Forum menu
Genuine question… which vaccines have been tested on school age kids?
None of them are licensed under 16 as far as I’m aware.
That age group will get herd immunity and be fine, generally.
Pensioners won’t be fine so need vaccine
Not sure it’s been proved that the vaccine stops you spreading it?
Indeed. Vaccine rollout is to save lives, more than it is to reduce spread. Being vaccinated doesn’t mean you can stop social distancing.
At some point though would it not be worth a switch im tactics?
When all the 60yo+ have had one shot, start from the other end.
You can **** right off with that.
Donald (59 3/4)
I don't believe there are any trials (unless the sinovac or sputnik ones are) in children.
As the vaccines haven't yet proved to reduce transmission, only reduce symptoms / severity there isn't the need for it yet. Plus they had to pick a target up front as the most impactful testing so went for the groups most potentially impacted.
Maybe the trials be done over time
You will be ok Donald, chances are you will be 60 by the time they get to your next age group
None of them are licensed under 16 as far as I’m aware.
Sinpharm have tested their vaccine in 3 and above. Ok one can debate regulatory process and pediatric vaccine development. But kids get coronavirus infections a lot including Chinese kids.
Sinovac’s COVID-19 vaccine candidate and CanSino Biologics are also being tested on children and teenagers. Pfizer and Moderna have also included children as young as 12 years in their clinical trials. Note 12 and above is adolescent. Plenty of precedent for including those.
Pfizer/BioNtech and Moderna are approved for emergency use only in US. Pfizer is 16+ and Moderna is 18+.
So the covid testing for flights plan seems to have been ditched?
Cheers Tired, didn't know that pfizer had tested younger
I'm going to be under 60 when they do the over 60s and over 60 when they do the under 60s.
I'm doomed.
Thanks TiRed. We should be paying you a subscription.
I can't help but hear that in a Scottish accent
Hey
Its just an idea, like the least worst scenario
Or not putting the wounded soldiers on the boats at Dunkirk
I had no idea herd immunity was age biased
Also, is there not a significant difference between being a super shedder and picking up a virol load via close contact and having it multiply 1000x internally till you exhale a few with every breath, or just passively be contracted and not replicating
I had no idea herd immunity was age biased
I don’t think they meant that, just that it’s less risky for kids than adults to get their (possible) immunity from exposure.
I wonder if this means a new even scarier variant or a vaccine resistant one?
I thought there was something on Channel4 news about the situation in Brazil - one of the places that had 70% infection rate in the first wave is getting hit extremely badly again.
Then there's also Prof Sir Mark Walport (former government chief scientific advisor) saying there is potential for new variants to evade the vaccine. Although I don't think he was being specific about the current new variants.
@ceepers funnily enough I saw that on your Instagram story and the next story was a gloating post about how good croyde was from someone I know from Plymouth. 🙄
Not totally up to date on the thread, just want to say that I hope the current posters on here that are infected are doing ok? My thought are with you guys.
As for the post about relatives having a go at NHS workers trying to save the lives of their family members...
Scum, utter scum.
Some people need to have a good look at themselves "after all this is over".
I thought there was something on Channel4 news about the situation in Brazil – one of the places that had 70% infection rate in the first wave is getting hit extremely badly again.
It's Manaus which is currently being overwhelmed and seeing its healthcare provision collapse
The one thing i genuinely struggle with is comments like this what are people supposed to do? In this example you can go for a bike ride (breathing on everyone you pass) but someone can’t get in their car and get a McDs. I understand people seem to go from one extreme to the other with their emotions right now, but i still struggle with the judgment that gets passed on others at time.
Where were they all the first time then? Staying indoors or finding space away from others. When I'm out on the bike I ride away from people, usually round the dead city centre or the crappy trails that others are avoiding to keep away from breathing on others. Plus a trip to McD's is not what I would call an essential journey. I only leave my flat to go shopping or out on the bike, nothing else. Why can't others follow the same rules as I stick to? If I can manage it without a garden and living alone then others can too.
Also this, as the son of an alcoholic father these people are not “scum” they have health problems. Please pick your words with a little more thought.
Hence why I said the following:
(some of the druggies and alcoholics for example)
I have friends who work or have worked in A&E, ITU etc and have countless stories of the same people showing up most nights beating up staff and causing havoc. In fact one of them was on our WhatsApp group saying exactly that 2 days ago after she had been hit by an aggressive druggie that has been in her dept for 8 of the last 12 days. She was back in work last night and had to deal with the same person who had bruised her leg on his last visit. She has also told me about patients with addictions that sit there quietly and apologise for being in there again so I hear both sides of the coin, plus two of my friends are ex-alcoholics and I hear their stories too. hence why I put the word "some" in there. Sorry if it offended you, that was not the intention but the point I was making of violence towards medical staff being unacceptable was what I was concentrating on.
I fear it will keep on mutating, which it does because there are lots and lots of infections, and its passed about the groups who dont show or suffer from symptoms. But what I fear most is a mutation will eventually start to hit hard and kill those groups that previously, as above, were non symptomatic, like the young or children.
In 3rd world coutries with dense populations who maybe cant isolate completely due to economic conditions, the virus is producing new more infectious strains of itself. It seems only a matter of time before one of those new strains becomes deadly to all who catch it.
I need to leave this forum for a while. The situation in Brazil in particular scares the s#*t out of me.
Look after yourselves.
It seems only a matter of time before one of those new strains becomes deadly to all who catch it.
At which point it can't be transmitted to another"host" and will die out.
It seems only a matter of time before one of those new strains becomes deadly to all who catch it.
I dont think it's that bleak.
It's how often we get a new resistant strain and how quickly that spreads vs how quickly the new vaccine can be produced. Is it going to be cycle of rapid closure of air travel accompanied by a circuit breaker for a few weeks then reset into tiers until vaccination starts. If it's annual vaccination are they just going to go for which variant is thought likely to become the dominant strain and backing that one?
ON a slight aside - has anyone done a cases graph showing how the waves associated with the different variations relate?
I only leave my flat to go shopping or out on the bike, nothing else. Why can’t others follow the same rules as I stick to? If I can manage it without a garden and living alone then others can too.
Why not just stay inside and ride on a turbo trainer, or get your shopping delivered? You'd not need to leave home at all then. Or would that feel bloody awful and be unreasonable? Others may be only leaving the house to get a McDonalds drive through. Restrict yourself in any way you want but don't expect others to follow your restrictions.
SARs-CoV-2 is a sarbecovirus of similar genus to two other endemic coronaviruses that give us colds. This is the first time we as hosts have ever seen it, so some people have had a very hard time indeed.
But as immunity builds up the severity of infections will decline. These virus do change their spike protein slightly and that’s what we are seeing under selection pressure, but they have not evaded immunity. I think cross reactivity and continual reboosting either by vaccine or a helpful child, will be the norm in years to come.
Long-term this is not influenza. These viruses do not undergo the huge genetic reassortment that influenza does. We’ll crack this one with a vaccine and will modify the vaccine as needed. Treatments will be available for those unable to have a vaccine.
It just takes time. And the timescale is already stupid-fast. We are talking up to ten times faster than the normal drug development process. This is the example of building the plane while you fly it. A hell of a ride.
Spot on TiRed
I can see a future where we (and I'm over 50) have the 'flu vaccine yearly and every few years there's an updated CV-19 vaccine thrown in with it.
In fact I get my flu vaccine through work so anyone (at work >16 gets it) and it may be that CV-19 vaccination needs to drop below the 50s but the rate of change will be less than 'flu.
thanks TiRed. a bit tired and emotional at the mo but the insight you've offered has been invaluable in my struggle to cope with this situation.
Layman question.
Generally, if viruses (virii?) mutate to become more infectious (more efficient?) do they also generally mutate to become less deadly? This would seem (layman's view again - just a lowly art teacher so all this science stuff is probably beyond me) to be 'Darwinian' to me - infect more hosts but don't kill them so much so you can infect more hosts and propogate further...
If so, is this what we're seeing the start of with the current crop of variants?
Reason's to be hopeful on vaccine rollout:
https://twitter.com/rowlsmanthorpe/status/135018199625809510 4"> https://twitter.com/rowlsmanthorpe/status/1350181996258095104
@stcolin
Free Member
I need to leave this forum for a while. The situation in Brazil in particular scares the s#*t out of me.Look after yourselves.
I've @'ed you to read TiRed's post below as the ITV news on Brazil scared me a little too... but his take on the situation helped me anyway.👍
TiRed
Full Member
SARs-CoV-2 is a sarbecovirus of similar genus to two other endemic coronaviruses that give us colds. This is the first time we as hosts have ever seen it, so some people have had a very hard time indeed.But as immunity builds up the severity of infections will decline. These virus do change their spike protein slightly and that’s what we are seeing under selection pressure, but they have not evaded immunity. I think cross reactivity and continual reboosting either by vaccine or a helpful child, will be the norm in years to come.
Long-term this is not influenza. These viruses do not undergo the huge genetic reassortment that influenza does. We’ll crack this one with a vaccine and will modify the vaccine as needed. Treatments will be available for those unable to have a vaccine.
This would seem (layman’s view again – just a lowly art teacher
Science is not just the preserve of scientists. It’s a privilege to explain it so that others understand. And yea, typically a virus will tend to become less pathogenic and may be more transmissible. How much? Well we don’t know.
Unusual fact, when myxomatosis was released to cull rabbits in Australia it mutated to become less pathogenic. But also the rabbits evolved to become more resistant. They kept a reference virus and rabbit strain in the lab to continually test the rabbits and virus from the wild. Hopefully humans won’t be following the rabbits. They won’t.
https://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2019-02-14-new-research-explains-how-rabbits-adapted-survive-myxomatosis
At least people know to keep away from him.... for viral and other reasons.😐
I think we will look back and see that the virus brought out the best in many, the worst in others.
^^ That he has.
Can you imagine having to treat him in hospital as a nurse or doctor if he came down with the virus?
Of course they would as they are better people than me and certainly him.
Using an analogy he would love, he wouldn't be "fighting them on the beaches" but instead be standing there with bunting, doing a meet and greet and pointing them to the nearest airfield.
Plastic patriot.
At which point it can’t be transmitted to another”host” and will die out.
Great yeah, as the virus doesnt know how many hosts there are, but not so good for the human race eh ?.
Anyone else feel like we're slowly sliding into some distopian nightmare?
Talk to me about both false negative results and in-household transmission.
We've one son with a positive result this week. He had two 'quick tests' in first week of December, both negative.
There's 5 of us in a small house with one bathroom for the last month.
He, mrs_oab and I have had headaches, general aches and overall feeling unwell.
Mrs_oab and I are negative. All his workmates are negative.
Is it possible to get false negatives on the quick tests or the full tests?
We're on the assumption that this may be the case and he had cv19 before December tests, because surely one other of they family or workmates would have caught it?
I only leave my flat to go shopping or out on the bike, nothing else. Why can’t others follow the same rules as I stick to? If I can manage it without a garden and living alone then others can too.
I think the key thing is they are your rules imposed upon yourself. If someone else's actions fall short of your expectation as long as they are acting within the law / guidance so what. On the flip side someone may think your bike ride is excessive after all you could just do a home workout on youtube.
People going out to McDs and such used to stress me out but after almost a year of this I just can't live with that level of anxiety I just do what ever I can to keep myself and partner safe.
because surely one other of they family or workmates would have caught it?
Not necessarily. The secondary attack rate in a household for one extra case is about 33% from PHR and ONS survey data. Probability that someone does not get it is 67%. Prob that the other four do not get it is 0.67*0.67*0.67*0.67 so prob that AT LEAST one person DOES get it is 1 - 0.67^4 = 0.8. So there’s actually a 20% chance that in a household of five nobody else is a case. Not so bad odds.
Plenty of other buggy reasons for headache and other symptoms. But the sensitivity and specificity of the test is also a reason. Loss of taste and especially smell has a high prognostic value. Other symptoms less so.
Anyone else feel like we’re slowly sliding into some distopian nightmare?
Sometimes. Then I get out for some fresh air and exercise and read TiReds posts, and it resets my anxiety level to its normal overactive state.
When I analyse my reaction it's more about anger and frustration at inept government response making things worse than they needed to be, than the actual threat of the virus itself.
Though there have been many days these last 10 months when I've got really close to phoning the doctor to see if they'll represcribe the Citalopram I needed before.
Cheers TiRed - we've clearly a seasonal bug, just interesting that son has managed to have cv19 in the last month without knowing and without passing on.
We were really worried about our sister in law , high temperature and her Apple Watch would keep warning her about her heart rate even if she was sitting down. This went on for about a week.
Then yesterday we get a video call from her standing on the beach ( her official quarantine ended days ago) right as rain. It was as if she had never been ill.
Finally some good news. (Fingers crossed)
The secondary attack rate in a household for one extra case is about 33% from PHR and ONS survey data. Probability that someone does not get it is 67%. Prob that the other four do not get it is 0.67*0.67*0.67*0.67 so prob that AT LEAST one person DOES get it is 1 – 0.67^4 = 0.8. So there’s actually a 20% chance that in a household of five nobody else is a case. Not so bad odds
If there’s only a 33% chance of catching it from a family member who definitely has it, with no precautions, does this not mean you’re gonna have to try really bloody hard to catch it masked up in a supermarket or distanced outside from people who mostly haven’t got it?
How on earth do you get from that to an R of 1.5?!
Is it possible to get false negatives on the quick tests or the full tests?
Yes. Talking to colleagues at work there's a recurring theme of testing negative when mild symptoms start (usually the cough or the fever) and then scoring a positive test result a few days later.
Might also depend on how enthusiastically you polished your tonsils and tickled your brain with the swab.
Many countries are not happy about the quality* of pre-departure PCR testing and for some destinations I have to take a PCR test before departure and then a further one on arrival.
* one assumes that this is because negative test certificates are widely available on the black market.
Some, i will let someone else with a gcse in math run the number, have given it to the infected person in the household. The giver being asymptomatic and a distributer. Hence they dont catch as they have had it and are now immune.
Maybe
Try really hard; maybe the wrong phrasing but absolutely it's the message I've given to my family who have at times got a bit panicked as if seeing someone with it causes you to instantly explode.
Your chance of running into someone infected is low (at 1/30 infected as per London estimates, 29/30 aren't = 97%, then take into account that of those infected the majority of those will be isolating anyway) so massively in your favour that the person who walked past you on your walk earlier isn't infected.
And if you do run into someone then the chances of catching it are low if you keep your distance, wash your hands, and so on.
Does it mean we shouldn't take those precautions - no, partly because those numbers are what they are BECAUSE the population is taking precautions (mainly!) and partly because even on those odds, multiply by 60million hosts and the numbers are still eye-wateringly high hence the need to protect the NHS.