Live data from Hacker News

Covid vaccine: First ‘milestone’ vaccine offers 90% protection

bbc.co.uk

771–780 of 1001 posts

Re: Covid vaccine: First ‘milestone’ vaccine offers 90% protection

#771
post #603

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The latest data (preprint, not peer reviewed etc etc) mention memory B and T cells up to 8 months after recovery from the illness. This means that an immunity of one year is probably likely. This would be probably enough to quench the spread, but not to eradicate the virus.

I'd happily take a shot a year for a decade in return for getting rid of lockdown.

Let's not forget that we can start with this vaccine, get life back to normal and then buy some time to develop better vaccines.

Re: Covid vaccine: First ‘milestone’ vaccine offers 90% protection

#772

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Flu has a unique capability to recombine that allows it to mutate more readily than other viruses. Hoping that the more simple coronavirus will be less fortunate. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antigenic_shift

Ability to recombine is not unique to the flu. SARS-CoV-2 is suspected to have been formed through a recombination event in vivo. [1] Mutation rates can also be manipulated through selective pressure e.g. vaccine-based herd immunity. For example, a vaccine-resistant polio virus has recently emerged. [2] [1] https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/6/27/eabb9153 [2] https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/11/1411041…

> a vaccine-resistant polio virus has recently emerged

A perfect example of why we won’t be able to eradicate Coronavirus. Polio was an easier target with stronger reasons to wish it gone, and we have failed.

Re: Covid vaccine: First ‘milestone’ vaccine offers 90% protection

#773

Good: + ~90% of individuals achieve immunity. + no significant side-effects. Not so good: - two doses needed, 3 weeks apart, immunity after one month from first dose. Slow rollout. - -80C storage and transport needed. Challenging, but doable in developed countries, but still may slow down mass rollout. Not feasible in many developing countries. I still wonder about long-term immunity. Anyone can share any insight?

-80C storage is an issue, you are definitely right, but it is a common requirement for many biological samples and protein-based drug therapies. -80C lab freezers are not that expensive and all over the place. I used to work in biotech and, at one company, all of our intermediate drug substance storage was -80C. we had freezers big enough to drive a forklift into; one such a freezer could store millions of doses... a…

Why, biologically speaking, does it need to be that cold? I'm guessing something breaks down at higher temperatures?

(That's -112 F, for anyone else wondering.)

Re: Covid vaccine: First ‘milestone’ vaccine offers 90% protection

#774
post #504

Good: + ~90% of individuals achieve immunity. + no significant side-effects. Not so good: - two doses needed, 3 weeks apart, immunity after one month from first dose. Slow rollout. - -80C storage and transport needed. Challenging, but doable in developed countries, but still may slow down mass rollout. Not feasible in many developing countries. I still wonder about long-term immunity. Anyone can share any insight?

Not so good: Safety data is for 2 months only

One point they made on NPR is that it's hard to imagine any sort of vaccine that would be as harmful as the virus itself, which is killing 1000 people per day.

Re: Covid vaccine: First ‘milestone’ vaccine offers 90% protection

#775
post #501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least this one has a decent looking 'n' value. The BBC also address this in part > There are still questions - how long does immunity last, does the vaccine work as well in high-risk elderly people, does it stop you spreading the virus or just from developing symptoms? I'd rate the news as "vibing" on a scale of clickbait to party for the world

The current n=94. The real n=43.5k data apparently will come later. Article doesn’t specify when, but “hopes” to have enough of the larger n analyzed to submit to regulators by 3rd week of November.

FWIW, N=94 seems ridiculously small to me. I realize there's ethical concerns in increasing exposure etc but in my experience, that's in the ballpark of sample sizes where unacknowledged heterogeneity can be manipulated to distort findings.

I'm not suggesting Pfizer is up to something nefarious, just that the biomedical literature is littered with studies with N 40k in some ways is irrelevant if none of those participants have the processes in play. It's more like recruiting N >40k to get N=94 to study.

I'm also not suggesting with 90% effectiveness that there's probably no effect, just that my guess is a true value of 60% isn't outside the realm of possibility once you consider all the factors that could be in play besides the random sampling variation that's assumed by their tests.

Re: Covid vaccine: First ‘milestone’ vaccine offers 90% protection

#776
All: don't miss that there are now multiple pages of comments in this thread. To get there, click 'More' at the bottom of the earlier pages. Or like this:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25033844&p=2

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25033844&p=3

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25033844&p=4

(Once we've rolled out some long-suffering performance improvements, all of this should blissfully disappear, including this sort of comment. Thanks for your patience.)

Re: Covid vaccine: First ‘milestone’ vaccine offers 90% protection

#777

Given we can't even get people to wear masks, regardless of efficacy I think we mainly have an education issue and half the country voted for "fuck that let's die." I think we need to spend as much time/money on a social campaign with mask mandates, social distancing, quarantine, contact tracing.

I think one of the reasons people won't wear masks is because they're mandated. Many are worried in the short-term about the spread of COVID-19, but after we come out of it the government has more power. I think it's important to understand and respect that other people have different priorities. In this case, the US was born out of fighting tyranny and that is a bigger concern to some because a tyrannical government could lead to more suffering and death than caused by COVID-19.

I liken it to the war on drugs, which used fear-mongering and propaganda to convince people that drugs are bad and that we need to lock up people that are making decisions regarding their own bodies and minds. Instead of educating people on the unbiased pros/cons of recreational and medical drug use, so that people are actually informed about the decisions they're making. Instead, we have a war on drugs that is fueled by corruption and labels non-violent offenders as criminals.

When it comes to the pandemic, there is a similar approach of fear-mongering and forced coercion. Those that refuse to wear a mask may just be people that have everyone's interest in mind because they believe they are rebelling against government trying to get more power, which they think is worse in the long-term.

I respect the mask requirements when, for example, entering the grocery story, but I also feel uncomfortable by the forced coercion, re-goalposting, and increase in government power. I believe the best approach forward is setting a good example and informing people on all aspects of the facts without bias.

Re: Covid vaccine: First ‘milestone’ vaccine offers 90% protection

#778
post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we can eradicate it by contact tracing. With 90% efficiency it will be extremely tough for the virus to spread. For any new cases you simply test everyone in the vicinity of the infected person. But I don't think even that will be necessary. 90% efficiency reduces R so much, it will probably die out on its own. The real problem is mutations that are not covered by the vaccine. If it mutates as efficiently as…

Contract tracing hasn't worked at scale anywhere. It's a nice idea conceptually, but the problem is psychological. People stop caring about tracing when 98% of all trace connections are false positives. If a person is infectious for a week and the r0 is around 1 then only 1 person of all the people they've been in contact with will actually contract the virus on average. The other 50+ people, assuming they can even b…

> Mutations aren't a serious concern. Because when viruses mutate it's the strains that are more infectious and less lethal that win out.

If only it worked that way! It doesn't, of course.

A random walk can lead anywhere in the adjacent landscape. That includes moving up in lethality without moving down in infectiousness. What you have written here is plausible-sounding nonsense; if it were true, the 1918 flu would never have occurred.

The good news is that influenza is almost pathologically mutation-prone, and coronaviruses are not.

Re: Covid vaccine: First ‘milestone’ vaccine offers 90% protection

#779
post #161
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The variations are enough to have differences in infectiousness and to allow us to trace the spread a bit, but as far as we know immunity to any of them is immunity to all of them.

I think someone should clarify the strands vs. genetic variations here. Because the reports from Denmarks Mink fiasco indicated that antibodies were not as effective on the mutation that appeared there short time ago. This would contradict the one-fits-all immunity argument.

The Danish mink mutation is the exception to the rule; that's why the government is taking extreme measures to contain it.

Re: Covid vaccine: First ‘milestone’ vaccine offers 90% protection

#780
post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we can eradicate it by contact tracing. With 90% efficiency it will be extremely tough for the virus to spread. For any new cases you simply test everyone in the vicinity of the infected person. But I don't think even that will be necessary. 90% efficiency reduces R so much, it will probably die out on its own. The real problem is mutations that are not covered by the vaccine. If it mutates as efficiently as…

Contract tracing hasn't worked at scale anywhere. It's a nice idea conceptually, but the problem is psychological. People stop caring about tracing when 98% of all trace connections are false positives. If a person is infectious for a week and the r0 is around 1 then only 1 person of all the people they've been in contact with will actually contract the virus on average. The other 50+ people, assuming they can even b…

It seems to be working here in New Zealand - we have an ongoing problem getting people to use the Covid app, but that just makes it easier, doesn't replace calling people on phones

Of course it helps to get the actual rate so close to 0 that the contact tracers are not overloaded

Post reply on HN