Likewise. Death might have been a possibility instead of an unpleasant hospital stay for any of us admitted to hospital. We can never know for sure but I’m glad I’d had all my jabs and feel it more than likely lessened the severity, enough that death wasn’t on the cards.
I mean, if a vaccine doesn't stop infection (which I thought was the usual way they work -- e.g they instead help fight infection after it enters the body) then even the vaccinated will still test positive (for active or inactive virus) if they contract the virus.
Interestingly, Fauci said something similar not long ago. That the flaw with the current mrna vaccines is that they don't provide the protection where needed for a respiratory virus e.g in the upper mucosal pathways. He said future ncov vaccines would need to be more focussed on the respiratory mucosa.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
Yes, and they also note that it's hard. And now much of the money's gone, and we have these very effective mRNA vaccines (and others like Novavax) so there's strong competition for new vaccines.Interestingly, Fauci said something similar not long ago. That the flaw with the current mrna vaccines is that they don't provide the protection where needed for a respiratory virus e.g in the upper mucosal pathways. He said future ncov vaccines would need to be more focussed on the respiratory mucosa.
Rethinking next-generation vaccines for coronaviruses, influenzaviruses, and other respiratory viruses - PMC
Viruses that replicate in the human respiratory mucosa without infecting systemically, including influenza A, SARS-CoV-2, endemic coronaviruses, RSV, and many other “common cold” viruses, cause significant mortality and morbidity and are important ...
Err yes if you have the virus in your body you will test positive whether you’ve been vaccinated or not. Did you really think a vaccinated person couldn’t test positive? I think your question is more about can a vaccinated person have the virus in their body in the first place, and yes they can.
It sounds pretty accurate in simple terms to me. And the “better” it is the faster it reacts to a virus but none are perfect consistently.
Then we agree. How then would we expect vaccination to put an end to positive tests, the basis of the televised test/pandemic? We were all treated to 24hrs a day of "case" numbers every day from March 2020 onwards. It seems the issue is testing, not the virus?
We didn’t. We expected it to reduce the number of positives tests/infections and to make those that did happen less severe.
can I borrow your Time Machine please? You seem to be able to predict alternative futures and pasts without having experienced them.'Britain's carefully researched battle plan was binned in favour of more draconian and — as events have proved — more destructive measures to close down national life,' Professor Robert Dingwall
The Covid Inquiry will never admit it but we had a strong plan
PROFESSOR ROBERT DINGWALL This may seem hard to believe, but for 48 hours in March 2020, the UK set out to manage the Covid in much the same way as Sweden.www.dailymail.co.uk
You've answered your own question. Neither did they (have a time machine), but instead of choosing the sensible option of advising those who are sick to stay at home and shield the vulnerable, they locked everyone in. Devastating the economy for generations. They knew at the time the effects of what they were doing.
Sensible in your opinion. A lot disagree(d). Many of which were a lot more qualified and expert than you, or me.
Not in my opinion. Of course it's sensible to advise those with symptoms, coughing and sneezing to stay at home.
Sigh. It’s your opinion that that precaution alone would have been enough. (And yes I know there are others that agree with you as well as the many that don’t).
There was also some evidence that vaccinated people cleared the infection a little earlier. I imagine that effect reduced after repeated infections (for the survivors of repeated infections, that is), but early on I remember there being some opinion (and some evidence, I think) that people who'd been vaccinated were (on average) safer to be around.
I agree. The vaccinated were/are slightly less infectious than non vaccinated according to the evidence I saw. And almost added that information to my post, but honestly thought it would just open another repetitive can of worms.
Sure, and I'm not at all sure how strong those factors are. I think the basic problem is that transmission is hard to measure observationally or experimentally (ethically, anyway), so there was (and still is) lots of uncertainty.
