Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[mmascari]

And another booster, and another booster and another booster..........................????

Has any study actually shown that a forth dose is going to be necessary?

If we get to four, has any study actually shown that a fifth is going to be necessary?

If we get to five, has any study actually shown that a sixth is going to be necessary?


Lots and lots of the vaccines we got as kids needed 3, 4, or 5 doses. Some of them needed additional doses after 5 or 10 years. Do we have any examples of another vaccine that needs the exact same vaccine additional doses every year?

The flu vaccine doesn't count, it's not the same every year. Until COVID is mutating enough that variants are breaking out from vaccine protection, it doesn't look like that pattern.


Why create worry and hysteria for some condition that's no more likely to occur than it's likely to occur?

 

[Tom P.]

So, some vaccinations require yearly or ten year boosters or cycles etc, it's the norm for many vaccinations the last 50 years.

If the current Covid vaccination turns out to need 6 month cycles so be it. It's better we just accept death and sickness?

The flu vaccine, which is not particularly controversial except among the real anti-vax kook fringe, has only about a 50% participation rate, if that, in an average year. It requires only one shot per year. A vaccine that requires a shot every 6 months is just not going to have wide-scale adoption. I'm sorry, but it just won't. Not because people are against the vaccines, but just because people are busy and lazy. You can make all the arguments for it that you want, and many of them are good arguments. I'm just telling you the reality is that it won't happen.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I wouldn't just discount a behavior change.

Haven't they done football studies that as helmet technology has improved players have developed behaviors that are more dangerous because of the perceived protection of the helmet. Sometimes leading back to the very injuries that the improvements were designed to protect against.

Likewise, have they seen that drivers using a seatbelt or car with other safety technology, like traction control, have been shown to take more risks while driving.

I can very easily imagine vaccinated people taking more risks of COVID exposure than the same people did prior to vaccination.

We know the vaccine reduces the chance you'll get COVID, not eliminates. So the question becomes if they increase risky behavior enough to eliminate (or severely diminish) the reduction from vaccination. Since the risk is also related to the level of community spread, doing more risky things in a low community spread area will negate less of the reduction than doing more risky things in a an area of high spread.

Worst case extreme, a vaccinated person sitting in a poorly ventilated confined space with a bunch of currently infected people. Maximum risky behavior that will severely erode the risk reduction from vaccination.

There's lots of stuff we might call quality improvements that would increase risk slightly but not anywhere near negating the reduction. Especially in areas of low community spread. Those are all things vaccinated people should be able to enjoy while unvaccinated people shouldn't be doing them. Assuming we know who is which, since some of them directly impact the risk calculation of someone else.

The main thing about football studies is that the helmets are backwards. The soft part should be on the outside

 

[mmascari]

Some will have issues dealing with the eventual reality.

If we need boosters every year, so be it. We'll deal with that then.

My issue today is the assumption that we'll need boosters every year based on the fact that for some people but not all, based on individual risk and environment they needed a single additional dose today. There's no line from that to the assumption that everyone will need one every year. It's all speculation to create fear and portray the vaccine as useless. That we'll never stop COVID and should just give up.

I'm not ready to just give up and let it rip.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

If you use what she has as a reason not to get a booster likely over half of people her age or older wouldn't be able to get one. Mild afib is extremely common in the elderly as is high cholesterol.

And that may be…

but wait a second…didn't you say this only is an issue for the vulnerable about a hundred times?

you should be major pro-vaccine booster

“lock up the weak…let me go to magic kingdom”

 

[Tom P.]

If we need boosters every year, so be it. We'll deal with that then.

My issue today is the assumption that we'll need boosters every year based on the fact that for some people but not all, based on individual risk and environment they needed a single additional dose today. There's no line from that to the assumption that everyone will need one every year. It's all speculation to create fear and portray the vaccine as useless. That we'll never stop COVID and should just give up.

I'm not ready to just give up and let it rip.

I don't believe we will ever stop Covid from transmitting. Eradicating it is not going to be a thing. I base that on history. We have only actually eradicated one human virus -- smallpox -- in the entirety of human history. I don't think that means that we have to accept the same level of death and severe disease that we've seen over the past 18+ months. But elimination is also not something realistic.

 

[mmascari]

A vaccine that requires a shot every 6 months is just not going to have wide-scale adoption.

What makes us think the COVID vaccine will require everyone to get a shot every 6 months ongoing?

We've got study participants in this thread. Did I miss the posts where any of them are in studies getting a second booster/fourth dose now?

Did I miss the reports where there's a COVID variant that's escaped the current vaccine response?

Something I'm worried about based on the uncontrolled spread but hasn't happened yet. Something I was routinely told not to worry about. So, now I shouldn't worry about a variant developing that escapes the current vaccine until that happens, but I should worry about needing frequent boosters every year or more often that would only be required if a variant develops and continues to develop again and again that continually escapes the vaccine.

Which is it? COVID is mutating but slowly in ways that haven't evaded the vaccine and not worry or COVID is mutating rapidly in ways that require constant vaccine updates and boosters?

Can we pick a plan on which one we're going to worry about? Sheesh.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I really wish people who can would just get the vaccination and the booster. Coming on two years of this soon.

Yep…I’m a big fan of the obvious approach too

 

[mmascari]

I don't believe we will ever stop Covid from transmitting. Eradicating it is not going to be a thing. I base that on history. We have only actually eradicated one human virus -- smallpox -- in the entirety of human history. I don't think that means that we have to accept the same level of death and severe disease that we've seen over the past 18+ months. But elimination is also not something realistic.

We haven't eradicated measles, polio, or mumps either.

When was that time you knew someone who contracted one of those? Clearly someone does, there's still cases in the US every year. But, they're so far smaller than the number of COVID cases that they might as well be 0.

We need to stop equating "not eradicating" with "current level is fine". They are not the same thing.

If we can reduce the level of COVID transmission to the level of measles transmission, it might as well be eradicated. It's not like people are taking precautions everyday to not catch measles.

 

[DonniePeverley]

Very disappointing reports today.

 

[hopemax]

And another booster, and another booster and another booster..........................????

Did your Mom take 1-3 pills for her cholesterol and then that's it? I've mentioned FIL is Type 1 and so he injects himself daily. It's necessary to do it frequently, so they do it frequently. And since it's a standard protocol you accept it as being necessary. How do you think the first people who were told that they had to take a pill or a shot every day for the rest of their lives felt? We don't know what is necessary for COVID standard protocols. We only know that the initial dosage tested against wild-type was too low against Delta. FIL has had to adjust his insulin several times in the years I've known him, should the doctors just have given up, decided it was a failure?

What we also don't have right now is a reliable standard for titers. There is no reason that one won't be developed in the future. The priority though is getting the world out of this crisis mode. It could be that older people do need boosters like flu shots or risk serious complications up to and including death. It could be that middle aged people with comorbidities should have their titers checked periodically during normal bloodwork and get a booster. It could be after studying COVID for a decade that we realize that for healthy people T-Cell & B-Cell response is strong enough that boosters aren't needed except in specific high-risk circumstances. We don't know, and for someone who usually gets out of joint when people say things when they don't really know the answer, you seem pretty confident that the booster strategy will extend beyond the initial discovery & research phase, beyond the pandemic crisis state. Is your expectation for human achievement that we've reached a place we don't have to discover and research, go through test and adjust for novel viruses like we do for everything else and just get it right the first time? You also like to use the quote-y "follow the science" but then you basically want us to resolve the circular bit of the scientific method about make conclusions, refine hypothesis, retest, down to "we should just do things once, and if we don't succeed give up and let whatever will happen happen."

and apparently the rest of you type way faster than me.

 

[drizgirl]

So, some vaccinations require yearly or ten year boosters or cycles etc, it's the norm for many vaccinations the last 50 years.

If the current Covid vaccination turns out to need 6 month cycles so be it. It's better we just accept death and sickness?

At worst, those other boosters have made my arm really sore for a day. This was a whole new level. No chance will people do this twice a year indefinitely. Won't happen.

 

[Nubs70]

L

And that may be…

but wait a second…didn't you say this only is an issue for the vulnerable about a hundred times?

you should be major pro-vaccine booster

“lock up the weak…let me go to magic kingdom”

Since covid is contactable and transmissable by both vaccinated and unvaccinated, not only should the unvaccinated avoid close personal contact, but also the vaccinated. Both classes should make it their personal responsibility not to become an incubator for Covid.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

At worst, those other boosters have made my arm really sore for a day. This was a whole new level. No chance will people do this twice a year indefinitely. Won't happen.

Who is pushing for twice yearly boosters indefinitely??? It's not a thing I've seen anywhere.

 

[hopemax]

At worst, those other boosters have made my arm really sore for a day. This was a whole new level. No chance will people do this twice a year indefinitely. Won't happen.

Those other boosters also have how many years of R&D intended to minimize side effects? If we are taking regular COVID boosters in 10 years, they would have undergone similar R&D. This should be as bad as they are because we prioritized speed over minimizing side effects. If people have issues like afib, we should expect protocols like we do like other medications like "make sure you don't take on an empty stomach" or "take with 24 oz of water." Especially, the water, if research confirms a strong link between dehydration and side effects. This process is because of the crisis, it doesn't have to stay this process forever.

 

[mmascari]

It could be after studying COVID for a decade that we realize

For some people, I think that's what they want before we do anything.

No sense starting a vaccination treatment if we don't know the entire multi dose multi year complete course of action when we start. Let's just wait until we've had the time to figure that all out.

If we're not waiting, lets just assume the worst possible scenario. Then, we can use that to justify never starting too.

It's like these same people assume we can just wait until we know all that, and at the same time do nothing else at all and COVID will just wait for us to know all those answers.

It's like if you don't already know the 6 rides you'll do in the park today before you even enter the park there's no sense even going. No changing plans and doing something different once you're there either. It's those 6 in that order or nothing else and it wasn't worth going at all. Bonus, if you're not going, they should just close up for the day, not even worth being open at all.

 

[drizgirl]

Who is pushing for twice yearly boosters indefinitely??? It's not a thing I've seen anywhere.

Effectiveness wanes over time. You don't know any more than I do what's going to be needed.

 

[mmascari]

Since covid is contactable and transmissable by both vaccinated and unvaccinated, not only should the unvaccinated avoid close personal contact, but also the vaccinated. Both classes should make it their personal responsibility not to become an incubator for Covid.

The rate of transmission is not the same between both vaccinated and unvaccinated people. They should not be equated, while both are possible, it's significantly lower for vaccinated people. Depending on the overall current community transmission rate, the reduced rate for vaccinated people can make it not a concern. Alternatively, if the current community transmission rate is high enough, then even the reduced rate for vaccinated people can matter.

They're not the same. They should not be equated. That's a huge misrepresentation.

 

[DisneyCane]

What makes us think the COVID vaccine will require everyone to get a shot every 6 months ongoing?

We've got study participants in this thread. Did I miss the posts where any of them are in studies getting a second booster/fourth dose now?

Did I miss the reports where there's a COVID variant that's escaped the current vaccine response?

Something I'm worried about based on the uncontrolled spread but hasn't happened yet. Something I was routinely told not to worry about. So, now I shouldn't worry about a variant developing that escapes the current vaccine until that happens, but I should worry about needing frequent boosters every year or more often that would only be required if a variant develops and continues to develop again and again that continually escapes the vaccine.

Which is it? COVID is mutating but slowly in ways that haven't evaded the vaccine and not worry or COVID is mutating rapidly in ways that require constant vaccine updates and boosters?

Can we pick a plan on which one we're going to worry about? Sheesh.

People who got a booster are still within the time period where the initial dosing was extremely highly effective. We won't see a change for booster recipients until it has been at least 6 months post booster.

From my limited research, it seems that vaccines like MMR need the booster dose to get it up to peak effectiveness. Not that the protection starts that high and quickly wanes.

The tetanus vaccine is the most similar I can think of to these vaccines but it needs a booster only every 10 years. As somebody (I think maybe you) said, this isn't like the flu shot because the flu shot is a different vaccine every year.

 

[lazyboy97o]

The flu vaccine, which is not particularly controversial except among the real anti-vax kook fringe, has only about a 50% participation rate, if that, in an average year. It requires only one shot per year. A vaccine that requires a shot every 6 months is just not going to have wide-scale adoption. I'm sorry, but it just won't. Not because people are against the vaccines, but just because people are busy and lazy. You can make all the arguments for it that you want, and many of them are good arguments. I'm just telling you the reality is that it won't happen.

The flu shot is annual because influenza successfully mutates that frequently. SARS-CoV-2 does not seem to be at that level.

I don't believe we will ever stop Covid from transmitting. Eradicating it is not going to be a thing. I base that on history. We have only actually eradicated one human virus -- smallpox -- in the entirety of human history. I don't think that means that we have to accept the same level of death and severe disease that we've seen over the past 18+ months. But elimination is also not something realistic.

Two of the three types of wild polio have been eradicated. Type 3 has been eliminated from all but two countries. It will likely remain endemic due to politics, not because it is some basic impossibility. There is a whole list of diseases that have been eliminated from the developed world and instead of trying huge chunks now just say it is impossible.

Since covid is contactable and transmissable by both vaccinated and unvaccinated, not only should the unvaccinated avoid close personal contact, but also the vaccinated. Both classes should make it their personal responsibility not to become an incubator for Covid.

Every disease for which there is a vaccine can be contracted by and transmitted by vaccinated persons. The Disneyland measles outbreak included vaccinated persons. This notion that the COVID vaccines are somehow different from other vaccines is just anti-vaccine bunk.