Mutating Corona Virus

[honeybee13]

I've lost track of where the UK stands currently on boosters. At the very least, I'd have thought they'll be needed for variants.

 

France is planning to start vaccinating vulnerable people and healthworkers over 50 from September, as their antibody levels and immunity drop.

 

But I see that Tedros from the WHO thinks it's more important to give first vaccines to more people. In his opinion, being vaccinated gives durable immunity against the virus. It'll be interesting to see what happens to hightail's antibodies over time.

Edited July 15, 2021 by honeybee13
Addition

[hightail]

6 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

I've lost track of where the UK stands currently on boosters. At the very least, I'd have thought they'll be needed for variants.

Problem is we'll be playing catch up with variants.  By the time they manage to modify a vaccine for a current variant another will have taken over as the dominant strain.  With flu vaccine they pick the one each year which they consider most likely to be effective against a predicted strain.  We're a long way off being there with Covid jabs yet.

 

 

[tobyjugg2]

I think Johnson is hoping this will be a lifeline for him, and it may well be

... even though the Beta variant targeted by the 'new vaccine is a generation or 2 and 9 months out of date already, the mutation targeted makes it well worth it.

 

Of concern is O/AZ (in league with Johnsons gov) tarnished reputation for apparently fudging results and apparent 'enhanced' claims of efficacy

.. and perhaps also that they are seemingly making other changes to the vaccine (address blood clotting) which although worthy, increase risk and will need additional careful vetting to ensure they haven't unwittingly caused a more prevalent side effect instead. Given O/AZ's history mentioned above, that doesn't fill me with great confidence.

 

Edited July 15, 2021 by tobyjugg2

[hightail]

13 minutes ago, honeybee13 said:

as their antibody levels and immunity drop.

This is something I wish I could get more hard info on.  Nowhere can I find info such as 'after X months protection has waned by Y%'.  Does such information exist or are governments working on the idea that it's a good idea to just keep shoving more of the same into people because they have it sitting spare?

[tobyjugg2]

You wont HB as (for example) if people have been infected whether they know it or not, antibodies and other resistance will almost certainly be far higher in the vast majority of those people - even after exactly the same vaccine + doses as others

 

The human immune system is a very varied beast

 

 

But broadly, antibody levels fall significantly after 6 months for those with 2 vaccinations and no prior infection. o?AZ seems to start lower and taper off quicker than pfiser vaccinated, but the levels still fall off. Undoubtedly the chinese and russian vaccines are at best similar to O/AZ - and probably significantly less so.

Other variants confuse it even more. (think of flu variants)

 

In the light of completeness:

If 90ish% of the UK population were vaccinated or resistant, and sensible mitigations like masks, space, distance and temperature checks were solidly in place, Johnsons 'get people infected' plan would be more understandable and supportable - but still HIGHLY questionable

Edited July 15, 2021 by tobyjugg2

[hightail]

5 minutes ago, tobyjugg2 said:

The human immune system is a very varied beast

Absolutely.  The lab I use provides figures along with your individual results which shows numbers of people tested against antibody numbers.  This is how I know I have not had the virus and that I was at the low end of +ve after a first jab.  Antibody levels are stratospheric for those who have had the virus.

[honeybee13]

 I'm not sure if this adds to what we already know. Nature published research from the end of last month.

 

There's a more readable but shorter version in the Times of Israel.

 

COVID-19 dynamics after a national immunization program in Israel | Nature Medicine

WWW.NATURE.COM

---

A retrospective analysis of data from the Israeli Ministry of Health collected between 28 August 2020 and 24 February 2021 documents the real-life...

 

[tobyjugg2]

sheesh - good link HB but even I got 'figure fatigue' there

 

I think a lot of the issues with first dose effectiveness is whether people had prior 'contact' with the virus.

Many may have had a small contact which the body resisted - and primed it - which the first vaccine does in a more limited way for those who haven't

In those with prior contact with the virus, the first vaccine dose is effectively a second dose, and the second dose of vaccine - a third practice run

and as we all know - practise makes perfect

Edited July 15, 2021 by tobyjugg2

[tobyjugg2]

Just a reminder on the 'herd immunity' plan of Johnsons given HBs' NZ link and the reference to it and the estimation that at least 70% immunity would be needed to achieve some form of 'herd immunity'

(I understand it to be far higher than that in a society without other controls)

 

The study found that, for the period from 5 April to 16 May:

• the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 88% effective against symptomatic disease from the B.1.617.2 variant 2 weeks after the second dose, compared to 93% effectiveness against the B.1.1.7 variant
• 2 doses of the AstraZeneca vaccine were 60% effective against symptomatic disease from the B.1.617.2 variant compared to 66% effectiveness against the B.1.1.7 variant
• both vaccines were 33% effective against symptomatic disease from B.1.617.2, 3 weeks after the first dose compared to around 50% effectiveness against the B.1.1.7 variant

Thats 60% effectiveness against symptomatic disease - NOT 60% effectiveness against transmission - which would still not be enough even if it were. It isnt against the older variant let alone the new one.

... and that doesnt even consider our un-vaccinated kids being used as breeding grounds for the virus

 

Johnson must be hoping for better from the new variant vaccine - it should be better - maybe even enough better - until a new variant is cooked by his plans

Edited July 15, 2021 by tobyjugg2

[tobyjugg2]

 Interesting that in @honeybee13linked Israeli report that they inoculated the teens before their exams based on their projections and saw significant benefits

 

[tobyjugg2]

along with masks, distance improved air circulation (which was already good)

From well over a year ago ...

 

Coming soon across Israel: Futuristic temperature testers using defense tech

WWW.TIMESOFISRAEL.COM

---

With some devices, you won't even have to stop walking to be checked

 

[honeybee13]

They must have been listening to you about temperature checks, TJ.

 

I'm very keen on good ventilation of enclosed spaces and that hasn't caught on everywhere.

[tobyjugg2]

Reading through all that (well most of it) reminded me of something that had completely slipped my mind

The chinese sinovac vaccine which is an inactivated virus vaccine (effectively injecting dead cov into your body) - and its effectiveness

 

I expected it to be much better than reports suggest - although its claimed efficacy is high against early versions

It also seem to be having problems with new variants - although others do too.

 

The results I'm seeing dont fit well with my understanding - so I'm clearly missing or been mislead with something.

I'm no virologist - but I am a systems person with a LOT of experience.

 

Consider - the inactivated virus sinovac still includes the protein spikes PLUS all the other stuff in the early version of the virus used - enabling your body to practice on much more of the virus

The mRNA vaccines with apparent better results are largely just the spike protein genetics - so why better?

.. and why haven't sinovac released an updated version?

 

A virologist might be able to explain that - I cant.

 

Edited July 15, 2021 by tobyjugg2

[tobyjugg2]

Just a little further note on Sinovac

 

I had severe doubts on the claimed efficacy that the Sinovac/Chinese gov reported.

Just like the O/AZ/Johnson gov figures.

 

... seems that sinovac and the Chinese gov at least were dealing straight and its at least as good or better than the O/AZ vaccine and the figures were straight according to the recently released extensive Chile real world analysis.

 

THAT speaks volumes.

as does the known fact that the Chinese sat on the 'initial  outbreak for FAR less time than the UK did when they were tracking the Kent variant spread across london and Kent

Edited July 15, 2021 by tobyjugg2

[hightail]

5 hours ago, tobyjugg2 said:

In those with prior contact with the virus, the first vaccine dose is effectively a second dose, and the second dose of vaccine - a third practice run

and as we all know - practise makes perfect

I've seen it suggested that those who have been infected with the disease could maybe get away with just one dose.  The real world figures I've seen do suggest (scream) that's the case.  What I can't find anywhere is a number for the level of antibodies considered worthwhile protection.  Of course the anonymised tables of figures from the lab are a vanishingly small study as they only consist of those who have paid for tests.  That in itself may mean a bias one way or another.

 

I'd also love to understand if measurable antibody levels are what matters long term.  There are jabs we get or diseases we've had which confer long term protection, some supposedly for life.  Is my blood still rife with measurable levels of all of those?

[honeybee13]

Well, have you caught measles or the other childhood diseases that can be vaccinated against? Or TB, etc? They're meant to be lifetime protection, I thought.

 

I know that a coronavirus isn't the same, I was talking about your bloodstream being rife with antibodies.

[BazzaS]

It (as ever!) isn’t that simple, I’m afraid, HB.

 

You mention measles : no real variants, so good (but one can never say ‘lifelong’ as an absolute!) immunity. Yet the coronaviruses can gave different variants / strains (more like ‘flu) so you can get immune to one strain and have only partial protection against others. The coronavirus protection even for one strain isn’t lifelong (so, with evolving strains, too - expect ongoing booster programmes)

 

You mention TB: BCG is  a live (attenuated) vaccine, but never gave 100% (or anywhere close to 100%) protection.

 

As a general rule (there is usually an exception to any rule, and then the exception to the exception!): attenuated vaccines give better protection than killed / sub-unit vaccines.

The “stimulus” to the immune system ‘stays around longer’ than for the killed vaccine, giving both better functional levels, and better immune memory.

 

Hightail : measuring levels is fine, but again, isn’t the whole story. “High levels must be better than lower levels” seems obvious, and is (usually!) correct, but it may be that once a threshold is reached, “higher” doesn’t always mean better protection (though, it may mean “stays above threshold” for longer)

 

There is also the concept of “immunological memory”, so in some situations a lower level but with an immune system “primed” to react better offers more protection. So, there used to be a (near-obsession?) with antibody levels against Hepatitis B for healthcare workers.

Regular (if infrequent!) testing, and ‘boosters’ if the level had waned.

Then they found what mattered was “immunological memory”, and it didn’t matter if the level had dropped as long as the immune system responded well to a challenge: so they stopped doing regular testing for levels, just giving boosters if the worker had an exposure risk event.

 

To add to the mix : “high antibody levels” must be better, right?. It seems obvious, yet initially there was the the theoretical concern of ADE : antibody dependant enhancement, where some antibodies can actually cause increased binding of the virus to a receptor - increasing infection risk. Fortunately not the case for the Covid vaccines, though this had to be shown not to be the case before work progressed on candidate vaccines.

 

[tobyjugg2]

51 minutes ago, hightail said:

I'd also love to understand if measurable antibody levels are what matters long term.  There are jabs we get or diseases we've had which confer long term protection, some supposedly for life.  Is my blood still rife with measurable levels of all of those?

 

Good info in the links I gave re that and bone marrow - although just like with 'how many million antibodies? - there is no definitive answer.

 

and under that umbrella (lol) Dont forget the T cells

 

Some bedtime reading when you've gone through the earlier links a couple of times :-) :

2021.06.08.447308v1.full.pdf

[hightail]

11 minutes ago, BazzaS said:

To add to the mix : “high antibody levels” must be better, right?

It is the current argument for further doses - that the antibody level will drop with time.  It becomes a different argument for me if we are talking about a modified vaccine capable of giving greater protection against currently circulatiing variants.  The risk/reward though of just dosing everyone with more of the same changes according to current protection (antibody levels) and known side effects.  This is the current argument against vaccinating children -  you might kill the odd one with the vaccine and so far the risk of serious illness in children doesn't warrant that risk.

[tobyjugg2]

3 minutes ago, hightail said:

you might kill the odd one with the vaccine and so far the risk of serious illness in children doesn't warrant that risk.

 

I think it highly unlikely that either the O/AZ or mRNA vaccines will kill more children than covid (even with the small announced UK figures) with that cost/'benefit getting higher with the new variants that seem more able to affect and harm kids

 

and the added benefit of any reduction in transmission, and hence mutation seems likely to add vastly to the benefit to kids, let alone their families

 

A political nightmare though

[honeybee13]

Bazza, if I'd known you were around, I would't have said anything.

 

Thank you for educating us again.

[hightail]

21 minutes ago, tobyjugg2 said:

I think it highly unlikely that either the O/AZ or mRNA vaccines will kill more children than covid (even with the small announced UK figures) with that cost/'benefit getting higher with the new variants that seem more able to affect and harm kids

 

and the added benefit of any reduction in transmission, and hence mutation seems likely to add vastly to the benefit to kids, let alone their families

 

A political nightmare though

The benefit of reduction in transmission is undeniable TJ.  One catastrophic vaccine reaction would though be a PR nightmare. 

[tobyjugg2]

It looks like reduction in transmission is somewhere between 45-65% after 2 doses (a huge margin of estimation yes but they are from the real world studies of various other vaccines which seem sadly inadequate/unreliable re O/AZ)

- but taking a roughly centre point as a starting point you are looking at halving the transmission.

 

Maybe its better for kids that they get infected and build up resistance - I have little clue on that, (we are likely to see some severe kickback from the more 'routine' respiratory diseases this winter with the fall off in exposer and resistance)

but we do know that other older family members could still get very sick,

the newer variants ARE seeming to make kids and the inoculated sick in increased numbers (lose lose)

and each transmission is a notch on the mutation pole.

 

Johnson has backed us into something of a corner - any update on the pfiser vaccine availability

- although the new O/AZ variant vaccine does seem to have promise - for what their word is worth

[BazzaS]

1 hour ago, hightail said:

This is the current argument against vaccinating children -  you might kill the odd one with the vaccine and so far the risk of serious illness in children doesn't warrant that risk.

The best (current!) reason for not vaccinating children in the U.K. in public health terms (assuming maximal U.K. adult vaccination)  is that those doses of vaccine will do more good (for the U.K., let alone abroad!) being used for adults in the developing world.

Less cases there, especially in the immunocompromised, less variant development, less imported variants, less U.K. cases.

[hightail]

To be fair it could be weeks since I saw either Whitty or one of the spokesmen saying they had to be very careful with vaccine safety in children and the risks from Covid in youngsters weren't great enough to vaccinate.