Jump to content

CDC COVID Vaccine in Nov 2020.


Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, atanac said:

No vaccine for HIV in forty years of trials. It just seems unreasonable they will have an effective

vaccine for Covid in 2020.

You cannot compare the virus that causes HIV to the virus that causes Covid when speaking about a vaccination.  It's like comparing dogs to giraffes.  I'm not saying I think we will or won't have a vaccine this year, but that the trials of getting an HIV vaccine made have nothing in common with the Covid vaccine.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, ipeeinthepool said:

 

Really?   People are dying everyday from Covid and you think government officials should wait until there is a vaccine developed and completely tested before we start to think developing a system to vaccinate people?  

YES!  100%.  Did you read what you wrote?  Do you think the government should wait for a vaccine to be developed before announcing plans. Really? During Swine Flu in 1976, the United States rushed a vaccine.  No one died of swine flu but multiple people died from the vaccine and those who lived suffered neurological diseases. Lets let science and facts lead the way to a successful vaccine.  To put out political statements about distributing a vaccine (that does not exist) 2 days before a presidential election is foolish.  This is cut and paste directly from Discover magazine about the rushed vaccine that did not do any good for anyone:

The Swine Flu Program was marred by a series of logistical problems ranging from the production of the wrong vaccine strain to a confrontation over liability protection to a temporal connection of the vaccine and a cluster of deaths among an elderly population in Pittsburgh. The most damning charge against the vaccination program was that the shots were correlated with an increase in the number of patients diagnosed with an obscure neurological disease known as Guillain–Barré syndrome (1).

 

Edited by david_sobe
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, gizfish said:

You cannot compare the virus that causes HIV to the virus that causes Covid when speaking about a vaccination.  It's like comparing dogs to giraffes.  I'm not saying I think we will or won't have a vaccine this year, but that the trials of getting an HIV vaccine made have nothing in common with the Covid vaccine.

Let's take this a step further, the flu vaccine in the US is a guess on what strains will occur based on what is happening in Asia and Australia. This is a specific virus not a bunch of them where they have to pick 3 of them which is what they do with the flu.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, phillyguy31 said:

Let's take this a step further, the flu vaccine in the US is a guess on what strains will occur based on what is happening in Asia and Australia. This is a specific virus not a bunch of them where they have to pick 3 of them which is what they do with the flu.

 

And many still get the flu even if they take vaccination, because either a different strain, or efficacy is far less than 100%.

 

I'd say that for this vaccine, see my previous post.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will never again go without the flu shot again. I got the flu so freaking bad in March 2019 so bad I will never, ever take the chance again. That was the worst flu I ever got and it was absolutely miserable. I still have mental scars from it.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, david_sobe said:

YES!  100%.  Did you read what you wrote?  Do you think the government should wait for a vaccine to be developed before announcing plans. Really? During Swine Flu in 1976, the United States rushed a vaccine.  No one died of swine flu but multiple people died from the vaccine and those who lived suffered neurological diseases. Lets let science and facts lead the way to a successful vaccine.  To put out political statements about distributing a vaccine (that does not exist) 2 days before a presidential election is foolish.  This is cut and paste directly from Discover magazine about the rushed vaccine that did not do any good for anyone:

The Swine Flu Program was marred by a series of logistical problems ranging from the production of the wrong vaccine strain to a confrontation over liability protection to a temporal connection of the vaccine and a cluster of deaths among an elderly population in Pittsburgh. The most damning charge against the vaccination program was that the shots were correlated with an increase in the number of patients diagnosed with an obscure neurological disease known as Guillain–Barré syndrome (1).

 

 

I absolutely understand what I wrote and it is the only reasonable approach in the current situation.  Local officials need to have a plan for how they are going to vaccinate the population.  They need to identify locations, get people trained, accumulate supplies, etc.  When the vaccine is ready we should be ready to execute immediately.  This has nothing to do with the actual vaccine..  If it isn't ready don't inoculate the population.  This is the only reasonable approach.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Fido Chuckwagon said:

So?  You need approximately 94 percent population immunity to interrupt the chain of transmission.  

Where did you get 94% from? While the percentage depends on the transmission rate of the particular disease, estimates for COVID-19 I've seen typically are around 70%. For some diseases it could edge up to 90 or be as low as 50, but I've never anything as high as 94% except for the most contagious diseases such as measles, and in particular nothing nearly that high for COVID-19.

Some sources:

 

https://www.mdanderson.org/cancerwise/what-is-covid-19-coronavirus-herd-immunity-when-will-we-achieve-herd-immunity.h00-159383523.html  : "For this particular coronavirus, doctors estimate that about 60% to 70% of the human population would need to have antibodies in order to have herd immunity as a species."

 

https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/coronavirus/in-depth/herd-immunity-and-coronavirus/art-20486808

" Experts estimate that in the U.S., 70% of the population — more than 200 million people — would have to recover from COVID-19 to halt the epidemic"

 

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/200623111329.htm

"Mathematicians from the University of Nottingham and University of Stockholm devised a simple model categorising people into groups reflecting age and social activity level. When differences in age and social activity are incorporated in the model, the herd immunity level reduces from 60% to 43%. The figure of 43% should be interpreted as an illustration rather than an exact value or even a best estimate. The research has been published today in Science."

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/17/health/coronavirus-herd-immunity.html

"To achieve so-called herd immunity — the point at which the virus can no longer spread widely because there are not enough vulnerable humans — scientists have suggested that perhaps 70 percent of a given population must be immune, through vaccination or because they survived the infection.

Now some researchers are wrestling with a hopeful possibility. In interviews with The New York Times, more than a dozen scientists said that the threshold is likely to be much lower: just 50 percent, perhaps even less."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, hamrag said:

Only a proven, and appropriately certified vaccine, will be acceptable in the UK.....no politics here when it comes to health risk, anyway the next election is at least 3 years hence not 3 months.....and, despite his ineptitude, we don't have a leader obsessed with his own self importance above leading the country who  elected him!!  😉

 

 

If a vaccine is ready before November it won't be a political decision in the US because it is an independent commission that makes the recommendation to the FDA.  It's not a political decision to be ready to vaccinate the population as soon as it is approved, it's common sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Sheshefran said:

If 50% of the people who get the vaccine become immune then that is a whole lot of people who are no longer spreading the virus.   

The other 50%... can catch it again and again, or spread it to brand new populations?  If a second or third round presents in a different form (like chickenpox virus as shingles) we're in a whole new world of hurt.

We'll be learning about this virus for a long time, unfortunately.  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is the FDA. not the CDC,  that governs approval of new medicines including vaccines.

Overview:

https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/development-approval-process-cber/vaccine-product-approval-process

Please read all the way including what should happen AFTER stage 3 trials are completed. Months more work is required!

 

Now this is interesting.  I want to learn more about how a vaccine for H1N1 came about so fast.

https://avalere.com/press-releases/recent-history-shows-variability-in-vaccine-development-timeline

 

I found this detailed timeline but no explanation of how it could be done so fast. I suspect it is related to the fact that H1N1 is a flu variant but can't be sure.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/2009-pandemic-timeline.html 

 

If anyone can find better information on how the FDA could approve H1N1 so fast it would be interesting to see if there is a comparison to Covid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, ziggyuk said:

 

You never know 😂

The Oxford vaccine is in full production will be ready for distribution in September, if they gain approval by then it's a go.

 

I'm not sure what all this 50% effectiveness talk is, what I can say is that 100% of those vaccinated so far have a good immune response, all at the levels seen in those who have recovered, a second shot is giving a much higher response.

 

What we do know is the antibody levels start to decrease after 3 months on those recovered, we don't yet know how long the vaccines effectiveness lasts. 

 

Right, which is why this ending phase 3 trials after a month or two idea seems a bit ridiculous. They won't know for several months into it if this is a 3 month vaccination, a 6 month vaccination, a 1 year vaccination, etc. And based on what I've read and heard about the phase 3 process, I have trouble believe they will actually have sufficient evidence of effectiveness that quickly. I'm all for life returning to normal, but releasing a vaccine that hasn't been fully tested doesn't seem the way to me. The release will turn into phase 3 b testing where everyone becomes a test subject to track deteriorating immunity over time and long term safety issues....

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, gizfish said:

Wow, how many of your fellow troops were battling a brand new disease that causes bizarre immune reactions, not to mention heart, lung, and virtually all other organ problems at the time they were taking the HCQ for malaria prevention?  HCQ is an excellent, effective and pretty safe drug taken at the common dose for preventing malaria in otherwise basically healthy people.  People on ventilators battling NOVEL coronavirus in no way fall into that category.  

 

Licorice is a safe and delicious treat.  But if you have high blood pressure it becomes dangerous at certain amounts.  Grapefruit is a healthy snack.  But, if you are taking certain medications, it can cause serious health issues.  HCQ is safe and effective for some diseases.  But in others it does not work and/or causes serious life threatening side effects.

 

But you just go on drinking the Kool-aid...

You're conflating 'safe' and 'effective'.  I've not claimed HCQ was effective, only that it was over-hyped as some kind of dangerous drug.  You're point is well taken that there are some who shouldn't take HCQ, the elderly in a nursing home with multiple comorbidities for example.  But that is a far reach to claim that this drug should only be taken in a hospital setting or while under the direct supervision of a doctor.  The point you, and others, are missing is this: HCQ is a very safe drug for the vast overwhelming majority of people.  That is something many in their knee jerk, politically motivated, reaction do not want to face.

Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, sanger727 said:

 

Right, which is why this ending phase 3 trials after a month or two idea seems a bit ridiculous. They won't know for several months into it if this is a 3 month vaccination, a 6 month vaccination, a 1 year vaccination, etc. And based on what I've read and heard about the phase 3 process, I have trouble believe they will actually have sufficient evidence of effectiveness that quickly. I'm all for life returning to normal, but releasing a vaccine that hasn't been fully tested doesn't seem the way to me. The release will turn into phase 3 b testing where everyone becomes a test subject to track deteriorating immunity over time and long term safety issues....

 

They started work on this vaccine in January while the virus was still confined to China and way before the virus ever hit Europe, they started the first human trials in April so they already have almost 5 months human data.

 

The progress is sped up by running stages that normally run one after the next concurrently, not by cutting corners.

 

There is one thing that is for sure, Oxford's vaccine will not be rushed out, there is no pressure on the team to rush anything other than the pressure to save lives.

 

 "ending phase 3 trials after a month or two"..... 1 month 😂, do some research, I'm over 2 months into phase three trials, trials that don't end for 14 months, they don't end early even if the vaccine is released.

 

You, of course, don't have to take anything, that's your choice, but I for one will be happy to take a booster every 6 months if that's whats needed, just as I was happy to take part in the trial, we will know very soon.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I can't believe any pregnant woman would want to risk a "rush to the market" vaccine. I will be

content to let others become test subjects before I have something injected into me that hasn't

been sufficiently tested. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, sanger727 said:

They will be vaccinating large portions of the population with no real idea of how long the immunity will last.

 

And that matters why? If you want to wait a year to see if it gives you a years protection be my guest, I will take it right away and take a booster when needed.

Don't eat now you might be hungry in 4 hours, you had better wait and ask other people how long it satisfied them 😂

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is excellent news and the only thing at the point I'll counting on. The actual drug makers.

Vaccine Makers Plan Public Stance to Counter Pressure on FDA ["https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-04/vaccine-makers-plan-public-stance-to-counter-pressure-on-fda"]

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, JAMESCC said:

This is excellent news and the only thing at the point I'll counting on. The actual drug makers.

Vaccine Makers Plan Public Stance to Counter Pressure on FDA ["https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-04/vaccine-makers-plan-public-stance-to-counter-pressure-on-fda"]

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk
 

Good news.

 

By the way your post didn't have a working link, so here it is again. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-09-04/vaccine-makers-plan-public-stance-to-counter-pressure-on-fda

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Trimone said:

One thing for certain, the media have been disgraceful throughout the whole COVID-19 epidemic.

Totally agree. The mainstream media makes money by “clicks”. You take any topic, any statement, any fact out of context and splash a sensationalize headline, true or not, to get those clicks and make money. CNN use to be one of the most respected news agencies. Not any more. They are now no better than a high street tabloid newspaper. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/3/2020 at 3:47 PM, gizfish said:

You cannot compare the virus that causes HIV to the virus that causes Covid when speaking about a vaccination.  It's like comparing dogs to giraffes.  I'm not saying I think we will or won't have a vaccine this year, but that the trials of getting an HIV vaccine made have nothing in common with the Covid vaccine.

what i think he was saying, is some diseases never get a vaccine. herpes simplex is another virus(es) that despite decades of research and billions of dollars has yet to receive a working vaccine. 

this with like 70% of the worlds population having HSV-1 or HSV-2 (ewww). 

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
      • SPECIAL EVENT: Q&A with Alberto Aliberti, President of Atlas Ocean Voyages
      • SPECIAL EVENT: Q&A with RiverCruising, the River Cruise Experts
      • 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
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...