COVID-19 vaccines: medical concerns and recommendations

[Joe in PNG]

Plan is to head to town for AZ #2 today.

[Paso Quito]

It has been a very, very long time since I took classes where we learned about the body's immune system. In all the hubub about the vaccines (who has taken it, who hasn't, why/why not, etc) I just don't see much discussion about those of us who have had Covid-19, survived it and should be immune. If I remember my earlier schooling correctly, we get sick & the body responds in several ways but eventually we create antibodies that kill the bugs. The level of antibodies will be high initially but will taper off over time unless we are exposed to the same (or very similar) bug again.

While as this internal bug control is being done, our immune system creates an instruction packet for how to create the antibodies that we worked so hard to create when we got sick initially. Therefore we have an expedited response to an exposure to the original bug.

As I understand it, the different variant of Covid-19 are nearly identical and that our natural immunity will almost certainly be triggered by exposure to the different variants. We will probably get sick but it shouldn't be bad (unless there is an underlying condition).

I realize that this is extremely simplified and it may be completely wrong. But it is what I understand happens to our body.

Assuming this is even close to true, why would I want to take a vaccine for anything I've already had?

When businesses and/or government makes having a vaccine (any vaccine) mandatory, regardless of previously acquired immunity (as described above) are we not painting with a much larger brush than necessary?

Am I incorrect in my understanding that part of standard vaccine testing (prior to approval) is to study where the vaccine (and its byproducts for lack of a better term) end up over time and that this has not been done on the current vaccines? I think this kind of testing is required and I assume that it was added to the approval process for a good reason. I hope that the approval process is not being short changed for expediency.

I have seen articles that say the H1N1 (I think) vaccine killed 53 people (if I remember correctly about 45 million vaccinations) before it was taken off the market. What has changed in society that more than 6000 deaths from vaccines is acceptable today?

I am just an old coot who remembers saccharine (perfect sugar substitute until it killed you) that was promoted and eventually buried. Thalidomide is another example of something that started well but ended very badly. I guess that my experiences in life have taught me to be very wary of people and organizations that push too hard and brook no questions. I am an engineer who lives day to day science. I am not anti science nor anti vax. I am anti coercion and I don't trust big government or big business to be honest and up front, especially where it impacts control/power and profits respectively.

This is probably the wrong place for this but where is all the research for treatment? If Covid-19 is as bad as made out in the media why are there no ongoing updates for early/mid/late treatments? If the goal is to reduce deaths wouldn't a good, early treatment option be something to pursue?

Like I said earlier, I may be completely off base here but I am asking these questions in good faith.

[Nephrology]

Too much knowledge on the other hand, combined with the wrong personality, even more so.

I’ve always believed that upper academia was populated by quite a few borderline (if not beyond) sociopaths.

One should always be careful who we hitch our wagons to.

No more than any other career that attracts high achievers but I guess it depends on what you mean by "academia" as that term means lots of things to different people

At the end of the day, in my world, academics offers the opportunity to develop unparalleled, specific professional expertise in advanced areas of practice. It probably does mean that on some level the "bread and butter" suffers, but if I needed a Whipple or a liver transplant, I know the names of exactly which surgeons I would go to, because they do more of them per year than just about anyone else in our time zone with correspondingly good outcomes.

Not a surprise - practice makes perfect.

[Nephrology]

Assuming this is even close to true, why would I want to take a vaccine for anything I've already had?

Like I said earlier, I may be completely off base here but I am asking these questions in good faith.

You're not wrong that your body will generate antibodies against COVID-19 if you are infected with it. Your immune response to infection (which usually includes antibody production) can be somewhat variable and depends a lot on the competency of your immune system.

My basic understanding is that the immunity generated by the vaccine is a little more 'broad' in the sense that it creates antibodies against epitopes (the "pieces" of the virus that your immune system can "see") that are a little more consistent between the different strains of the virus. Also, for reasons I honestly don't fully understand, the evidence seems to suggest that immunity generated by the vaccine is more potent and longer lasting than immunity generated by viral infection. I just got home and have to prepare for tomorrow but I can dig up some of the primary literature on this if I get a moment later tonight

[Paso Quito]

You're not wrong that your body will generate antibodies against COVID-19 if you are infected with it. Your immune response to infection (which usually includes antibody production) can be somewhat variable and depends a lot on the competency of your immune system.

My basic understanding is that the immunity generated by the vaccine is a little more 'broad' in the sense that it creates antibodies against epitopes (the "pieces" of the virus that your immune system can "see") that are a little more consistent between the different strains of the virus. Also, for reasons I honestly don't fully understand, the evidence seems to suggest that immunity generated by the vaccine is more potent and longer lasting than immunity generated by viral infection. I just got home and have to prepare for tomorrow but I can dig up some of the primary literature on this if I get a moment later tonight

Thanks for the reply. I thought that the vaccine was actually making the body create the spike protein but that is did not really convey immunity (creat antibodies for the virus) like a weakened or dead virus would.

[Clusterfrack]

Reluctance to be vaccinated seems to be due to a combination of misinformation and the very rapid creation of the vaccines. mRNA vaccines are novel, and the J&J adenoviral vax is relatively new as well--so it's not surprising that many people are concerned.

However, it seems clear that these vaccines keep people out of the hospital, and significantly reduce the risks from Covid-19. My SME sources think it is likely that most healthy people who are vaccinated with Pfizer or Moderna are likely to have significant immunity for years. We don't know what the duration of protection is, but getting a higher quality vaccine (Pfizer or Moderna >> J&J) may yield the best results.

Safety: My sources think the mRNA vaccines are as safe or safer than the flu vax. Flu vax contains components that irritate the immune system and can cause side effects. COVID-19 mRNA vaccines don't have that, and because mRNA disappears quickly, long term effects seem less likely.

No vaccine is 100% safe. Based on my read of the literature and from information from subject matter experts, I and everyone in my family were enthusiastic to be vaccinated ASAP. The risk of serious Covid-19 complications appear to be vastly greater than the risk of a serious reaction to the vaccine.

Edit: just to be clear: I expect to get Covid of some type sooner or later. Eradication of the disease or vaccination immunity do not seem likely in our lifetimes. I hope the vaccines are sufficient to make Covid as or less severe than a bad cold or mild flu.

[MickAK]

Thanks for the reply. I thought that the vaccine was actually making the body create the spike protein but that is did not really convey immunity (creat antibodies for the virus) like a weakened or dead virus would.

There's a user here @pangloss that works in a lab of some sort and measured his antibody levels regularly after his vaccination and reported them here, if you're curious about how that works and how long it takes and such.

[Clusterfrack]

Ivermectin is a neurotoxin that targets Cl- channels in invertebrates, and under most circumstances does not adversely effect humans except in high doses. High doses of Ivermectin may help treat SARS cov2, but are inconclusive against COVID-19.

Risk of high dose ivermectin seems much greater than for mRNA Covid vaccines, for much lower (possibility zero) value.

[Nephrology]

for much lower (possibility zero) value.

It's definitely zero IMO. If it was my sibling/parent in the ICU for COVID I would not want them to be wasting space on the IV pole with stupid bullshit like that.

[Sensei]

As I understand it, the different variant of Covid-19 are nearly identical and that our natural immunity will almost certainly be triggered by exposure to the different variants. We will probably get sick but it shouldn't be bad (unless there is an underlying condition).

This is may very well be incorrect. Nobody can make that statement with any degree of certainty. What little knowledge we had about re-infection was based on non-Delta strains from last Summer and Winter. Delta is the predominant strain now and the best course is to probably get immunized - especially if you’re over the age of 40.