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

Covid-19 breakthrough data

coronavirus.health.ny.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 180 posts

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#101

Post by gilbetron »

b112 wrote: post #96
asimpletune wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, I think it really all comes down to numbers, and also agreeing on reasonable definitions of what words like "over now" mean. That being said, vaccines have stopped effectively ended viruses before, e.g. polio (again, for counter examples please refer to my comment about reasonable definitions). Therefore it's clear that vaccines can achieve this effect, and really what lies in question is how hard is it? So,…

Appealing to authority, is a logical fallacy. He's not right due to credentials. You've glossed over very important parts of my post. I did edit it within 3 minutes of posting, so you may be responding to an alternate. My point is: - the current vaccines do not stop spread due to, and in the vaccinated Everyone agrees on this. - for spread to occur, the virus must replicate, therefore it can mutate even in the vaccin…

You should probably take Viral 101 over again. Vaccines definitely reduce transmission - current vaccines, however, are barely, if at all, effective against Omicron.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3...

IF we had been able to vaccinate 90%+ of the world by the start of last summer, this pandemic had a good chance of ending. Delta made it much more difficult, and Omicron crushed that option.

"it's possible for a variant to come out that gets around all vaccinations every time, so therefore vaccines can't stop the pandemic" means that you definitely failed Viral 101.

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#102

Post by tremon »

argvargc wrote: post #67

To enjoy an interesting and arguably also somewhat more accurate experience reading articles such as these, try mentally replacing the term "vaccine breakthrough" with "vaccine failure". Going to hospital is not protection.

Why would that be more accurate? A total vaccine failure would imply that a fully vaccinated person died from Covid, no?

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#103

Post by peteradio »

kleiba wrote: post #29
sschueller wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't make much sense when looking at hospital data. The previously infected have the lowest hospital administrations vs even the vaccinated. If you are double vaxed and get infected it make zero sense to also get a booster unless you have an immune system issue.

That view is not supported by all vaccination researchers. The argument against that line of thought is that your immune response to, say, omicron is very specific toward that variant. Consequently, if you catch omicron, that does not mean you're automatically protected against other variants.

How likely is that to pan out, viruses of the common cold gives cross reactive immunity to sars-cov-2?

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#104

Post by b112 »

gilbetron wrote: post #101
b112 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Appealing to authority, is a logical fallacy. He's not right due to credentials. You've glossed over very important parts of my post. I did edit it within 3 minutes of posting, so you may be responding to an alternate. My point is: - the current vaccines do not stop spread due to, and in the vaccinated Everyone agrees on this. - for spread to occur, the virus must replicate, therefore it can mutate even in the vaccin…

You should probably take Viral 101 over again. Vaccines definitely reduce transmission - current vaccines, however, are barely, if at all, effective against Omicron. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3... IF we had been able to vaccinate 90%+ of the world by the start of last summer, this pandemic had a good chance of ending. Delta made it much more difficult, and Omicron crushed that option.…

You should probably take Viral 101 over again. Vaccines definitely reduce transmission

This is a third order effect, not first. They do not reduce transmission, instead they increase immune response, thus reducing replication, thus reducing transmission.

This is a vital point here.

Second, please take care. At no point did I ever say "vaccines don't reduce transmission". That is a general statement, mine was specific, about current covid vaccines only.

Covid is a unique beast, able to spread for weeks without creating a strong immune response, and therefore, symptoms. Other viruses seem to spread much later, and typically only when symptoms are shown.

This is what makes covid so spreadable, dangerous. It may also be why successful spread is difficult to stop even when vaccinated. After all, this happened with delta too.

EDIT: going to add here.

COVID is in mice, deer, dogs and cats as a minimum, and other mammals are strongly suspected.

A recent HN story cited a paper, where a researcher believes covid jumped from human to mouse, mutated to omicron, and jumped back to human.

So, regardless of the spread and mutation happening in the currently vaccinated, we have spread and mutation in other mammals. Including ones in our homes.

Think on that a bit, please people.

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#105

Post by chadlavi »

drewg123 wrote: post #9

I wonder how under-reported mild breakthrough cases are, due to self testing? I'm fully vaccinated and boosted, and I had what I suspect is Omicron about 10 days ago. I had a mild fever (approaching, but not reaching 101), a sore throat, sneezing and nasal congestion for 3-4 days, and I tested positive with an over the counter rapid test. Overall, it was like a very minor cold. My girlfriend also tested positive, and…

hundreds of thousands in NYC alone. I'm one of them too, similar situation to your gf. Triple vaxed, was asymptomatic but got positive home tests across different brands. Was unable to get a PCR test, so I didn't get in the official numbers.

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#106

Post by ryandrake »

pelasaco wrote: post #59
sschueller wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know where you are located but here in Switzerland I would definitely want the positive PCR test as proof. Although it may no longer be needed as it looks like this will be over soon the confirmation of an infection is treated here almost like a vaccination. So you will get a certificate extension etc. The isolation time here has been reduced to 5 days with minimum 2 days symptom free.

Germany, but what is the upside to do the PCR test? You get officially in Isolation and can get a visit from the regulatory office to check if you are at home. AFAICS there is no upside. You won't get any treatment protocol, any help. You just get more pressure over you. I won't have the proof of recovery, but actually I don't need it since I have all certificates (2 shots + booster). That's make me think if this who…

You should be isolating either way. Just because you can go everywhere doesn't mean you should. People going out and about while unknowingly positive is why this thing won't end. Testing positive and deliberately not isolating is even worse.

You're right though: If you look at it only through the lens of individual incentives, the official test has no upside. One of the huge problems with governments' responses to this pandemic is they are not closing these loopholes. People will take the most convenient option, not necessarily the one benefiting public health. To align individual and societal incentives, governments need to make not-isolating when infectious more inconvenient/costly than isolating.

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#107

Post by FabHK »

FabHK wrote: post #43
awb wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We’ll have to think of a different methodology because it’s not ethical to issue placebo vaccines during a pandemic.

Well, antivaxxers would take the placebo. But they wouldn't take the vaccine. So you can't randomise the trial.

I was serious with that comment. You can do longitudinal studies now, and people do, comparing infection/hospitalisation/death rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated people. But those have very serious confounders, namely that those who are still unvaccinated might behave rather different from everyone else.

To overcome this, you'd need an RCT. But you're unlikely to find either a) unvaccinated people that want to be vaccinated, yet would be ok to get a placebo instead, or b) unvaccinated people that don't want to be vaccinated yet would be ok to get a vaccination instead.

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#108

Post by argvargc »

tremon wrote: post #102
argvargc wrote: post #67

To enjoy an interesting and arguably also somewhat more accurate experience reading articles such as these, try mentally replacing the term "vaccine breakthrough" with "vaccine failure". Going to hospital is not protection.

Why would that be more accurate? A total vaccine failure would imply that a fully vaccinated person died from Covid, no?

So if someone was permanently disabled it's a success? What about in hospital 8 weeks but eventually recovered? It's hard to understand why this needs to be debated. Why is it so bad to simply admit it failed to protect?

Even if we set the bar at death I guarantee someone would step up and say: "Yes, but they would've died even sooner without the vaccine! Oh come ye let us praise it". The religious fervour is bizarre. Let's face it - the vaccines are a bit shit.

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#109

Post by awb »

FabHK wrote: post #107
FabHK wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, antivaxxers would take the placebo. But they wouldn't take the vaccine. So you can't randomise the trial.

I was serious with that comment. You can do longitudinal studies now, and people do, comparing infection/hospitalisation/death rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated people. But those have very serious confounders, namely that those who are still unvaccinated might behave rather different from everyone else. To overcome this, you'd need an RCT. But you're unlikely to find either a) unvaccinated people that want to b…

Agreed, not sure why you were downvoted.

Re: Covid-19 breakthrough data

#110

Post by awb »

SV_BubbleTime wrote: post #86
rsynnott wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's probably essentially what you'd expect with omicron, which is more effective at immune escape but appears less effective at causing serious illness (at least in vaccinated and previously infected people).

Short of a vaccine that prevents infection isn’t this the best case scenario?

If it provides immunity to the other more deadly variants and competes with them, then yes, but I haven’t seen that data yet. Otherwise, it’s just a supplemental virus.
Post reply on HN