Jump to content

Are vaccines the light at the end of the tunnel?


Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, WrittenOnYourHeart said:

 

I got my flu and pneumonia vaccines that way. I HATED my doctor for a few days after that as both arms were so sore!!

A catch 22 I suppose?  Is it better to have both arms sore simultaneously for days, or each arm sore consecutively for a total of 4 days 🤔 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, retired dude said:

dr. "F" announced this morning that in his humble opinion that the vaccine will not be widely available until the end of 2021. Wonder how that will affect cruising????????

Would you please provide the link where he gives that new assessment?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ken the cruiser said:

Would you please provide the link where he gives that new assessment?

 

Ken, I'm pretty sure that's been his assessment for awhile. Vaccine available late 2020 to early 2021, but moving into wider availability and use later in the year, if all continues to go well. Didn't see anything specific this morning.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, markeb said:

 

Ken, I'm pretty sure that's been his assessment for awhile. Vaccine available late 2020 to early 2021, but moving into wider availability and use later in the year, if all continues to go well. Didn't see anything specific this morning.

Thanks! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is somewhat frustrating here and everywhere when the comparisons between Influenza disease and COVID disease are made when it is clear they are very different - other than respiratory spread.  I know we have these discussions here repeatedly.  But as a person who spent a career developing vaccines, I get even more frustrated when folks compare the potential efficacy of an as yet unknown SARS-CoV-2 vaccine with the effectiveness of the seasonal influenza vaccine.  Different viruses.  Different vaccine approaches.  SARS-CoV-2 appears to be not anywhere near as divergent as originally speculated.  A good portion of our population appears to carry significant immunity (T-Cells) from other coronaviruses making them asymptomatic or just mildly ill on exposure.  So I take this as all very good news for an efficacious vaccine.  Keeping the faith! 

Edited by TeeRick
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, retired dude said:

dr. "F" announced this morning that in his humble opinion that the vaccine will not be widely available until the end of 2021. Wonder how that will affect cruising????????

He also said a few days ago that catching covid from a surface is unlikely.  After the drumbeat for 5 months has been wash your hands all day long, and businesses need to be doing "deep cleaning".....

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, markeb said:

 

Ken, I'm pretty sure that's been his assessment for awhile. Vaccine available late 2020 to early 2021, but moving into wider availability and use later in the year, if all continues to go well. Didn't see anything specific this morning.

My guess at this point is that most of us in the "regular" non-priority population will be waiting until at least the second half of 2021 to start getting vaccinated.  It is a guess only.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, bouhunter said:

He also said a few days ago that catching covid from a surface is unlikely.  After the drumbeat for 5 months has been wash your hands all day long, and businesses need to be doing "deep cleaning".....

I will give Anthony Fauci a break. He is really doing everything he can.  The virus information changes almost weekly.  You cannot hold him accountable for stuff going back to March and April.  Just not fair.  I feel sorry for the guy.  It cannot be easy to be in his position for a load of reasons.  But he is sticking it out!

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, bouhunter said:

He also said a few days ago that catching covid from a surface is unlikely.  After the drumbeat for 5 months has been wash your hands all day long, and businesses need to be doing "deep cleaning".....

 

lol. It's because that was the scientific consensus at that time.  No one really had any interest in investigating these viral respiratory illnesses in that most of the really dangerous ones we have nearly eradicated (or completely eradicated) with vaccines, and the last big killer flu there is a vaccine for as well.  No one was really willing to spend money research the dozens of myriad common cold viruses.  So the aerosol vs. droplet dichotomy has stayed with us for like 50 years.

 

We probably have poured more into research and learned more about how these viruses work in the last 6 months than in the total of those previous 50 years combined.

 

I hate these non sequitor arguments.  This is how science works.  It is constantly refined.  Just because one assumption based on weak experimentation is later proved to be false doesn't mean other things with tons of data and experimentation is also unreliable.

 

Yes it can be frustrating if you are a completely passive outside observer to understand what is going on, but I blame our education system for not really teaching people what the process of science is.

Edited by UnorigionalName
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, TeeRick said:

It is somewhat frustrating here and everywhere when the comparisons between Influenza disease and COVID disease are made when it is clear they are very different - other than respiratory spread.  I know we have these discussions here repeatedly.  But as a person who spent a career developing vaccines, I get even more frustrated when folks compare the potential efficacy of an as yet unknown SARS-CoV-2 vaccine with the effectiveness of the seasonal influenza vaccine.  Different viruses.  Different vaccine approaches.  SARS-CoV-2 appears to be not anywhere near as divergent as originally speculated.  A good portion of our population appears to carry significant immunity (T-Cells) from other coronaviruses making them asymptomatic or just mildly ill on exposure.  So I take this as all very good news for an efficacious vaccine.  Keeping the faith! 

thanks @TeeRick.  These brief "summary-type-posts", based on science and facts, are nice reminders.  I appreciate the positivity.  👍

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, UnorigionalName said:

I hate these non sequitor arguments.  This is how science works.  It is constantly refined.  Just because one assumption based on weak experimentation is later proved to be false doesn't mean other things with tons of data and experimentation is also unreliable.

 

Yes it can be frustrating if you are a completely passive outside observer to understand what is going on, but I blame our education system for not really teaching people what the process of science is.

Beautiful 💫

👍👍👍

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the article:  https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-coronavirus-vaccine-likely-available-to-all-americans-in-2021-2020-8

 

My takeaway is this:  IF the Oxford developed vaccine is viable, by spring the majority of American can be vaccinated.  Mighty big "IF", but I seriously doubt a company like AstraZeneca is going to produce something to lose money.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It appears that the Russian Vaccine will go into 40,000 people in their phase 3 trial and it is based on recombinant human adenovirus as the vector.  Similar to the J&J/Janssen vaccine.  I think the Chinese vaccine (CanSino) uses this human AD-5 vectored approach too.  So the Russian vaccine might be promising.  We shall see.  The AZ/Oxford vaccine uses a replication-defective monkey adenovirus vector.  One issue in Human vs monkey AD vectors is the potential immunity against the actual vector in humans.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-russia-vaccine/russia-to-begin-covid-19-vaccine-trials-on-40000-people-next-week-idUSKBN25G1HJ

Edited by TeeRick
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, K.T.B. said:

Here's the article:  https://www.businessinsider.com/fauci-coronavirus-vaccine-likely-available-to-all-americans-in-2021-2020-8

 

My takeaway is this:  IF the Oxford developed vaccine is viable, by spring the majority of American can be vaccinated.  Mighty big "IF", but I seriously doubt a company like AstraZeneca is going to produce something to lose money.

Several of the big pharma companies are doing things to fight COVID where they will either lose money or maybe make a small profit.  While some big numbers are being talked about, the numbers on the expense side are also huge.

 

As far as timing I suspect the Pfizer is the first one likely to have trial results.

 

As far as availability keep in mind that if you treat the military, medical professionals, police, fire fighters, teachers in the US first that will consume about 50 million doses (25 million X 2), if getting vaccinated is required for their jobs.

 

Most likely the majority of Americans will not get vaccinated.  The 40% that are likely to get vaccinated  (136 million) would require 272 million doses.

Edited by npcl
Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, npcl said:

Several of the big pharma companies are doing things to fight COVID where they will either lose money or maybe make a small profit.  While some big numbers are being talked about, the numbers on the expense side are also huge.

 

As far as timing I suspect the Pfizer is the first one likely to have trial results.

 

As far as availability keep in mind that if you treat the military, medical professionals, police, fire fighters, teachers in the US first that will consume about 50 million doses (25 million X 2), if getting vaccinated is required for their jobs.

 

Most likely the majority of Americans will not get vaccinated.  The 40% that are likely to get vaccinated  (136 million) would require 272 million doses.

 

Meaning there will be more than enough doses by spring, assuming everything passes and is approved by the FDA by, say, November/December.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, K.T.B. said:

 

Meaning there will be more than enough doses by spring, assuming everything passes and is approved by the FDA by, say, November/December.

Not necessarily. Considering that the current agreement only delivers 100 million doses by December , and the option to buy up to 500 million, but no time frame on the additional purchases probably not.  Especially since Pfizer is partnered with a German company so their production will certainly be split. With some going to other countries in addition to the US. The initial 100 million is probably earmarked for priority targets (military, first responders, teachers, those with chronic condition, etc)

Link to post
Share on other sites

@TeeRick & @markeb :

 

So, if there are several potential vaccines being developed that work somewhat differently, and if each is not highly effective, would researchers start looking at combining some into a "cocktail" to get a cumulative inoculation effect?  Or would triggering the immune system in several different ways run the risk of triggering an overloaded response?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mayleeman said:

@TeeRick & @markeb :

 

So, if there are several potential vaccines being developed that work somewhat differently, and if each is not highly effective, would researchers start looking at combining some into a "cocktail" to get a cumulative inoculation effect?  Or would triggering the immune system in several different ways run the risk of triggering an overloaded response?

 

Not real likely with what's under development. TeeRick probably understands the development side better than me. It's probably easier ultimately to do that with the Novavax product that hasn't gotten as much attention. That uses a protein subunit, and there are vaccines on the market with a mix of subunits. But the methods used on the other vaccine candidates probably wouldn't let you add a different technology base.

 

There have been various studies over the years on what are known as "prime-boost" vaccine strategies, but as far as I know those have all been basic science type studies. That would do something like prime the immune system with say the mRNA vaccine, then boost with a subunit vaccine. Theoretically interesting, lot of research and trials to make it work. And a lot of time.

 

My best guess, and that's a guess, is you roll along the trials, which look promising. You start vaccinating. If at some point, a couple of years down the line, there's still significant disease out there (and there may be, compared to baseline but not compared to now), AND there's some financial incentive and more basic research, you look at adding another antigen to the mix, using the same technology of your current vaccine, so an additional mRNA segment, or an additional protein coded into an adenovirus, or an additional recombinant subunit. To use a software saying, you're at configuration lock on these candidates through the trials.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@markeb Thanks!

 

I have known people who jump from medicine to medicine trying to treat something that seems intractable, sometimes combining several by going to different doctors (especially for depression and fibromyalgia, it seems). I wonder if people would try to get a couple different vaccines?

 

For all the anti-vaxxers running around, there are probably just as many people scared to death of Covid-19 who would jump at anything.

 

Then again, I suppose it will all go away since the pillow guy has found a miracle cure.....  😵

Edited by mayleeman
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, mayleeman said:

@markeb Thanks!

 

I have known people who jump from medicine to medicine trying to treat something that seems intractable, sometimes combining several by going to different doctors (especially for depression and fibromyalgia, it seems). I wonder if people would try to get a couple different vaccines?

 

For all the anti-vaxxers running around, there are probably just as many people scared to death of Covid-19 who would jump at anything.

 

Then again, I suppose it will all go away since the pillow guy has found a miracle cure.....  😵

 

When one or more of the vaccines is licensed, if they require a series (most look like at least two shots), the studies and label will support two shots of the same product. There will likely be later studies to fully support boosters with a different manufacturers product, but the initial series will almost certainly be labelled for that specific product. If they were essentially all the same, just made by different people, it might not matter. It probably won't matter physiologically as they're all presenting a version of the same target, but it will likely matter regulatorily, and it will likely matter on availability and where you get the second shot. That will be one of the logistics things is multiple products come to market at essentially the same time.

 

And it's possible that one product will either work better in a different age group, or will simply have  data to support that age group. There will be people up at night trying to figure this out, and it could complicate the Walgreens/CVS model initially.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/19/2020 at 11:45 AM, TeeRick said:

My guess at this point is that most of us in the "regular" non-priority population will be waiting until at least the second half of 2021 to start getting vaccinated.  It is a guess only.

I believe that monoclonal antibodies can be a good bridge to a vaccine, and we should be able to cruise as soon as these come out because the correct ones can eliminate the virus. Also, the phase III studies can move very fast BK as soon as they are given to enough people who are sick with the virus and agree to an emergency use of the Mab, we will know if they work. However, I only know of three companies who are ready to be or now are in phase III: Eli Lilly, Regeneron and Centivax. Furthermore, I believe the small Co Centivax is on hold for lack of funding.  It's CEO, Jacob Glanville has some promising results, and we need to make sure his Mab cocktail is funded now to ensure that we have at least one that works. I don't understand why we only focus on vaccines when Mabs can get us out of this mess so much faster.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Doris&Nereus said:

I believe that monoclonal antibodies can be a good bridge to a vaccine, and we should be able to cruise as soon as these come out because the correct ones can eliminate the virus. Also, the phase III studies can move very fast BK as soon as they are given to enough people who are sick with the virus and agree to an emergency use of the Mab, we will know if they work. However, I only know of three companies who are ready to be or now are in phase III: Eli Lilly, Regeneron and Centivax. Furthermore, I believe the small Co Centivax is on hold for lack of funding.  It's CEO, Jacob Glanville has some promising results, and we need to make sure his Mab cocktail is funded now to ensure that we have at least one that works. I don't understand why we only focus on vaccines when Mabs can get us out of this mess so much faster.

If it was really all that promising they would not have a funding issue.  There would be a number of Pharma companies offering to partner on the product or buy the company.  Centivax has no track record.  Lilly has multiple trials running for their product including both as treatment, and as a preventive therapy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Forum Assistance
      • Q&A with the Quark Expeditions Team: New Ship Ultramarine
      • Register Now for Cruise Critic Live Special Event: Explore the Remote World with Hurtigruten!
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...