nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

COVID-19: Vaccine/antidote and testing procedures Megathread [Mod Warning - Post #1]

Masala

Today being Paddy Day 2020... when do you think we will have a ‘flu jab’ / pill / syrup that we can take to make us immune/ les likely to catch this 19 virus?.

Mod: The purpose of this thread is baked into the title - COVID-19: Vaccine/antidote and testing procedures - it's not a platform to push an anti vaccination agenda. If posters wish to discuss the perceived cons of vaccinations, or push various theories regarding 'the agenda' (whatever that is supposed to mean), open a thread elsewhere on it.

Threadbanned Users:
3xh
Dr.Frost
kingbhome
nannerbenahs
skooterblue2
Fodla
Caraibh
drunkmonkey
lawrencesummers
Howard Beale

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

marno21

Bursanc wrote: »

Seems like they're looking at the end of the first half of the year for mass vaccination (around June I suppose). Though this could be even sooner if vaccine supplies ramp up before then

Indeed. They have to be cautious here about timelines given that the solid fact is we have 0 approved vaccine candidates at this time.

Realistically, if we enter March with Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, J&J and maybe Novavax we should be able to accelerate those timelines.

Irish Stones

EMA will decide December 21st, latest news.

Now, most countries were going to get ready for the roll out mid-January. Will the 4 weeks in the middle be wasted?

IrishStuff09

It seems there are considerations for vaccination certificates underway, based on that document. Can't see them not being a thing given that there will certainly be countries / situations where you will be required to provide proof of having had a vaccine.

Interesting to see what ends up being implemented.

"The solution must also potentially cater for the production of a vaccine certificate. The design of this certificate and the scope of how it will be delivered (e.g. physically, digitally or both) is currently being progressed with a number of stakeholders, including the EU. " (page 42 of National COVID-19 Vaccination Strategy)

Also included is a good table on Irish allocations of EU stock

[Deleted User]

Do you think we will have enough?

seamus

IrishStuff09 wrote: »

It seems there are considerations for vaccination certificates underway, based on that document. Can't see them not being a thing given that there will certainly be countries / situations where you will be required to provide proof of having had a vaccine.

Interesting to see what ends up being implemented.

"The solution must also potentially cater for the production of a vaccine certificate. The design of this certificate and the scope of how it will be delivered (e.g. physically, digitally or both) is currently being progressed with a number of stakeholders, including the EU. " (page 42 of National COVID-19 Vaccination Strategy)

Certainly an EU standard certificate seems like the most appropriate thing to do. Just a reference number that can be looked up by relevant bodies (immigration, health authorities) in any EU country, as well as the ability to generate a certificate or passport insert for travelling to other countries.

Irish Stones

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you think we will have enough?

I guess all countries have optioned many more doses than they need, just in case something goes wrong. I think 3 times the necessary is the norm.

Irish Stones

IrishStuff09 wrote: »

It seems there are considerations for vaccination certificates underway, based on that document. Can't see them not being a thing given that there will certainly be countries / situations where you will be required to provide proof of having had a vaccine.

If it has to be, I hope it's a certificate that we don't have to carry with us. It must be a digital thing, on a server, where the authorities may access and read.
I don't even have the loyalty cards from supermarkets with me.

hmmm

marno21 wrote: »

I feel a lot more optimistic reading this; it seems the Civil Service are tuned in here and know what has to be done unlike the disjointed blasé stuff we’ve been hearing from politicians and in the media recently.

That IT project in the plan is a big project in my opinion, particularly with all the interlinks they are looking for. I know they are going to try and deliver it in modules, but you can only wish the best to who-ever is trying to deliver this. Particularly as most places are in the middle of code freezes, and you're not going to deliver much over the Christmas period.

hmmm

Deleted User wrote: »

Do you think we will have enough?

Sanofi slipping was a blow.

We have to hope (I think) that 2 out of 3 of the AZ, J&J, and CureVac will deliver on time to get mass vaccinations towards Summer.

I thought also the EU had a deal with Novavax?

[Deleted User]

hmmm wrote: »

I thought also the EU had a deal with Novavax?

Still in negotiations apparently.

Scuid Mhór

IrishStuff09 wrote: »

It seems there are considerations for vaccination certificates underway, based on that document. Can't see them not being a thing given that there will certainly be countries / situations where you will be required to provide proof of having had a vaccine.

Brilliant. Quite right. Never thought I'd welcome the advent of a new caste system but desperate times call for desperate measures.

[Deleted User]

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

Brilliant. Quite right. Never thought I'd welcome the advent of a new caste system but desperate times call for desperate measures.

Caste system?

schmoo2k

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

Brilliant. Quite right. Never thought I'd welcome the advent of a new caste system but desperate times call for desperate measures.

I assume folks who tested positive will also get a cert?

Scuid Mhór

Deleted User wrote: »

Caste system?

The certificate isn't supposed to be congratulatory. I would guess it is to differentiate between those who have been vaccinated and those who haven't, and will find usage as a means of verification to travel through airports, go to gigs, attend nightclubs, go to sports, and so on. Until the virus is vanquished it makes the most sense to have a vaccination screening system for most events.

Scuid Mhór

schmoo2k wrote: »

I assume folks who tested positive will also get a cert?

Unlikely -- the jury is still out on how long one is immune from the virus for after infection, and there have been myriad studies showing that an individual can become reinfected after a few months since their recovery.

seamus

Hmmzis wrote: »

Not sure about that, there is already decent enough indications that the current vaccines prevent infections outright. Both Oxford and Moderna have some ok-ish data on it already.

Indeed. But we won't really have a good indication on its real world protective effects until we have a few hundred thousand people vaccinated for a couple of months.

That'll bring us from "probably" to "almost definitely".

To get from there to "absolutely certain" will likely require challenge trials. We may never bother with them.

ixoy

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

Until the virus is vanquished it makes the most sense to have a vaccination screening system for most events.

Although the people most likely to go to many of these are amongst the last to be vaccinated.. That will cause pushback even though I understand your point.

Irish Stones

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

Unlikely -- the jury is still out on how long one is immune from the virus for after infection, and there have been myriad studies showing that an individual can become reinfected after a few months since their recovery.

I know a person who got infected at the very beginning of the outbreak and in their recent serological test they are still "positive for the antibodies". This person is still also a plasma donor.

[Deleted User]

ixoy wrote: »

Although the people most likely to go to many of these are amongst the last to be vaccinated.. That will cause pushback even though I understand your point.

Yeah this is why we're highly unlikely to see any form of domestic 'passport' system. The highly mobile people are the ones at the very bottom of the list for getting the vaccine.

schmoo2k

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

The certificate isn't supposed to be congratulatory. I would guess it is to differentiate between those who have been vaccinated and those who haven't, and will find usage as a means of verification to travel through airports, go to gigs, attend nightclubs, go to sports, and so on. Until the virus is vanquished it makes the most sense to have a vaccination screening system for most events.

It won't be needed for any voluntary settings like gigs, sports etc. Some countries may require it for entry and some "high risk" settings like ICU and retirement settings would be my guess.

Take a concert as an example:
1. If your vaccinated happy days.
2. You are not vaccinated but consider yourself a low risk so are happy to go to the gig happy days, but you may need to self isolate should you contract Covid (the same as if you caught it in the shops). Good news your now immune!

The point is that its your personal responsibility once the vaccine is available.
Note: Low risk groups very rarely need hospitalisation (by definition).

Scuid Mhór

Irish Stones wrote: »

I know a person who got infected at the very beginning of the outbreak and in their recent serological test they are still "positive for the antibodies". This person is still also a plasma donor.

Knowing one person doesn't mean anything. You need a much larger sample than that before you can make a call like that.

Scuid Mhór

schmoo2k wrote: »

It won't be needed for any voluntary settings like gigs, sports etc. Some countries may require it for entry and some "high risk" settings like ICU and retirement settings would be my guess.

Take a concert as an example:
1. If your vaccinated happy days.
2. You are not vaccinated but consider yourself a low risk so are happy to go to the gig happy days, but you may need to self isolate should you contract Covid (the same as if you caught it in the shops). Good news your now immune!

The point is that its your personal responsibility once the vaccine is available.
Note: Low risk groups very rarely need hospitalisation (by definition).

Maybe you are right. We will see anyway. Certainly both you and ioxy have made pragmatic points I didn't think of so thanks for that.

schmoo2k

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

Unlikely -- the jury is still out on how long one is immune from the virus for after infection, and there have been myriad studies showing that an individual can become reinfected after a few months since their recovery.

1. There is more evidence on how long the natural immunity lasts than there is for the vaccines.
2. The number of reinfections is tiny, even less than Chicken Pox reinfections and we consider that a "get once" disease.

Scuid Mhór

schmoo2k wrote: »

1. There is more evidence on how long the natural immunity lasts than there is for the vaccines.
2. The number of reinfections is tiny, even less than Chicken Pox reinfections and we consider that a "get once" disease.

1. That's a misnomer -- the vaccines have been designed to last as long as they can. Most epidemiologists and virologists seem to be more convicted in the vaccines providing longer protection than natural antibodies arising from prior infection.

2. Based on very limited longitudinal data -- the virus has only been around for a year at most and there hasn't been much opportunity to study its reinfection rates, especially amongst asymptomatic people who may not even have realised they had it the first time. Comparing it to chicken pox is a bit of a misnomer also because we have had a very, very long time to acquire the relevant data on that. There's no way we can say anything definitively right now hence I would assume those who have been infected will still be required to get vaccinated in an ideal world.

seamus

hmmm wrote: »

Particularly as most places are in the middle of code freezes, and you're not going to deliver much over the Christmas period.

Code freezes are only for old-school companies who plan on shutting down over Xmas.

With enough cash incentive there's no reason a dedicated dev team can't work on it all the way through.

tom1ie

schmoo2k wrote: »

It won't be needed for any voluntary settings like gigs, sports etc. Some countries may require it for entry and some "high risk" settings like ICU and retirement settings would be my guess.

Take a concert as an example:
1. If your vaccinated happy days.
2. You are not vaccinated but consider yourself a low risk so are happy to go to the gig happy days, but you may need to self isolate should you contract Covid (the same as if you caught it in the shops). Good news your now immune!

The point is that its your personal responsibility once the vaccine is available.
Note: Low risk groups very rarely need hospitalisation (by definition).

with the above example:
you are vaccinated.
you catch covid at the gig
covid has no effect as you are immune from the vaccine but you carry the virus
you return to work in a hospital where you are dealing with people who have low immune systems and cant take the vaccine.

whats the plan for this?

[Deleted User]

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

The certificate isn't supposed to be congratulatory. I would guess it is to differentiate between those who have been vaccinated and those who haven't, and will find usage as a means of verification to travel through airports, go to gigs, attend nightclubs, go to sports, and so on. Until the virus is vanquished it makes the most sense to have a vaccination screening system for most events.

Is nothing new

Irish Stones

schmoo2k wrote: »

2. You are not vaccinated but consider yourself a low risk so are happy to go to the gig happy days, but you may need to self isolate should you contract Covid (the same as if you caught it in the shops). Good news your now immune!

This is what I always believed, but it seems most people do not agree.

Irish Stones

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

Knowing one person doesn't mean anything. You need a much larger sample than that before you can make a call like that.

There are lots of people like that, as far as I know, but I only personally know this one.

schmoo2k

Scuid Mhór wrote: »

1. That's a misnomer -- the vaccines have been designed to last as long as they can. Most epidemiologists and virologists seem to be more convicted in the vaccines providing longer protection than natural antibodies arising from prior infection.

2. Based on very limited longitudinal data -- the virus has only been around for a year at most and there hasn't been much opportunity to study its reinfection rates, especially amongst asymptomatic people who may not even have realised they had it the first time. Comparing it to chicken pox is a bit of a misnomer also because we have had a very, very long time to acquire the relevant data on that. There's no way we can say anything definitively right now hence I would assume those who have been infected will still be required to get vaccinated in an ideal world.

1 - I may be wrong but the non mRNA vaccines are based on infecting folks with a "dead" virus to prime the immune system? Your immune system gets primed exactly the same way with the "live" virus (but obviously more dangerous). Also the antibody protection will be shorter lived than the T-Cell immunity, which they are still studying. Misnomer is a bit harsh.

2 - You are correct that there is no way to say anything definitively right now, but we do have 8 to 10 months of re-infection data and the numbers are very low. Even Pfizzer points out that their vaccine may only be good for 1 year, they don't definitively know yet either. But its a good thing that those numbers are low and long may it last!