of preventing infections and, in the face of the delta variant, a falling efficacy in terms of preventing varying degrees of symptomatic cases. I don't recall hearing or reading any suggestion that experts considering the need for boosters were doing so based on antibody levels, which as you say and which, even with my limited knowledge, I knew was to be expected and not a cause for concern.

    Pertaining to TWIV, they are all virologists. The two guests they had in this episode do work on CoVid. They regularly have guests who work on this virus. Every week he hosts an infectious disease doc who updates everyone on the clinical aspects of Covid. These episodes generally drop on Saturdays I believe.

    The episode Kimny discussed was a great one. I'm currently getting caught up now that I'm commuting again.
  • kimny72
    kimny72 Posts: 16,013 Member
    Options
    Dnarules wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    So in the latest TWIV they interviewed Paul Bieniasz and Theodora Hatziiouannou, virologists who are renowned for working on HIV but obviously right now are focused on covid. This one was really fascinating and I'll probably listen to it again because it was more conversational and I def missed some stuff. Anyway...

    They noted that declining antibodies months after vaxx is normal. The point of vaxx is not to have permanently circulating antibodies but for your body to know how to make the antibodies. They said that if your goal is just to reduce hospitalizations, then skip boosters and make sure everyone gets their two shots, but if your goal is to reduce transmission, boosters are a good idea. If I'm understanding correctly, they were saying that if you get the standard dose and 8 months later you don't have antibodies, you may become infected and be contagious for a short time before your body creates antibodies to keep you from getting really sick. But if you get a booster and have circulating antibodies when you get infected, they will eliminate the infection before you have a chance to spread.

    Basically, every time you get vaxxed or get infected, it prompts your body to create more antibodies, and every time your body gets better and faster at doing so. So they expect that people who get vaxxed and then get a breakthrough infection, that infection is like a booster, except of course there is the risk that the infection may still be powerful enough to do damage in a small percentage of people.

    The confounding factor is the high percentage of unvaxxed people. They said the possibility of more dangerous variants emerging as the unvaxxed continue to incubate the virus makes boosters to provide ex"ftra protection for the vaxxed an even better idea.

    The other point that stuck with me was that covid tests are measuring viral RNA load in the nose, but they don't believe viral RNA load is a good way to measure transmissibility. In a vaxxed person, that RNA being measured could be in deactivated virus, not contagious viral particles. And the viral RNA load declines much more rapidly in a vaxxed person. They think time will show that vaxxed people are much less infectious and only for a short period of time, and that a vaxxed person infecting another vaxxed person is not much of a danger.

    I think they touched on the case of Israel, but I don't remember what they be said. It doesn't seem from the stuff I do remember that they feel it is an accurate picture of vaccine effectiveness though.

    A big focus on every episode of TWIV now is that almost all widely available vaccines do NOT stop infection, they prevent illness and greatly reduce spread. Their almost total effectiveness is reached because of herd immunity. If we want to stop having to worry about COVID-19, we need more people vaxxed asap. Which is a sobering thought. I will happily get a booster whenever it's recommended until more people come around.

    I don't follow this stuff as closely as you do, and obviously don't want to argue with the actual experts you listened to (although I'm curious what "focused on covid" actually means -- have they been doing research on covid, or just talking about it on podcasts?) -- but, anyway, the impression I had in the discussions I've seen about the possible need for boosters was that epidemiologists and public health officials, as well as researchers following the early-vaccinated subjects from the clinical trials, were seeing a falling efficacy in terms of preventing infections and, in the face of the delta variant, a falling efficacy in terms of preventing varying degrees of symptomatic cases. I don't recall hearing or reading any suggestion that experts considering the need for boosters were doing so based on antibody levels, which as you say and which, even with my limited knowledge, I knew was to be expected and not a cause for concern.

    Pertaining to TWIV, they are all virologists. The two guests they had in this episode do work on CoVid. They regularly have guests who work on this virus. Every week he hosts an infectious disease doc who updates everyone on the clinical aspects of Covid. These episodes generally drop on Saturdays I believe.

    The episode Kimny discussed was a great one. I'm currently getting caught up now that I'm commuting again.

    Interestingly, it seems at least in my limited exposure to the field, that many of the specialists currently all in on covid-19 were previously focused on HIV. Not sure if their is something the two viruses have in common or just the sudden global need for rapid answers. Now that I think about it, I may have heard that the mRNA vaccine technology had researchers hoping for an mRNA vaccine for HIV before covid-19 emerged and opened the door to grant money and study volunteers. Don't quote me in that though :wink:
  • AnnPT77
    AnnPT77 Posts: 32,154 Member
    Options
    kimny72 wrote: »
    Dnarules wrote: »
    kimny72 wrote: »
    So in the latest TWIV they interviewed Paul Bieniasz and Theodora Hatziiouannou, virologists who are renowned for working on HIV but obviously right now are focused on covid. This one was really fascinating and I'll probably listen to it again because it was more conversational and I def missed some stuff. Anyway...

    They noted that declining antibodies months after vaxx is normal. The point of vaxx is not to have permanently circulating antibodies but for your body to know how to make the antibodies. They said that if your goal is just to reduce hospitalizations, then skip boosters and make sure everyone gets their two shots, but if your goal is to reduce transmission, boosters are a good idea. If I'm understanding correctly, they were saying that if you get the standard dose and 8 months later you don't have antibodies, you may become infected and be contagious for a short time before your body creates antibodies to keep you from getting really sick. But if you get a booster and have circulating antibodies when you get infected, they will eliminate the infection before you have a chance to spread.

    Basically, every time you get vaxxed or get infected, it prompts your body to create more antibodies, and every time your body gets better and faster at doing so. So they expect that people who get vaxxed and then get a breakthrough infection, that infection is like a booster, except of course there is the risk that the infection may still be powerful enough to do damage in a small percentage of people.

    The confounding factor is the high percentage of unvaxxed people. They said the possibility of more dangerous variants emerging as the unvaxxed continue to incubate the virus makes boosters to provide ex"ftra protection for the vaxxed an even better idea.

    The other point that stuck with me was that covid tests are measuring viral RNA load in the nose, but they don't believe viral RNA load is a good way to measure transmissibility. In a vaxxed person, that RNA being measured could be in deactivated virus, not contagious viral particles. And the viral RNA load declines much more rapidly in a vaxxed person. They think time will show that vaxxed people are much less infectious and only for a short period of time, and that a vaxxed person infecting another vaxxed person is not much of a danger.

    I think they touched on the case of Israel, but I don't remember what they be said. It doesn't seem from the stuff I do remember that they feel it is an accurate picture of vaccine effectiveness though.

    A big focus on every episode of TWIV now is that almost all widely available vaccines do NOT stop infection, they prevent illness and greatly reduce spread. Their almost total effectiveness is reached because of herd immunity. If we want to stop having to worry about COVID-19, we need more people vaxxed asap. Which is a sobering thought. I will happily get a booster whenever it's recommended until more people come around.

    I don't follow this stuff as closely as you do, and obviously don't want to argue with the actual experts you listened to (although I'm curious what "focused on covid" actually means -- have they been doing research on covid, or just talking about it on podcasts?) -- but, anyway, the impression I had in the discussions I've seen about the possible need for boosters was that epidemiologists and public health officials, as well as researchers following the early-vaccinated subjects from the clinical trials, were seeing a falling efficacy in terms of preventing infections and, in the face of the delta variant, a falling efficacy in terms of preventing varying degrees of symptomatic cases. I don't recall hearing or reading any suggestion that experts considering the need for boosters were doing so based on antibody levels, which as you say and which, even with my limited knowledge, I knew was to be expected and not a cause for concern.

    Pertaining to TWIV, they are all virologists. The two guests they had in this episode do work on CoVid. They regularly have guests who work on this virus. Every week he hosts an infectious disease doc who updates everyone on the clinical aspects of Covid. These episodes generally drop on Saturdays I believe.

    The episode Kimny discussed was a great one. I'm currently getting caught up now that I'm commuting again.

    Interestingly, it seems at least in my limited exposure to the field, that many of the specialists currently all in on covid-19 were previously focused on HIV. Not sure if their is something the two viruses have in common or just the sudden global need for rapid answers. Now that I think about it, I may have heard that the mRNA vaccine technology had researchers hoping for an mRNA vaccine for HIV before covid-19 emerged and opened the door to grant money and study volunteers. Don't quote me in that though :wink:

    Also - and this is just a suspicion - I think HIV may have been one of the more interesting, high-value research targets among virologists before this pandemic, so probably many working on that pre-Covid. HIV's been a tough and therefore interesting challenge, with many lives affected; and much has been learned and developed.

    At risk of feeding the conspiracy theorists, I also wonder if - in the US at least - the relatively close attention to HIV within NIH, FDA, etc., over the last few decades, may've strengthened communication channels and relationships between virologists/administrators in the governmental health institutions, and the HIV researchers, via grant reviews, conferences, etc., etc.