Covid vaccination status for CF members

[Woodland Hills]

So, anyone up for the new anal swab Covid test? It’s much more accurate!

[CatNewBee]

Originally Posted by Invictus69

.... hence I mentioned to look and compare on a broader international basis in order to see the cracks in the politically motivated reporting which only raises suspicion - the screen below is only one example. I am sure on many locations things are presented more accurately.

Yes, covid tests are dangerous, so many people die within 28 days of a test...

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

See, right here is the difference. Using science, NOTHING is "self-evident." As I said, the actual evidence is inconclusive regarding how long the immune response is effective. It's a hot research topic, with lots of early findings being published. As I said, I'm happy to point you to the research.

It may well be that your perspective comes out to be the correct one, but not because it is self-evident. But because the actual evidence supports the conclusion.

Unless you want to play the philosophical debate of if we can ever know anything....Science often treats obvious items as self evident. If you are doing flight research, any scientist worth their salt will accept gravity existing as self evident. What you suggest is nothing but playing word games. Feel free to us the terminology you prefer if you don't like "self evident" when the data makes it abundantly and obviously clear that infection based immunity is real and significant both in level and duration.

Scientific knowledge based choices are pretty much never done based on the philosophical approach because it goes no where since it's impossible to know with certainty. That's something for the academics to argue after the fact. That academic process is important but it shouldn't (and typically doesn't) stand in the way of moving forward once the facts are self evident.

Also, if you want to play this game, we shouldn't be vaccinating in the first place because we can't prove with certainty what level of immunity will be or how long it will last with the vaccines...by your logic, we should wait for the science to prove exactly what level and for how long the immunity will last. That may take many years. It might be our great grandchildren who finally say enough is enough long after the pandemic is nothing but a bad memory. But back in the real world, it's self evident from the research that the vaccines provides some level of immunity for some time period but just like infection based immunity.

The fact that it's a research topic doesn't mean the basics are not well understood and clear cut. The research is fine tuning the details.

This isn't an issue of perspective. The facts indicate that re-infection is all but non-existent while we have a very large sample size and now a significant "after" time period. In fact far larger and far longer than the vaccine trials.

[Montanan]

Originally Posted by Woodland Hills

So, anyone up for the new anal swab Covid test? It’s much more accurate!

The issue with this wonderful advancement is that it is not easily self-administered so there is considerable reluctance and inconvenience.

Also it requires many hours of simulator training to become competent and then certified in its administration, see image below.

Presently, one has to stand in a long, long line of people and dispense with your lower garments in front of everyone and the tester has to put on new gloves for each procedure, so there can be a shortage of PPE, and that anal swab has considerable girth so it takes forceful effort to persuade its entry, far up you know what.

I have heard it is rather similar to a prostrate exam, which exam be like:

Humor can be the best medicine and at times the only medicine.

[Midnight Son]

Location, end of the pavement in Northern Manitoba.
64 years young. Wife is a few years younger.
Yes I will get vaccinated (pre-existing conditions).
Wife will probably get vaccinated first as she works in the Education system.
When? That's the question, who knows, supposed to be late summer????


To all those not taking the vaccine.

Oh well, when I first got on the internet one of my favorite pages, was The Darwin Awards, from an entomologist at the University of Florida. It is absolutely amazing how many wish to emulate the award winners.


Best wishes all, some are really going to need it.

[Catalier]

Getting back to what this post is SUPPOSED to be about...

I'm now 24 hrs post 2nd shot. I'm perfectly fine, my shoulder isn't even sore anymore.

Get the vaccine. Totally worth it.

[Mike OReilly]

How Long Does Immunity to COVID-19 Last?

Endemic SARS-CoV-2 will maintain post-pandemic immunity

Herd immunity by infection is not an option

And on, and on... there's a trove of research looking at the question of how long immunity lasts. It is not cut and dry.Which is why the current public health approach to vaccinating everyone by risk category is the one that follows the the science. Not your self-evident truth.

No one is disputing your straw man that the body produces an immune response. The start of our latest spat here is your assertion that they should be prioritizing based on past exposure to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. I pointed out that the current science on immunity and how long the immune response lasts is unclear.

But you continue to assert things which are simply not true. The research remains inconclusive on this question at this point. Allusions to gravity or self-evident truths are obfuscations ... again. For what? I don't even understand. It's a simple statement that the research is ongoing on this question.

[Montanan]

FYI:

Do realize that while the vaccine provides a high degree of protection against the variants that it was designed to protect against as to mitigating the onset of severe symptoms of COVID upon being infected, it does not change anything about how you are to continue to interact with your community. You can still be contagious and infectious.

You will still need to keep social distancing.
Wearing masks.
Washing hands.
Avoiding contact with people you do not cohabitate with and of course large crowd gatherings.

Here is why:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3kr...mNUmqm0yg-gfC_

[Montanan]

It becomes much harder to proceed through new clinical trials of Covid vaccines because one can't readily enroll volunteers, few people will pursue testing, if they know there are proven alternatives. Hence it can take far, far longer to achieve the numbers required to prove both safety and efficacy. The second set of clinical trials can take many more months or even years to complete versus the first few that have already occurred.

This becomes an ever bigger issue as to proving out the next batch of vaccines which will be targeting to derive protection against newer variants which variants may not be provide protection by older vaccines. And also the statistics become evermore challenging because the testing has to be completed with large enough subsamples of persons who have each received a prior vaccine from a specific manufacturer which means trials have to be inclusive of Moderna vaccinated persons, Pfizer, vaccinated persons, etc., etc.

And one can no longer ethically use placebos to establish comparative controls. The task of developing the next round is dramatically more complicated at the clinical trial stage.

Reference: Nature 08 JANUARY 2021
Search for better COVID vaccines confounded by existing rollouts
As placebo-controlled testing falls out of favour, vaccine developers eye blood markers and challenge trials to assess next-generation candidates.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d415...38691-45326354

"As we celebrate emergency approvals of the first COVID-19 vaccines, finding participants for trials of earlier-stage vaccine candidates has become challenging. We still need more vaccines that are less expensive, have fewer side effects and are easier to administer than those now in use. They would also bolster the world’s supply, ensuring quicker distribution to all countries. But placebo-controlled trials require that half of the participants receive a dummy shot. “Once you have a vaccine that is available,” notes vaccinologist Scott Halperin, “a placebo-controlled trial is no longer ethical or acceptable.” Next-generation vaccine makers are therefore considering ways of proving their products’ effectiveness without placebos."

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Literally, the FIRST hit I get when I search: "Covid immunity wanes":

More people are getting COVID-19 twice, suggesting immunity wanes quickly in some

You obviously aren't reading the scientific literature.

First Example: So compiling the POSSIBLE reinfections...they don't even have 1,000 out of 100,000,000 confirmed cases (ie: not even 1 ten thousand of a percent reinfection rate)

The example in the first paragraph is a good example. Mostly likely, she never got fully over it, just had a false negative test. That just means she wasn't shedding virus at the time of the negative test. While it can't be discounted entirely, it's a very suspect case. This is common of most of the reported POSSIBLE reinfections, they typically have a negative test followed very quickly by a positive test.

Your second example was about studies with other viruses...but even there when they were able to get reinfections to happen the study individuals experienced far less sever symptoms, which for most practical purposes is just as good as being immune.

Your third example...again, reinfection is possible (not common) at some point but mild to no symptoms is the typical result.

Your next link is about attempting to hit herd immunity purely by allowing infection to run wild. No one is suggesting we stop the vaccination process, nor that we don't extend vaccination to previously infected once supply catches up with demand. This is about prioritizing during the period of limited supply.

[Mike OReilly]

Well, I'm glad to see you agree it's not as cut-and-dry as you initially suggest. Immune response does wane, and in some cases, rather quickly, but not in all cases. That's what makes it worth studying, and not just assuming the answer is obvious.

Like I said, I'll go with actual public health experts when it comes to deciding the best way to hand out the limited supplies of vaccines. I'm sure they're considering the uncertainty around lasting immune responses in their calculation. I also suspect basic logistics has a lot to do with it.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

Well, I'm glad to see you agree it's not as cut-and-dry as you initially suggest. Immune response does wane, and in some cases, rather quickly, but not in all cases. That's what makes it worth studying, and not just assuming the answer is obvious.

Like I said, I'll go with actual public health experts when it comes to deciding the best way to hand out the limited supplies of vaccines. I'm sure they're considering the uncertainty around lasting immune responses in their calculation. I also suspect basic logistics has a lot to do with it.

Nice red herring argument...I never said it couldn't wane eventually.

But based on the evidence, it's cut and dry that as a population, those who have had the virus and recovered currently have significant immunity and it is likely to last well beyond the point where vaccine supply is no longer an issue.

With the limits on availability, it makes perfect sense to focus them on populations more likely to benefit.

Public health officials have proven to be far from infallible as has been proven multiple times. Based on the facts, I'm not ready to believe they have seriously considered the uncertainty around lasting immunity...more likely they are claiming "uncertainty" to avoid making the tough choices.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by valhalla360

But based on the evidence, it's cut and dry that as a population, those who have had the virus and recovered currently have significant immunity and it is likely to last well beyond the point where vaccine supply is no longer an issue.

With the limits on availability, it makes perfect sense to focus them on populations more likely to benefit.

Public health officials have proven to be far from infallible as has been proven multiple times. Based on the facts, I'm not ready to believe they have seriously considered the uncertainty around lasting immunity...more likely they are claiming "uncertainty" to avoid making the tough choices.

Like I said, I'll go with actual experts over self-proclaimed internet experts.

BTW, you sure seem to have a lot of inside knowledge about what public health experts think and know. Pretty amazing... Which is part of my broader point about the prevalence of anti-folks here on CF.

[Montanan]

Covid reinfection

Common Investigation Protocol for Investigating Suspected SARS-CoV-2 Reinfection
Updated Oct. 27, 2020

Protocol summary: This protocol is designed to support a common public health investigation into suspected SARS-CoV-2 reinfection cases across jurisdictions. Confirming SARS-CoV-2 reinfection requires advanced laboratory diagnostic support built upon advanced planning to implement this protocol, or a locally adapted version, with referral of specimens to supporting laboratory networks. Data collected with this protocol will identify potential cases of reinfection, advance understanding of SARS-CoV-2 epidemiology, and inform public health response.

Introduction
Current state of knowledge: A gold-standard confirmation of SARS-CoV-2 reinfection will require confirmation of initial infection and virus detection across two distinct time periods with genetic sequencing data needed to support a conclusion of high probability that reinfection has occurred. Possible SARS-CoV-2 reinfection could be differentiated from persistent viral carriage through a variety of laboratory-based parameters, patient symptomology, and/or epidemiologic links1. However, reinfection cannot be confirmed if clinical specimens from the initial coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) illness are not available.

Reinfection is known to occur with other human coronaviruses (HCoVs) 2. A study in Kenya found that 4%–21% of people infected with endemic coronaviruses (HCoV-229E, NCoV-NL63, and HCoV-OC43) had two or more episodes of infection with the same virus species during a six-month period. Another study of HCoVs that used an antibody increase as a proxy for reinfection found that reinfections occurred at a median of 30 months but could occur as early as 6 months following the first infection4. However, immunologic data on durability of immunity for SARS-CoV-2 are limited. Of note, South Korea has documented RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 cases that became undetectable by RT-PCR, then subsequently tested positive again by RT-PCR within 35 days due to detection of presumable incomplete (defective) viral genomes, suggesting that reinfection was not detected during that time frame.

CDC is aware of recent scientific and media reports of cases of suspected SARS-CoV-2 reinfection among persons who were previously diagnosed with COVID-197–9. However, these reports use different testing methods to ascertain reinfection. Because of the need for a common understanding of what constitutes reinfection, CDC proposes this common investigation protocol for identifying cases with a high index of suspicion for reinfection and suggests paired specimen testing using the following approaches.

Justification: Detecting confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 reinfections is critical to public health control and related risk assessments. The possibility of reinfection could present challenges to controlling viral transmission within communities or within specific vulnerable populations. A better understanding of reinfection and the immune response to SARS-CoV-2 is also needed to inform vaccine planning efforts.

Intended use of study findings: Findings on the likelihood of reinfection will be used to guide future public health surveillance and prevention guidance for COVID-19. Additionally, confirmed or suspected SARS-CoV-2 reinfection case detection can inform future research into SARS-CoV-2 host immunity and vaccine development.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019...infection.html

[Mike OReilly]

Thanks Montana. As I keep saying, the issue of reinfection, IOW immune longevity, is a hot topic in Covid research right now. It is far clear how long our immune response remains viable, either with natural exposure or vaccine stimulation.