What if no Vaccines work?

patnor1011

Charles Babbage wrote: »

They cannot make a claim that it lasts a long time from a short trial, whereas they can reasonably claim that it does 3 or 4 months. It may last much longer.
In reality, the first vaccine may be expensive and short lived. But even within the period that the first vaccine lasts a longer lasting and cheaper vaccine may be developed. Rome wasn't built in a day.

Only that they cant. There is no working vaccine for any coronavirus. Not for the lack of trying. It seems that our bodies work that way. Antibodies simply disappear rather fast.

Vaccine is wishful thinking. The more painful way is needed - adjusting our lifestyle and try to remain as healthy as we can. Exercise, healthy diet, cleaner environment - stuff like that. We got so lazy that most of us wait for some miracle injection which makes it all good again... Not going to happen.


Below are not my words but it perfectly sumarize what I am talking about:

---

"When the coronavirus crisis first began, there was a lot of hope that at least those who survive the disease will develop immunity to it and won’t have to worry about catching it again. However, it has become painfully apparent that it doesn’t work that way at all. In fact, a trio of studies that have been released recently illustrate just how fleeting the immunity offered by coronavirus antibodies truly is."

1. The newest study comes out of London, where COVID-19 patients’ immune responses were analyzed. The researchers discovered that the levels of antibodies that could kill the virus dropped quickly after peaking a few weeks after the patients first exhibited symptoms. At the peak of their battle against the disease, 60 percent of the patients had a “potent” antibody response; two months later, however, only 16.7 percent of them had such a response.

For some patients, the antibody response against the virus went on to become undetectable. The study’s lead author, Katie Doores, said that although people are producing reasonable antibody responses to the virus, that response is fading quickly.
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/507043-virus-immunity-in-recovered-patients-may-be-gone-in-months-researchers-say

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/07/13/opinions/herd-immunity-covid-19-uncomfortable-reality-haseltine/index.html

2. A large study carried out in Spain showed that antibodies disappear just weeks after people test positive for the disease, deflating hopes for the possibility of attaining herd immunity. Herd immunity occurs when enough of the population becomes immune to a certain disease, either by already getting sick or through vaccines, to make it unlikely to spread throughout the community. The study, which was published in the journal Lancet, found that 14 percent of those who tested positive for antibodies did not have any antibodies just weeks later.

The study involved more than 60,000 participants, who answered questionnaires about symptoms and were given antibody and blood tests.

The report stated: “At present, herd immunity is difficult to achieve without accepting the collateral damage of many deaths in the susceptible population and overburdening of health systems.”
https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article244087867.html


3. A different study, this one from China, found that antibodies faded quickly in people with COVID-19 symptoms and asymptomatic patients alike. The scientists found that more than 90 percent of people in both groups experienced deep declines in their antibody levels two to three months after the onset of their infection. Among the asymptomatic group, 40 percent tested negative for antibodies just eight weeks after being released from isolation.
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/06/chinese-study-antibodies-covid-19-patients-fade-quickly


While SARS and MERS are the coronaviruses that grab the headlines, there are four other mostly unknown coronaviruses that are much more common: 229E, HKU1, NL63 and OC43. What we know from 60 years of research into these viruses is that they come back year after year and reinfect the same people — over and over again.

Of course, it goes without saying that if antibodies do disappear this quickly, any vaccine that is developed would have to be administered repeatedly throughout the year if people wanted to gain any amount of protection whatsoever. Most people don’t want to get even one vaccine, much less various shots throughout the year.

Making matters even more complicated is the fact that even if a coronavirus patient does develop antibodies, it doesn’t necessarily mean that they will have any immunity at all. Writing for CNN, Dr. William Haseltine said: “Only 15 percent of those who test positive for antibodies make the neutralizing antibodies necessary to develop immunity.”

Unfortunately, it looks like COVID-19 is much like many other types of coronavirus. The antibodies for other common coronaviruses generally disappear completely within somewhere between four months and a year, which is why people can catch the same one every year.

Vaccines may not offer much protection from the disease after all, and their long-term effects will be largely untested as they are rushed to the market. These studies underscore the importance of preventing the disease naturally. Wear a mask when you’ll be around others, and don’t forget that washing your hands frequently remains essential. One of the best lines of defense is keeping your immune system up. Eat a healthy and well-balanced diet, and make sure you get plenty of Vitamin C, zinc, and Vitamin D from the sun.

---

end of quoted article.

Pinch Flat

one world order wrote: »

Once the global economy suffers, civil unrest breaks out and the Devil has used the media to generate as much fear, then the microchip vaccine will all of a sudden be mandated for the global population.

I've heard they are working on beaming the vaccine through 5g transmitters.

padser

patnor1011 wrote: »

Only that they cant. There is no working vaccine for any coronavirus. Not for the lack of trying. It seems that our bodies work that way. Antibodies simply disappear rather fast.
.

There definitely seems to be a fair bit of evidence that antibodies disappear reasonably quickly. However we dont really know if Antibodies are what give protection.

As with a lot about COVID19 - there are still a huge amount of unknowns. Also, crucially, real world data supports immunity.

COVID has been with us for about 8 months, and we have precious little evidence of any widespread re infection of early infectees. Now maybe it's only 6 months ago that we had decent moments and good tracking of infectees globally - but the absence of evidence of the infection means something is providing at least 3 to 6 months of protection......

Onesea

If we assume human efforts had no impact on the spread. Could it be guessed the virus is dieing off slowly?

Donald Trump

growleaves wrote: »

Meanwhile back in reality the CDC now estimates the Infection Fatality Rate at 0.05%. Seasonal flu is 0.02% and that is the proportionate comparison, not medieval plagues which almost wiped out entire populations.

Are you sure with your figures there? With a fatality rate of 0.05% it would mean that, for example, the UK with a population of about 68m should see at 34,000 deaths even if everyone eventually catches it.

Stark

Donald Trump wrote: »

Are you sure with your figures there? With a fatality rate of 0.05% it would mean that, for example, the UK with a population of about 68m should see at 34,000 deaths even if everyone eventually catches it.

In Imagination Land, all figures are correct

hmmm

Donald Trump wrote: »

Are you sure with your figures there? With a fatality rate of 0.05% it would mean that, for example, the UK with a population of about 68m should see at 34,000 deaths even if everyone eventually catches it.

Growleaves pulls stats out of the air which suit whatever dream he is having that day. Best not to pay attention.

People keep saying "we have never had a coronavirus vaccine". Firstly, we have never needed a coronavirus vaccine. Secondly we have animal coronavirus vaccines (because they've been needed). Now we have 180 vaccines in development, with a lot of the worlds medical scientists focusing on Covid, and we have working vaccines in trials.

Finally, the antibodies issue keeps coming up. The immune system is a complicated beast, and more than antibodies are involved. There is an interesting coronavirus called OC43 which is suspected of causing a pandemic in 1889 - very similar to today. This now is "just a cold" as humans have built up immunity to it over the years.

banie01

one world order wrote: »

Once the global economy suffers, civil unrest breaks out and the Devil has used the media to generate as much fear, then the microchip vaccine will all of a sudden be mandated for the global population.

saabsaab wrote: »

Have you been drinking the hand satanizer ?

The bolded above, in its context as a reply to a religious fruit cake is absolute genius!

Well done Saab, well bloody done!

growleaves

Donald Trump wrote: »

Are you sure with your figures there? With a fatality rate of 0.05% it would mean that, for example, the UK with a population of about 68m should see at 34,000 deaths even if everyone eventually catches it.

In Imagination Land, all figures are correct

Growleaves pulls stats out of the air which suit whatever dream he is having that day. Best not to pay attention.

I posted a correction at #44 (reproduced below).

My original post giving wrong figures was at 2am and I'm not being paid to post here, so a mistake is not the end of the world.

Now that I know that people aren't reading the whole thread, I'll include this clarification in the original post as an Edit. (Actually it won't let me do that since the original post was so long ago. Anyway the clarification has now been double-posted.)

In my above post, 0.05 s/b 0.5 and 0.02 s/b 0.2.

The CDC estimate ifr between 0.2-1% with "best estimate" of 0.5%. That was revised downwards from a higher estimate in mid-April.

bb1234567

Wow I can't believe the flu comparison is still going. A conference recently held by WHO determined an IFR of 0.64%. This is now the official estimate of the WHO and the very first official estimate released by them since the pandemic emerged 6 months ago. 1300 scientists globally reached this consensus at the conference.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/04/health/coronavirus-death-rate.html?referringSource=articleShare&fbclid=IwAR359G0Tc7QwMYWnVsQGLrNLgGfOX9mHgvDaD57xxjeyErtg8Ow4JeX7uHI

Those researchers looked at 267 studies in more than a dozen countries, and then chose the 25 they considered the most accurate, weighting them for accuracy and averaged the data. They concluded that the global I.F.R. was 0.64 percent.

In areas where hospitals are being overwhelmed the IFR is considerably higher, estimated to be over 1% in badly affected Brazilian urban areas for example.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.30.20117531v1.full.pdf

Large scale antibody tests in France and New York determined IFR in the region of 0.67-69, almost exactly same as that estimated by WHO.
So it is likely the unforeseen T cell immunity cohort theory is a red herring. Antibody testing in Spain and Italy determined an IFR of over 1%, this figure may be greater than the estimate because health services were so overwhelmed and may also be why this figure is similar to the IFR estimated in Brazilian regions which are similarly overwhelmed.

So it is likely that if 60% of Ireland's population contracts COVID that around 20,000 will die. This figure assumes no overwhelming of Irish health services, given that several recent studies have shown that mortaty roughly doubles when hospitals are overwheled, the revised figure of 35,000 deaths in Ireland in an unmitigiated scenario does not look unlikely. Anecdotally this does seem improbably high, but it really is what the most accurate information we now have does indeed indicate.

Donald Trump

growleaves wrote: »

I posted a correction at #44 (reproduced below).

My original post giving wrong figures was at 2am and I'm not being paid to post here, so a mistake is not the end of the world.

Now that I know that people aren't reading the whole thread, I'll include this clarification in the original post as an Edit. (Actually it won't let me do that since the original post was so long ago. Anyway the clarification has now been double-posted.)

Ignoring the excess deaths figure and taking the actual official number then your numbers would imply that about we should expect that one in every 7.5 people in the UK has already caught the virus (actually that should be caught it long enough ago to have died from it so lets say two weeks back).


Would that be consistent with your own take on it?


To visualise the stat, lets assume you had 150 guests at your wedding (or have been at a wedding with 150 guests). On average, you'd expect that 20 of them have contracted the virus already

growleaves

Donald Trump wrote: »

Ignoring the excess deaths figure and taking the actual official number then your numbers would imply that about we should expect that one in every 7.5 people in the UK has already caught the virus (actually that should be caught it long enough ago to have died from it so lets say two weeks back).


Would that be consistent with your own take on it?


To visualise the stat, lets assume you had 150 guests at your wedding (or have been at a wedding with 150 guests). On average, you'd expect that 20 of them have contracted the virus already

The figures are from the CDC, who also said last month that for every one case detected there were 10 undetected cases.

I see no reason for that not to be true.

In March, one of only two predictions I was willing to make was that the death rate would be <1%. Many posters were predicting death rates of 3%, 4%, 7% and even higher. It was explained to them by multiple others that the wider picture of asymptomatic and undetected cases would bring the figure way down further on in the discovery process (because that is what happened with e.g. SARS, Bejing flu etc.) Now the official estimates are catching up with that explanation.

Christof Kuhbandner, professor of psychology at the University of Regensburg, wrote about the phenomenon of the drastic increase of "new" cases, explaining that testing was simply finding already-existing cases (and explaining it more eloquently than your name-sake, Donald Trump):

This can be illustrated by a simple everyday example: Let us assume that ten eggs are hidden in a garden every day (the true number of new infections). On the first day, the children are only allowed to search for one minute and they find one egg, on the second day two minutes and they find two eggs, and on the third day they are allowed to search four minutes and they find four eggs (increasing the number of tests over the time). The children could now get the misleading impression that they are exponentially more eggs (new infections) hidden in the garden every day because they find exponentially more eggs every day. But of course this is a problematic interpretation, because in reality there were always the same number of eggs (new infections) hidden in the garden.

So if there is a high number of unreported eggs (new infections) that are hidden but not found due to the small number of search attempts, you will automatically find more and more eggs (new infections) when increasing the number of tests, but nothing about the true number of eggs per day hidden eggs (new infections) testifies. You can make one interesting point clear from this example: What would actually happen if more eggs (new infections) were actually hidden in the garden every day? Then you would have to find more eggs (new infections) than is caused by increasing the number of tests. For example, if ten eggs were hidden on the first day, 20 eggs on the second day, and 40 eggs on the third day, you would find not just two but four eggs on the second day, and not just four on the third day, but 16 eggs. If you double the number of tests, you will always find more than twice as many eggs.

There is now a relatively simple statistical method to determine the true course of new infections: You simply have to divide the number of new infections found with a certain number of tests by the number of tests. This can be illustrated by the example of eggs: The children could simply divide the number of eggs (new infections) found each day by the number of search minutes (number of tests). If the number of hidden eggs (new infections) remained the same, the value 1 would be obtained for all three days. If the number of hidden eggs (new infections) doubled every day, the values ​​1, 2 and 4 would be obtained. This would then reflect the true course of the increase relatively accurately. In other words, this method is used to estimate what would have happened.

growleaves

Wow I can't believe the flu comparison is still going.

As said upthread, I believe flu is a more proportionate comparison to c19 than the Black Death, which had a fatality rate of 40-60% (in some cities, like Florence, it is estimated to be 75%)

This was the context in which I brought up seasonal influenza.

saabsaab

banie01 wrote: »

The bolded above, in its context as a reply to a religious fruit cake is absolute genius!

Well done Saab, well bloody done!

Well it could have been a freudian slip but i'll take genius, thank you sir.

growleaves

A conference recently held by WHO determined an IFR of 0.65%. This is now the official estimate of the WHO and the very first official estimate released by them since the pandemic emerged 6 months ago.

Good to know. The WHO's (unofficial?) estimate on March 3rd was 3.4%, revised upward from an earlier estimate of 2.3%.

WHO says coronavirus death rate is 3.4% globally, higher than previously thought

bb1234567

growleaves wrote: »

Good to know. The WHO's (unofficial?) estimate on March 3rd was 3.4%, revised upward from an earlier estimate of 2.3%.

WHO says coronavirus death rate is 3.4% globally, higher than previously thought

Yes that was not an official estimate. It was simple maths, the percent of patients who died among confirmed cases at that period in time.

'“Globally, about 3.4% of reported COVID-19 cases have died,”WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said during a press briefing at the agency’s headquarters in Geneva.

This estimate is based on examination of '267 studies ' by the 1300 researchers. It is by far the closest thing we have to a definitve IFR figure.

one world order

banie01 wrote: »

The bolded above, in its context as a reply to a religious fruit cake is absolute genius!

Well done Saab, well bloody done!

Don’t be so quick. The mark of the beast is all over this global pandemic and we know how important numerology is to the luciferian worshiping illuminati.

Tokyo

one world order wrote: »

Don’t be so quick. The mark of the beast is all over this global pandemic and we know how important numerology is to the luciferian worshiping illuminati.

Mod. Nope.

scilover

If that were to happen, i think we just have to adapt to the new norm. Basically we'll just have to live with it. Sounds bad but i dont think there's any other choice.

one world order

mike_ie wrote: »

Mod. Nope.

Is that a threat to stay quiet?

Donald Trump

growleaves wrote: »

The figures are from the CDC, who also said last month that for every one case detected there were 10 undetected cases.

I see no reason for that not to be true.

In March, one of only two predictions I was willing to make was that the death rate would be <1%. Many posters were predicting death rates of 3%, 4%, 7% and even higher. It was explained to them by multiple others that the wider picture of asymptomatic and undetected cases would bring the figure way down further on in the discovery process (because that is what happened with e.g. SARS, Bejing flu etc.) Now the official estimates are catching up with that explanation.

Christof Kuhbandner, professor of psychology at the University of Regensburg, wrote about the phenomenon of the drastic increase of "new" cases, explaining that testing was simply finding already-existing cases (and explaining it more eloquently than your name-sake, Donald Trump):

Don't mind that psychology fella. He might as well be a professor of fine art insofar as it pertains to viruses. There is a concept of a non-sequitur in logic



Below are the facts:

The UK population is almost 14 times the population as Ireland.

The UK has conducted 24 times as many tests as in Ireland.
It has found 11 times as many cases as Ireland.
It has had 26 times as many deaths as Ireland (official numbers, not excess deaths which give higher numbers for UK and lower numbers for Ireland which would increase that multiple a fair bit).



I would ask you to try to reconcile these numbers with your egg arguments

Donald Trump

one world order wrote: »

Is that a threat to stay quiet?

You'd wanna be careful. If the quare fella can organise a global pandemic, I'd imagine he can also organise an admin login to boards.ie

weldoninhio

Oops! wrote: »

A quick question... How many people here have had/known somebody with the virus? I know i'm in a rural area but their has'nt seem to have been a case of it here in a 30k radius.....

Know 2 people, both HCA's. Both perfectly fine after something like a "bad flu".

Beasty

one world order wrote: »

Is that a threat to stay quiet?

It's an instruction to keep your beast remarks/luciferian crap to yourself

Now back on topic

one world order

Beasty wrote: »

It's an instruction to keep your beast remarks/luciferian crap to yourself

Now back on topic

Is it not better to know the truth rather than putting your head in the sand?

Tokyo

one world order wrote: »

Is it not better to know the truth rather than putting your head in the sand?

Mod:


The power of Mike compels you.....

Don't post in the thread again.

saabsaab

Donald Trump wrote: »

You'd wanna be careful. If the quare fella can organise a global pandemic, I'd imagine he can also organise an admin login to boards.ie

Some it is said, can see the devil’s work in all and the poster may be serious
The human need to see designs or shapes in nature is known as Pareidolia
Others say that if you call a demon by name he will come. Weird or what
I can’t believe that but then again some believe in the Goddess Diana
Then again each to his or her own.

Deeper Blue

saabsaab wrote: »

Some it is said, can see the devil’s work in all and the poster may be serious
The human need to see designs or shapes in nature is known as Pareidolia
Others say that if you call a demon by name he will come. Weird or what
I can’t believe that but then again some believe in the Goddess Diana
Then again each to his or her own.

So... how about those vaccines eh?

saabsaab

God knows if they'll work or not. Too soon to say.

patnor1011

hmmm wrote: »

The Oxford vaccines have shown good results in animal trials for MERS and Covid, phase 1 results will be published on Monday and they are on Phase 3 of human trials with their Covid vaccine.

Not really, quite the opposite.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/williamhaseltine/2020/05/16/did-the-oxford-covid-vaccine-work-in-monkeys-not-really/

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1283909/coronavirus-vaccine-latest-cure-uk-oxford-vaccine-covid19-monkeys-test-alok-sharma