2019-2020 coronavirus pandemic (Vaccination 2021 Edition)

[Fieldy409]

Just reread what I said in the last post 20 times please.

Don't do that. Don't act like I didn't read or understand please. Just because I have a different opinion doesn't mean I'm too stupid to understand yours.

You mentioned problems. But I just don't see any insurmountable problems in what you said.


Its not about size,geography or anything like that. It simply is that its proven we can stop the virus from spreading beyond people, making sure a person does not infect others, and then the virus just dies. New Zealand being small or population density or who you share a border with(when they're also working towards eradication) it doesn't matter they're just details. What matters is that the proof that the cycle can be broken.

This is not an inevitable unstoppable force. Its stoppable, (and... evitable?)

 

[Agema]

What you're not taking into account which is the important part of this, is medical interventions of any sort still impart a demand in terms of time and resources on the health care system.

There is only one form of medical intervention for covid-19 that poses a critical problem for the health service: having respiratory problems that are so serious that it requires hospitalisation.

Otherwise, patients isolate at home for a couple of weeks and wait for it to end, like a common cold or 'flu. If they want to take an antipyretic or antitussive, they buy one over the counter. The only other thing it may need are more primary healthcare contacts and laboratory testing facilities, both of which are relatively trivial.

 

[Eacaraxe]

There is only one form of medical intervention for covid-19 that poses a critical problem for the health service: having respiratory problems that are so serious that it requires hospitalisation.

I'm sorry, when in the past two weeks have we invented Star Trek-styled replication technology that conjures PPE, medical supplies, and incidentals such as immunoglobulin and saline solution straight from the luminiferous aether? Have we now time dilation, and sleep and food replacement technologies, that allow health care personnel to work around the clock, 24+ hours per day? Matrix-style brain jacks that allow end users to download a decade's worth of medical training and on the job experience to eliminate staffing shortages that existed years prior to the pandemic?

Funny, I seem to have missed that world-changing breakthrough which has spontaneously ushered in the era of post-scarcity medical care amidst a global pandemic.

 

[tstorm823]

Don't do that. Don't act like I didn't read or understand please. Just because I have a different opinion doesn't mean I'm too stupid to understand yours.

You mentioned problems. But I just don't see any insurmountable problems in what you said.


Its not about size,geography or anything like that. It simply is that its proven we can stop the virus from spreading beyond people, making sure a person does not infect others, and then the virus just dies. New Zealand being small or population density or who you share a border with(when they're also working towards eradication) it doesn't matter they're just details. What matters is that the proof that the cycle can be broken.z

This is not an inevitable unstoppable force. Its stoppable, (and... evitable?)

I'm not saying you're stupid, but you don't understand. It's not just scale. Scale is a big deal. Climate is a big deal. Remoteness is a big deal. The initial avoidance is the biggest deal of all. The US was relatively quick to block travel from China, a solid week ahead of New Zealand, but it was too late, it was already here. New Zealand was on high alert for a month before a single case emerged. The differences between the places were determined months ago beyond anyone's feasible control, the same responses don't work in different circumstances.

 

[SupahEwok]

Don't do that. Don't act like I didn't read or understand please. Just because I have a different opinion doesn't mean I'm too stupid to understand yours.

Hey man, it's better than just being told you're a liar.

One would think one would wonder if one needed to re-examine one's positions if so many conversations one engaged in ended in one claiming lies, slander, and ignorance. Alas. One does not seem to.

 

[Fieldy409]

I'm not saying you're stupid, but you don't understand. It's not just scale. Scale is a big deal. Climate is a big deal. Remoteness is a big deal. The initial avoidance is the biggest deal of all. The US was relatively quick to block travel from China, a solid week ahead of New Zealand, but it was too late, it was already here. New Zealand was on high alert for a month before a single case emerged. The differences between the places were determined months ago beyond anyone's feasible control, the same responses don't work in different circumstances.

Ah but you're so focused on when the borders shut do you know about the Ruby Princess Cruise ship? The cruise ship visited New Zealand on March 15 and caused a cluster there in their ports before coming to Australia and giving us over 650 infected Australians which each state took its residents for.

Ruby Princess: The call that led to 650 Covid-19 cases

Crucial phone call likely to be probed in criminal investigation into a massive blunder.

www.nzherald.co.nz

 

[Fieldy409]

Hey man, it's better than just being told you're a liar.

One would think one would wonder if one needed to re-examine one's positions if so many conversations one engaged in ended in one claiming lies, slander, and ignorance. Alas. One does not seem to.

Lucky it doesn't happen often and now I think I got a bit grumpy and even T-storm didn't mean anything. What a strange thing to say to me. Now 'One' should stop insulting people and go away unless 'One' has something to actually contribute to the conversation.

 

[SupahEwok]

Lucky it doesn't happen often and now I think I got a bit grumpy and even T-storm didn't mean anything. What a strange thing to say to me. Now 'One' should stop insulting people and go away unless 'One' has something to actually contribute to the conversation.

'One' was not you, if that is what you thought.

 

[Fieldy409]

'One' was not you, if that is what you thought.

Oh I guess I got confused. Still it's better to debate than attack the person but whatever I don't want to start acting like a pretend moderator.

 

[SupahEwok]

Oh I guess I got confused. Still it's better to debate than attack the person

That is an enlightened way of living. Unfortunately, I'm a petty man.

 

[Agema]

snip...

I could not care less about your usual trick of hyperbolic rhetoric and red herrings to cover the fact you fucked up over a relatively small point and can't admit it. It was cute the first few times, but it's really stale by now.

Far fewer than 20% of covid-19 patients need medical intervention, or at least "significant" medical intervention if you insist on including paracetamol and staying at home as medical intervention. Just fucking deal with it for heaven's sake and move on to something constructive.

 

[Silvanus]

Even if that is true(mind that in Europe 'collective' healthcare spending already reaches into the stratosphere) then you would still have the issue of finite doctors, nurses and ICU personnel. Human resources are also a resource even if money grew on trees. Sooner or later you'll run into limitations.

Sure, eventually, a solid limit exists. But we haven't reached it, and nor are we anywhere close. The resources exist in all relatively wealthy countries to avoid having to make those decisions; it's a political choice not to invest them in the health service.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

No, those figures are accurate and still track, the problem is you guys aren't paying attention to what I said and are conflating "medical intervention" with "hospitalization". Those two terms are not synonymous, and mean completely different things; hospitalization is admission to a hospital for care, medical intervention is any care employed to alter the outcome of a condition. Hospitalization is a type of medical intervention, but not all medical interventions are hospitalizations.

For example, if you get strep throat and go to the doctor, they check you out, and send you home with a prescription for an antibiotic and the usual recommendations, that's still a medical intervention.

What you're not taking into account which is the important part of this, is medical interventions of any sort still impart a demand in terms of time and resources on the health care system.

What actual medical intervention is needed for the virus outside of hospitalizations? There's no treatment yet and outside of getting tested, what other medical interventions are there?

---

I missed this SciShow video for whatever reason and it just popped up on my feed yesterday. The video explains how a vaccine is made so your immune system will target a specific protein so unless a new strain of the virus (which doesn't even exist yet) mutates that specific protein, the vaccine will still work. Certain vaccine types don't even need the entirety of the virus so it mutating is even less of a big deal than you would think. Plus, if mutation was such a killer to making vaccines, how do we even have all the vaccines that we do actually have? Lastly, targeting a specific protein is why the Dr. Peter Hotez who I mentioned a page or 2 back about making a vaccine that works for more than one type of coronavirus could work assuming both types share the same protein.

 

[Eacaraxe]

I could not care less about your usual trick of hyperbolic rhetoric and red herrings to cover the fact you fucked up over a relatively small point and can't admit it. It was cute the first few times, but it's really stale by now.

Would you care to explain precisely where I engaged in "hyperbolic rhetoric and red herrings" and "fucked up"? My first post in this sub-topic:

Because quarantines and lockdowns were to prevent uncontrolled spread taxing health care systems, infrastructures, and supply lines, to the point buggies and ouchies a lot nastier than COVID-19 could no longer be adequately treated. As should be well known by now, drugs, medical equipment, PPE, and sanitation supplies don't grow on trees, and once supplies are depleted treating a wave of COVID-19 cases they're no longer available for treating later, more life threatening, conditions.

My second:

Ever hear the old quote about tactics, strategy, and logistics? Well, this is what a public health crisis looks like when it must be considered, first and foremost, in logistical terms. If you're thinking in terms of COVID-19's mortality rate you're looking at the completely wrong statistic; the one you ought to be looking at is that 20% of cases manifest symptoms severe enough to necessitate medical intervention.

Am I responsible for the fact folks don't know the definition of medical intervention? Moderate cases still necessitate the use of PPE, medical supplies, sanitation supplies and equipment. Or are you implying doctors, nurses, orderlies, and administrative staff only have need for PPE when interacting with proven COVID-19 cases which have manifested severe symptoms, or in hospitals' intensive care wings or temporary COVID wards? Interacting with other patients, or with potential but unproven cases? How about testing, might staff need PPE and sanitation equipment when administering and processing test kits?

 

[Agema]

I missed this SciShow video for whatever reason and it just popped up on my feed yesterday. The video explains how a vaccine is made so your immune system will target a specific protein so unless a new strain of the virus (which doesn't even exist yet) mutates that specific protein, the vaccine will still work. Certain vaccine types don't even need the entirety of the virus so it mutating is even less of a big deal than you would think. Plus, if mutation was such a killer to making vaccines, how do we even have all the vaccines that we do actually have? Lastly, targeting a specific protein is why the Dr. Peter Hotez who I mentioned a page or 2 back about making a vaccine that works for more than one type of coronavirus could work assuming both types share the same protein.

Okay, microbiology isn't my specialism so don't take this as gospel, but...

In theory, a "strain" is classified as micro-organism having a new phenotype (i.e. it has some sort of unique biological activity). However, this isn't necessarily the same as having identical genetics. Mutations may not alter the structure of the protein at all. Or they may alter the protein in ways that don't affect its biological activity. Vaccines generate antibodies that are usually very specific to a certain protein structure. In theory, you could have a mutation that changes the structure of a protein which retains its biological activity, but could feasibly make antibodies to it less effective. (If this were to occur it might be termed a new strain simply because it has resistance to the vaccine - which is I guess a sort of changed biological activity).

An obviously good target for a vaccine might be part of protein that is key to the infectious activity of the virus: so for instance covid-19, the part of the viral protein that binds to the human protein ACE2, because if this suffers a mutation that causes a functional change that would render the vaccine ineffective, chances are it will also not bind to ACE2 anymore so not be infectious.

A generic coronavirus vaccine may impart some protection, but there's a fair chance that differences in protein structure between different types of coronavirus may make the vaccine less effective or even ineffective against a lot of them.

 

[Agema]

Am I responsible for the fact folks don't know the definition of medical intervention?

Everyone was kind enough to assume you meant hospitalisation because it the only way to make sense of your comment. Hospitalisation is the only necessary intervention (the others merely alleviating non-threatening symptoms), and secondly because the same basic tactics patients use to alleviate discomfort for a common cold don't seriously threaten the capabilities of a healthcare system.

If you want to talk about PPE and sanitation to prevent spread of infection, you could be talking about a type of healthcare intervention, but one that makes no sense in the context of 20% of infected, because it's advisable for 100% of infected.

 

[Eacaraxe]

Everyone was kind enough to assume you meant hospitalisation because it the only way to make sense of your comment.

No, it's people jumping to conclusions because they're only thinking in terms of mortality rates and critical care, as opposed to the approximately 14-15% of COVID-19 cases that require medical intervention but not necessarily hospitalization or critical care, because those cases impart a logistic burden on the health care system and supply lines as well. In that light, it's not even about the patients in need of critical care -- because if a massive, uncontrolled wave of COVID-19 cases depletes necessary medical supplies (up to and including strategic stockpiles, which has already been the case) today, what happens to patients with emergent life-threatening conditions tomorrow or, god forbid, there's a major regional disaster like an earthquake or hurricane?

Food for thought: do you think the only benefit of telehealth services and drive-through testing is to limit contact between patients and care providers, and thereby minimize potential spread? Or is it also to minimize the amount of labor-hours needed per patient, in terms of administrative and clerical staff, and care providers?

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Okay, microbiology isn't my specialism so don't take this as gospel, but...

In theory, a "strain" is classified as micro-organism having a new phenotype (i.e. it has some sort of unique biological activity). However, this isn't necessarily the same as having identical genetics. Mutations may not alter the structure of the protein at all. Or they may alter the protein in ways that don't affect its biological activity. Vaccines generate antibodies that are usually very specific to a certain protein structure. In theory, you could have a mutation that changes the structure of a protein which retains its biological activity, but could feasibly make antibodies to it less effective. (If this were to occur it might be termed a new strain simply because it has resistance to the vaccine - which is I guess a sort of changed biological activity).

An obviously good target for a vaccine might be part of protein that is key to the infectious activity of the virus: so for instance covid-19, the part of the viral protein that binds to the human protein ACE2, because if this suffers a mutation that causes a functional change that would render the vaccine ineffective, chances are it will also not bind to ACE2 anymore so not be infectious.

A generic coronavirus vaccine may impart some protection, but there's a fair chance that differences in protein structure between different types of coronavirus may make the vaccine less effective or even ineffective against a lot of them.

Maybe SARS and COVID-19 share that same ACE2 binding protein and that's what Dr. Hotez was referring to, I'm not sure. Anyway, having to worry about the virus mutating so fast that a vaccine won't work doesn't seem to be something that's likely to happen. Vaccines wouldn't be a thing if that viruses normally did that. The flu has an unique property where the virus pretty much always makes errors in gene replication.

 

[Fieldy409]

What actual medical intervention is needed for the virus outside of hospitalizations? There's no treatment yet and outside of getting tested, what other medical interventions are there?

---

I missed this SciShow video for whatever reason and it just popped up on my feed yesterday. The video explains how a vaccine is made so your immune system will target a specific protein so unless a new strain of the virus (which doesn't even exist yet) mutates that specific protein, the vaccine will still work. Certain vaccine types don't even need the entirety of the virus so it mutating is even less of a big deal than you would think. Plus, if mutation was such a killer to making vaccines, how do we even have all the vaccines that we do actually have? Lastly, targeting a specific protein is why the Dr. Peter Hotez who I mentioned a page or 2 back about making a vaccine that works for more than one type of coronavirus could work assuming both types share the same protein.

Isn't mutation why we need a new flu shot vaccine every year?

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Isn't mutation why we need a new flu shot vaccine every year?

The flu is a special case due to how it can't really replicate itself without causing mutations.