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

It will take 100 days to tailor a vaccine to a new variant

thetimes.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 67 posts

Re: It will take 100 days to tailor a vaccine to a new variant

#11

Post by icedchai »

GDC7 wrote: post #8
icedchai wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you think we wouldn't have noticed it in the 90's and 2000's? When hospitals fill up, people are definitely going to notice. There were flu outbreaks in the 60's and 70's and people noticed. When comparing "different approaches" you need to look at many factors: population density, environment (average temperature), living conditions (like multi-generational families living together.) Countries are not directl…

> There were flu outbreaks in the 60's and 70's and people noticed No, they didn't. The population back then wasn't as depressed and anxious as today's population. They didn't extrapolate figures and trends and charts. They were not bombarded by news on 5 different screen devices. They'd notice when 5,6,7 or even 10 people they knew, and in the same age/health cohort as them would become incapacitated for more than 4…

I suspect neither of us were around then, so we can't really say, on a personal level, whether we would've noticed the 1968 flu pandemic. But the fact is millions of people died, and millions more got sick. Television and news papers were obviously around then, so people would've been talking about it. We are definitely more connected today, but to claim it "would not have been noticed" is an exaggeration.

As for Covid, I personally know at least 5 people who got sick, 1 was out of work for 4 weeks, though none died. How about you?

Re: It will take 100 days to tailor a vaccine to a new variant

#12

Post by didibus »

sterlind wrote: post #7

Is original antigenic sin due to prior vaccination or natural infection a concern for developing a new vaccine for this variant? Or perhaps the B.1.1.529 spike is so different that the original antibodies won't bind to it, even ineffectively? Or is there a way to design the new vaccine explicitly so that antibodies produced by prior strains can't bind the new antigens?

From what I understand, there's no way to predict the pros and cons of the original antigenic sin. You will be biased against the strain you first receive, either as a vaccine or by catching the virus itself.

What we don't know is which of these strains 20 years from now will make a resurgence. When that happens, you will be lucky if it's the strain closest to the first strain you caught or received a vaccine for, and unlucky if it isn't.

Finally, I understand that vaccines for specific strains still work, but they won't work as well for mutations of their strains and might not get you immunity for as long.

Re: It will take 100 days to tailor a vaccine to a new variant

#13

Post by thisiszilff »

GDC7 wrote: post #5

Covid is just a symptom of bigger underlying epidemic: It's an epidemic of depression and anxiety ravaging through society, which doesn't spare anybody. I became interested in Sweden's approach of not doing anything at all , per the John Hopkins University website COVID deaths in Sweden are 15,000. 15k in 2 years, now how many months/weeks were trimmed off those people's lives? Note that I said months/weeks, not year…

We definitely noticed the 2009-2010 swine flu pandemic, it just wasn't as deadly as COVID. Most pandemics in past memory have been minor in nature. We likely were aware of them, but didn't feel their impact because they caused mild illness or were limited in scope (eg, with SARS, ebola) and didn't directly impact people's lives. COVID does impact people's lives and the closest referent we have is the Spanish flu in 1918 which is far outside of anyone's historical memory. I'm not necessarily disputing your point about depression and anxiety, sure those may have increased as well, but COVID isn't anything like the other pandemics we've had in recent memory.

Re: It will take 100 days to tailor a vaccine to a new variant

#14

Post by GDC7 »

icedchai wrote: post #11
GDC7 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There were flu outbreaks in the 60's and 70's and people noticed No, they didn't. The population back then wasn't as depressed and anxious as today's population. They didn't extrapolate figures and trends and charts. They were not bombarded by news on 5 different screen devices. They'd notice when 5,6,7 or even 10 people they knew, and in the same age/health cohort as them would become incapacitated for more than 4…

I suspect neither of us were around then, so we can't really say, on a personal level, whether we would've noticed the 1968 flu pandemic. But the fact is millions of people died, and millions more got sick. Television and news papers were obviously around then, so people would've been talking about it. We are definitely more connected today, but to claim it "would not have been noticed" is an exaggeration. As for Cov…

> whether we would've noticed the 1968 flu pandemic

What do your parents tell you about that year?

Students protests

Vietnam War

Woodstock

Moon landing

Drugs

African Americans finally getting their voices heard.

Nobody ever mentions the 1968 flu pandemic, given how things are 50 years from now we'd still be talking about COVID and fearing its #100,000 variant.

> As for Covid, I personally know at least 5 people who got sick, 1 was out of work for 4 weeks, though none died. How about you?

1 got sick, recovered in 8 days. Considering the median individual has a circle of 200 people they know.

It's 1/200 for me and 1/200 for you.

Re: It will take 100 days to tailor a vaccine to a new variant

#15

Post by GDC7 »

thisiszilff wrote: post #13
GDC7 wrote: post #5

Covid is just a symptom of bigger underlying epidemic: It's an epidemic of depression and anxiety ravaging through society, which doesn't spare anybody. I became interested in Sweden's approach of not doing anything at all , per the John Hopkins University website COVID deaths in Sweden are 15,000. 15k in 2 years, now how many months/weeks were trimmed off those people's lives? Note that I said months/weeks, not year…

We definitely noticed the 2009-2010 swine flu pandemic, it just wasn't as deadly as COVID. Most pandemics in past memory have been minor in nature. We likely were aware of them, but didn't feel their impact because they caused mild illness or were limited in scope (eg, with SARS, ebola) and didn't directly impact people's lives. COVID does impact people's lives and the closest referent we have is the Spanish flu in 1…

> Spanish flu in 1918

How many people you know died of COVID?

The spanish flu had roughly 1 death every 2/3 families.

Honestly you are comparing a firecracker to a nuclear weapon, and if you want to do that, then you have to produce the proofs.

Re: It will take 100 days to tailor a vaccine to a new variant

#16

Post by icedchai »

GDC7 wrote: post #14
icedchai wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect neither of us were around then, so we can't really say, on a personal level, whether we would've noticed the 1968 flu pandemic. But the fact is millions of people died, and millions more got sick. Television and news papers were obviously around then, so people would've been talking about it. We are definitely more connected today, but to claim it "would not have been noticed" is an exaggeration. As for Cov…

> whether we would've noticed the 1968 flu pandemic What do your parents tell you about that year? Students protests Vietnam War Woodstock Moon landing Drugs African Americans finally getting their voices heard. Nobody ever mentions the 1968 flu pandemic, given how things are 50 years from now we'd still be talking about COVID and fearing its #100,000 variant. > As for Covid, I personally know at least 5 people who g…

Certainly, tons of stuff happened during that time. However, my parents actually did mention the 1968 flu pandemic (though it was prompted by covid discussions, it wasn't just out of the blue.)

But yeah, you're probably right... if things keep up like this, we won't go back to normal due to anxiety and fear. I can see this going on for additional years.

Re: It will take 100 days to tailor a vaccine to a new variant

#17

Post by nobodyandproud »

GDC7 wrote: post #15
thisiszilff wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We definitely noticed the 2009-2010 swine flu pandemic, it just wasn't as deadly as COVID. Most pandemics in past memory have been minor in nature. We likely were aware of them, but didn't feel their impact because they caused mild illness or were limited in scope (eg, with SARS, ebola) and didn't directly impact people's lives. COVID does impact people's lives and the closest referent we have is the Spanish flu in 1…

> Spanish flu in 1918 How many people you know died of COVID? The spanish flu had roughly 1 death every 2/3 families. Honestly you are comparing a firecracker to a nuclear weapon, and if you want to do that, then you have to produce the proofs.

Weren’t families much larger in 1918?

I know two people who died from Covid-19, and my circle of friends and acquaintances is fairly small.

This, despite precautions and modern medicine.

Re: It will take 100 days to tailor a vaccine to a new variant

#18

Post by modriano »

GDC7 wrote: post #15
thisiszilff wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We definitely noticed the 2009-2010 swine flu pandemic, it just wasn't as deadly as COVID. Most pandemics in past memory have been minor in nature. We likely were aware of them, but didn't feel their impact because they caused mild illness or were limited in scope (eg, with SARS, ebola) and didn't directly impact people's lives. COVID does impact people's lives and the closest referent we have is the Spanish flu in 1…

> Spanish flu in 1918 How many people you know died of COVID? The spanish flu had roughly 1 death every 2/3 families. Honestly you are comparing a firecracker to a nuclear weapon, and if you want to do that, then you have to produce the proofs.

The Spanish flu of 1918 killed ~675k people in the US [0] and the US population was 105M [1], so the Spanish flu killed off a bit more than 0.6% of the entire US population, or about 1 in 150 people. Despite massive improvements in sanitation and ability to distance from others, COVID has still killed a bit more than 0.2% of the entire US population in the past 2 years. These pandemics are comparable.

[0] https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/1918-pandemic-h1n...

[1] https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20210920/covid-matches-1918_....

Re: It will take 100 days to tailor a vaccine to a new variant

#19

Post by thisiszilff »

GDC7 wrote: post #15
thisiszilff wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We definitely noticed the 2009-2010 swine flu pandemic, it just wasn't as deadly as COVID. Most pandemics in past memory have been minor in nature. We likely were aware of them, but didn't feel their impact because they caused mild illness or were limited in scope (eg, with SARS, ebola) and didn't directly impact people's lives. COVID does impact people's lives and the closest referent we have is the Spanish flu in 1…

> Spanish flu in 1918 How many people you know died of COVID? The spanish flu had roughly 1 death every 2/3 families. Honestly you are comparing a firecracker to a nuclear weapon, and if you want to do that, then you have to produce the proofs.

> Honestly you are comparing a firecracker to a nuclear weapon, and if you want to do that, then you have to produce the proofs.

Only if you've already decided COVID is a firecracker. Most people, especially early on, had no pandemic in their memories that occurred at the scale of COVID and were stuck figuring out exactly what their attitude should be towards it and how to interpret the government health interventions. The Spanish flu was a crucial referent for what might be in store.

Even then, look at it from a the perspective of someone in the US:

The estimated percentage of the US population that died to the 1918 flu is 0.64% (using the estimate of 675k from the 1918 flu) vs 0.23% for COVID so far (eg 770k US deaths). By those numbers the Spanish flu may have been worse, but for someone in the US it is natural to look at them and compare them. Medicine has improved considerably since 1918 and much of the anxiety around COVID revolves around health care collapsing and people no longer being able to receive care in which case the death rate would increase.

We definitely noticed the Spanish flu and COVID is occurring on a similar scale, it isn't just anxiety.

Re: It will take 100 days to tailor a vaccine to a new variant

#20

Post by keymon-o »

didibus wrote: post #10
GDC7 wrote: post #5

Covid is just a symptom of bigger underlying epidemic: It's an epidemic of depression and anxiety ravaging through society, which doesn't spare anybody. I became interested in Sweden's approach of not doing anything at all , per the John Hopkins University website COVID deaths in Sweden are 15,000. 15k in 2 years, now how many months/weeks were trimmed off those people's lives? Note that I said months/weeks, not year…

Sweden didn't do nothing. Most of the streets were empty for all of 2020. Everyone that could work from home started doing so. People avoided social contact and travel. It imposed entry bans, and 68% of its population are now fully vaccinated, 80% ages 16 and up. I think people underestimate social awareness, even if there is no official restrictions, people have their own worries and take their own precautions. This…

>I think people underestimate social awareness

Not that I disagree with you, but I'd guess that social awareness is a product of having a trustful sources of information coming from trustworthy and capable leaders/government. It seems to me that handling of covid crisis is clearly correlated with how well people of a certain country do trust and respect their elected leaders.

Edit: It all reminds me of an excercise from some teamwork and leadership class, where there was a given logical problem to be solved in 45 minutes between teammates. And no matter how smart, proactive, arrogant or quiet members they had, all the teams failed to solve a problem. The issue was everybody participating in solving a problem which turned into 45 hour debate, rather than having a leader coordinating the path to solution.

It may be an oversimplifaction, but when you have a crisis which you don't know how to solve, you can at least try to handle it the best you can. Without trust in leadership, it will be chaotic.

Post reply on HN