mersenneforum.org

mersenneforum.org (https://www.mersenneforum.org/index.php)
-   Science & Technology (https://www.mersenneforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=52)
-   -   COVID vaccination wavefront (https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=26332)

storm5510 2021-01-29 02:03

95% is as good as it ever gets. Anyone not understanding what this is about, go up to my previous.

kriesel 2021-01-29 14:41

[QUOTE=kriesel;570189]Wisconsin ranks a poor 34th among the 50 US states, for putting vaccines received to work in patients, with [B]51.8%[/B] of what was received, administered as of today. Not far from the dead last spot for US states, at 44.4%, but far from first at 86.7%, despite having some excellent health care facilities. Yet [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Palm"]Andrea Palm[/URL] moves up to the federal level. [URL]https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/public-health/states-ranked-by-percentage-of-covid-19-vaccines-administered.html[/URL][/QUOTE]As of this morning, Wisconsin is now listed as [B]49th[/B] out of 50 US states, 42.45% used, probably reflective of recently received shipments. Over 360,000 received by Wisconsin but unused ATM. Alabama is listed at #50 at 42.03%
It seems the number of virus variants has increased too. Maybe not so good for expected immunity after vaccination, as occurs with the many flu strains and vaccination.
At least the following variants are identified in [URL="https://www.today.com/health/how-many-strains-covid-19-exist-covid-19-variant-guide-t207173"]this Today article[/URL] presumably in addition to the originally sequenced Wuhan:
Ohio COH.20G/501Y
UK V.1.1.7
South Africa B.1.351
Brazil P.1
California Cal.20C
[URL]https://wexnermedical.osu.edu/mediaroom/pressreleaselisting/new-sars-cov2-variant[/URL] mentions an unnamed variant found in only one Columbus OH patient at the time
The early news in the Today article of vaccine effectiveness vs. variant is concerning but not alarming; weaker but still regarded as sufficient immune response. More infectious but not determined to be more deadly. Vaccine makers and medical researchers are responding.

pinhodecarlos 2021-01-30 16:46

WHO urges Britain to pause Covid jabs after treating vulnerable


[url]https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jan/30/who-urges-britain-to-pause-covid-jabs-after-treating-vulnerable[/url]

The Carnivore 2021-01-30 21:13

[QUOTE=storm5510;570373]95% is as good as it ever gets. Anyone not understanding what this is about, go up to my previous.[/QUOTE]
Now here are some that are not as good:
2 doses required, 70% effective: [url]https://www.healthline.com/health-news/the-astrazeneca-vaccine-is-between-62-and-90-effective-what-we-know[/url]
1 dose required, 66% effective: [url]https://www.statnews.com/2021/01/29/jj-one-dose-covid-vaccine-is-66-effective-a-weapon-but-not-a-knockout-punch/[/url]

If less effective vaccines are approved for use in the US, can the general public choose which vaccine to get? If not, it would potentially make the situation worse. A considerable number of people who aren't eligible to get vaccinated yet would try to jump the line at all costs instead of waiting, since the choice would be to get a superior vaccine now or an inferior one later. And once the less effective ones are rolled out, many of those who receive them would try to get vaccinated again so that they have another chance at getting the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine.

lavalamp 2021-01-30 21:26

[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;570507]WHO urges Britain to pause Covid jabs after treating vulnerable[/QUOTE]That doesn't sound like something our isolationist government would consider.

storm5510 2021-01-31 00:48

[QUOTE=The Carnivore;570520]If less effective vaccines are approved for use in the US, can the general public choose which vaccine to get? If not, it would potentially make the situation worse. A considerable number of people who aren't eligible to get vaccinated yet would try to jump the line at all costs instead of waiting, since the choice would be to get a superior vaccine now or an inferior one later. And once the less effective ones are rolled out, many of those who receive them would try to get vaccinated again so that they have another chance at getting the Moderna or Pfizer vaccine.[/QUOTE]

Question: Would the FDA allow vaccines of lower quality to be used here?

Uncwilly 2021-01-31 01:34

[QUOTE=storm5510;570536]Question: Would the FDA allow vaccines of lower quality to be used here?[/QUOTE]
IIRC Salk is less effective than the Sabin for Polio. If there is a different production pathway that can turn out a large amount of a 60% effective vaccine, that can be given to part of the population. It will drop the R[SUB]0[/SUB] in that group (which will reduce the loading on the hospitals). Giving the 95% effective vax to everyone that can be supplied by that manufacturing chain will reduce the transmission in that group even more. After everyone has had a vax from either group, those from the lessor group could get the vax from the more effective type. Stopping the spread and getting a large part of the population immune work hand in hand. Also, the J&J vaccine does not require the strict cold chain of the mRNA. So that can be deployed in more rural areas, small military outposts, first nation villages, etc. There is room for both types of vaccines to work together. Also, having more supply chains will allow more to be delivered world wide. Cold chain will be an issue for some areas around the world. Getting small towns vaccinated with a 60% effective vax will help stop the spread. And that gives a chance for contact tracing to be used. Masks, distancing, and other measures get a big effectiveness 'shot in the arm' when more than half of the population can't get the disease.

Dr Sardonicus 2021-01-31 02:50

[QUOTE=The Carnivore;570520]<snip>
If less effective vaccines are approved for use in the US, can the general public choose which vaccine to get? If not, it would potentially make the situation worse. A considerable number of people who aren't eligible to get vaccinated yet would try to jump the line at all costs instead of waiting, since the choice would be to get a superior vaccine now or an inferior one later.[/QUOTE]So far, the vaccine isn't available to the general public. There just isn't enough vaccine for that. Yet.

I'm not sure a vaccination site would want to have more than one type of vaccine on hand at any one time. The storage and use requirements are different. There might also be an increased chance of record keeping errors if more than one kind of vaccine was on hand at the same time.

If there's a mass vaccination site taking all comers at some point, my guess is you get Hobson's choice. You take whatever shot happens to be available then, or you leave.

As I understand it, the supplies of the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines will increase in the coming months, so I don't foresee either becoming unavailable.

People are [i]already[/i] cutting in line. Here in the good ol' USA, some of our young, physically healthy congress critters have done so legally. Some other elites are also being allowed to get the shot before us little people. In Canada, [url=https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9186273/Casino-CEO-wife-arrested-flying-remote-Canada-vaccinated-indigenous-people.html]Rodney Baker and his wife Ekaterina[/url] chartered a flight to a remote area and posed as motel workers to get vaccinated. They got arrested - not for their imposture to get the shot, but for violating isolation protocols and not following their signed declarations. They were fined, but the fines are chump change for them. I don't know whether there is any prospect of jail time in their case. The maximum possible is six months.

[color=red][b]Uncwilly[/b][/color] has already covered the advantages of complementary deployment of different types of vaccine based on logistical considerations.

Uncwilly 2021-01-31 03:34

Since Merck has dropped their vaccine, it is not out of the realm of possibility that Biden might sweet talk them (Defense Production Act) into producing Pfizer or Moderna's version. The Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine might come into the mix in the USA too.

Countries that have their own that are ~50% effective jabs would do well to not wait for a higher effectiveness model to become available. Slow the spread. Every new case is another new chance at a bad mutation popping up.

A 50% effective vax for Ebola or Marburg would be welcomed in some areas.

An R[SUB]0[/SUB] of 0.75 is much preferred to one of 1.5 (just hypothetical numbers).

pinhodecarlos 2021-01-31 18:14

UK vaccinates almost 600,000 people in single day for first time
([url]https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/uk-vaccine-rollout-record-highest-b918093.html[/url])

The mass vaccination centre in Milton Keynes will be opening on the 8th February and will require a large number of volunteers. Call for volunteers is underway. Is the empire reborn? Wow!!

storm5510 2021-01-31 18:26

[URL="https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/jan/27/most-poor-nations-will-take-until-2024-to-achieve-mass-covid-19-immunisation?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=facebook&fbclid=IwAR1fmNBPySSGv7dW7Pvz09QwnZfkk_kg6IP262q5dweCJnYBMAmkMxjN3FQ"]Most poor nations 'will take until 2024 to achieve mass Covid-19 immunization.'[/URL]

I don't know how trustworthy this source is. It may be of no more value than the tabloids in the grocery check-out lanes.


All times are UTC. The time now is 06:20.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.