Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 712 posts

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#31

Post by cheph »

henearkr wrote: post #11
marketingPro wrote: post #2

This article reinforces that herd immunity between young healthy people would have been the best solution. Our old are going to get sick from vaccines, so the young are going to get it anyway. Next year under 50 year olds will line up for their vaccine. Meanwhile 1.5 years worth of old, obese, and sick people will have died from coronavirus. Wouldn't it have been better if healthy kids and adults caught it in q2 2020…

This is a virus with bad long-term effects on the body. Not a good idea to catch it just to get immune.

> This is a virus with bad long-term effects on the body.

In what percentage of people who get COVID-19 are there bad long-term effects? What other conditions did the people get bad long term effects have? How does these numbers compare with other diseases?

Would appreciate citations.

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#32

Post by calvinv »

erikrothoff wrote: post #8
dbetteridge wrote: post #3

OK, someone tell me why this isn't the good news it sounds like

“The programme is progressing well, (but) we’re not there yet,” Hancock said. Looking good, but still months away from rolling out.

if we're back to normalish by spring next year I think that would be a great outcome, if the messaging to the public would be, buckle down until then I think lockdown complaince could go up

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#33

Post by faitswulff »

dbetteridge wrote: post #3

OK, someone tell me why this isn't the good news it sounds like

Well, it's still good news, but an injected vaccine may not lead to sterilizing immunity - i.e. vaccinated persons might still be able to transmit the disease:

> Without a strong mucosal response, injected vaccines may be less likely to produce so-called sterilizing immunity, a phenomenon in which a pathogen is purged from the body before it’s able to infect cells, Dr. Durbin said. Vaccinated people might be protected from severe disease, but could still be infected, experience mild symptoms and occasionally pass small quantities of the germ onto others.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/14/health/coronavirus-nasal-...

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#34

Post by cheph »

celticninja wrote: post #22
marketingPro wrote: post #2

This article reinforces that herd immunity between young healthy people would have been the best solution. Our old are going to get sick from vaccines, so the young are going to get it anyway. Next year under 50 year olds will line up for their vaccine. Meanwhile 1.5 years worth of old, obese, and sick people will have died from coronavirus. Wouldn't it have been better if healthy kids and adults caught it in q2 2020…

Given that immunity from infection is currently questionable your suggestion doesn't make sense. The reason the findings mentioned in this article are important is because the immune response seems to be stronger than that seen in people that have been infected and recovered. So this vaccine would be better at creating herd immunity than just allowing everyone to get infected. At the same time vaccinations will have…

> Given that immunity from infection is currently questionable your suggestion doesn't make sense.

If you can't get immunity from the infection, how will the vaccine work?

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#35

Post by 3np »

cheph wrote: post #31
henearkr wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a virus with bad long-term effects on the body. Not a good idea to catch it just to get immune.

> This is a virus with bad long-term effects on the body. In what percentage of people who get COVID-19 are there bad long-term effects? What other conditions did the people get bad long term effects have? How does these numbers compare with other diseases? Would appreciate citations.

We don't know. Which is why it's preferred to play it safe, in that regard.

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#36

Post by mav3rick »

LatteLazy wrote: post #24
marketingPro wrote: post #2

This article reinforces that herd immunity between young healthy people would have been the best solution. Our old are going to get sick from vaccines, so the young are going to get it anyway. Next year under 50 year olds will line up for their vaccine. Meanwhile 1.5 years worth of old, obese, and sick people will have died from coronavirus. Wouldn't it have been better if healthy kids and adults caught it in q2 2020…

Why would old people get sick from the vaccine? If we let everyone get it in Q2 2020, millions would have died when we ran out of ventilators.

Not supporting the OP's assertions, but vaccines have some timid / less potent form of the virus.

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#37

Post by feanaro »

rimliu wrote: post #28
henearkr wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a virus with bad long-term effects on the body. Not a good idea to catch it just to get immune.

Nobody knows its long term effect on the body. Especially if you were asymptomatic.

Your response is phrased in a way that all the meaning lies in the exact definition of what you mean by "knows". There is certainly evidence that there are long-term effects. Example: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.10.20.20215863v...

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#38

Post by mcintyre1994 »

School-Cotton wrote: post #17
henearkr wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This IS good news. Now (soon, hopefully) people can acquire immunity through a vaccine, instead of through a virus that leaves long-lasting damage to the body (in particular, but not limited to, the brain).

Do you have a source on how common severe long-term effects from Covid are? All I’ve seen are anecdotes.

There are some stats here for the UK, based on a symptom tracking app that's been active since about March. https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-long-covid-warning-as...

> One in 20 people with coronavirus are likely to have symptoms for eight weeks or more, according to a new study by King's College London.

> The research, which uses data from the COVID Symptom Study App, suggested so-called "long COVID" affects around 10% of 18 to 49-year-olds who become unwell with coronavirus.

Whole study is here: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/study-identifies-those-most-risk-...

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#39

Post by xiphias2 »

aphextron wrote: post #14
dbetteridge wrote: post #3

OK, someone tell me why this isn't the good news it sounds like

>OK, someone tell me why this isn't the good news it sounds like The AstraZeneca vaccine is based on an adenovirus vector, which has never been approved for use in humans. It uses a weakened live virus that can (and apparently has, in the case of the J&J vaccine, which is using very similar tech) cause serious adverse systemic reactions. From what we've seen so far, the safety profile for these vaccines is far worse…

Thanks for your input!

The worrying trend is the ,,signed contracts with governments'' part even though the clinical trial results are not out yet. It seems that vaccination gets highly political, just like how EU made a mistake of paying for Remdesivir even though we knew that it's not worth it at that point.

Re: Vaccine hopes rise as Oxford jab prompts immune response among old and young

#40

Post by henearkr »

cheph wrote: post #31
henearkr wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a virus with bad long-term effects on the body. Not a good idea to catch it just to get immune.

> This is a virus with bad long-term effects on the body. In what percentage of people who get COVID-19 are there bad long-term effects? What other conditions did the people get bad long term effects have? How does these numbers compare with other diseases? Would appreciate citations.

Damage to the heart, the brain, even for mild or asymptotic cases. My references are previous posts on HN or on phys.org as you can easily search it.

As you said there are scarce data yet, but the risks are scary. In these conditions, it's obvious one should avoid relying on a herd immunity induced by the virus.

Post reply on HN