There's 8 months of tracking so far: immunity still intact.
Story as described by my teacher daughter who describes it thus to her "littles" (kindergarten, grades 1 and 2) about the spike protein which joins up with cell membranes in our bodies. The virus is like a hand, and the vaccine is like a mitten you put over the hand. The new varieties of virus are like a hand with a finger missing or an extra long finger. The vaccine still covers them pretty well. Sometime in the future maybe the virus will look like a hand with a finger coming out sideways, or three thumbs or extra fingers. Will the mitten or the sock fit? or will the scientists need to knit a new one? She teaches outside year round, so mittens and sock analogies make instant sense to everyone.
Moreover, 3 months may well be enough. Part of the reason I was stressing the lack of an animal reservoir a page or so back is because that makes eradication much, much easier.
But with effective test and trace, we could get proper control of the virus without a vaccine. If we'd locked down 2 weeks earlier and stayed locked down long enough (6 weeks probably would have been plenty) and then instituted effective test and trace and proper border controls, then we would have been counting infection rates in single figures for the past 6 months. And we would have had a full bounce back on the economy too.
That's not speculation, that's what the data shows.
If the vaccine gives 3 months coverage, that's probably enough to damp down this second peak completely.
FWIW, I strongly suspect the protection will last longer as the antibody levels are not the most important thing in viral immunity. But like most things Covid; we don't know yet.
It does seem rather surprising though that immunity after having had COVID should be lesser than that after having the vaccine. And it seems really weird that you should be able to get it twice, with the second infection being as bad or worse than the first. I can't think of any other disease for which that is the case (you might say chickenpox/shingles, but in that case the virus is never cleared from the body and is flaring up again; it's not really a fresh infection).
It does seem rather surprising though that immunity after having had COVID should be lesser than that after having the vaccine. And it seems really weird that you should be able to get it twice, with the second infection being as bad or worse than the first. I can't think of any other disease for which that is the case (you might say chickenpox/shingles, but in that case the virus is never cleared from the body and is flaring up again; it's not really a fresh infection).
Not necessarily. It does get quite technical but it is at the least theoretically possible for a vaccine to induce better protection than exposure to the disease. Happy to expand on this if you'd like.
When you catch a cold from a virus, is it always from a virus you haven't had yet?
Not always. It's certainly been widely reported that there are a few coronavirus's among the mix of cold viruses, and that it's possible to get a cold from those more than once. I don't know if the same is true of any of the other families of virus that cause colds.
So, this is a UK case report. Re-infection is possible with Covid-19.
I will point out three important things about this case
1. It appears that re-infection only occurred with a very high viral load
2. The second illness was demonstrably milder (indicating a degree of immunity).
3. I don't want to brush over this but it is only one case when literally millions have been infected so on the population level (especially when you consider point 1.) it remains unlikely to be a common phenomenon.
As I was saying quite recently, almost nothing in biology is binary. Immunity is not an on/off thing, it is a spectrum.
Ohh - go on. I don't know anything about friction. I always used to approximate to viscous damping (which is just F=Rdx/dt) and tell students that friction was a bit more complicated!
It has long been established that there is huge variety of viruses that cause a Cold and that many of these viruses are very mutation-prone and hence new strains are emerging all the time.
But I will quote this small exert from the paper
In view of the available data, it seems obvious that complete prevention of colds would only be possible by total long-term isolation from the community. While waiting for the next ship bound for Antarctica, however, many people might find solace in a report that suggests that intake of wine, especially red wine, may have a protective effect against the common cold.
So, this is a UK case report. Re-infection is possible with Covid-19.
I will point out three important things about this case
1. It appears that re-infection only occurred with a very high viral load
2. The second illness was demonstrably milder (indicating a degree of immunity).
3. I don't want to brush over this but it is only one case when literally millions have been infected so on the population level (especially when you consider point 1.) it remains unlikely to be a common phenomenon.
As I was saying quite recently, almost nothing in biology is binary. Immunity is not an on/off thing, it is a spectrum.
AFZ
Thanks AFZ - that reassures me that my previous general outlook was not wildly off-beam!
So, this is a UK case report. Re-infection is possible with Covid-19.
I will point out three important things about this case
1. It appears that re-infection only occurred with a very high viral load
2. The second illness was demonstrably milder (indicating a degree of immunity). 3. I don't want to brush over this but it is only one case when literally millions have been infected so on the population level (especially when you consider point 1.) it remains unlikely to be a common phenomenon.
As I was saying quite recently, almost nothing in biology is binary. Immunity is not an on/off thing, it is a spectrum.
AFZ
The bit in bold is what I'd like to highlight. The fact that reinfections are making the news and we can name the people who are known* to have been reinfected (rather than saying, "approximately 4,000 people were reinfected last week in Missouri") is actually very encouraging. It suggests that reinfection is in fact not a common thing at all, considering the huge number of people who have had it already and continue to be re-exposed. I would be inclined to wonder if the fraction who turn up with re-infections have perhaps some immune system defect--like the rare birds who catch chicken pox twice.
* Yes, of course there's the possibility that people are being re-infected left and right and we don't know about it because they're asymptomatic the second time. Or the first, for that matter. That would suck, because we'd still have people transmitting it all over. But I would sort of expect such a thing to have been noticed before now, if only because of the trials. Some of them have "let's swab everyone regardless of COVID status" built in at various milestones along the way, and with 30,000 plus in both of the big trials here, I would have thought such a thing would show up in the data by now, at least as something to be further investigated.
So, this is a UK case report. Re-infection is possible with Covid-19.
I will point out three important things about this case
1. It appears that re-infection only occurred with a very high viral load
2. The second illness was demonstrably milder (indicating a degree of immunity). 3. I don't want to brush over this but it is only one case when literally millions have been infected so on the population level (especially when you consider point 1.) it remains unlikely to be a common phenomenon.
As I was saying quite recently, almost nothing in biology is binary. Immunity is not an on/off thing, it is a spectrum.
AFZ
The bit in bold is what I'd like to highlight. The fact that reinfections are making the news and we can name the people who are known* to have been reinfected (rather than saying, "approximately 4,000 people were reinfected last week in Missouri") is actually very encouraging. It suggests that reinfection is in fact not a common thing at all, considering the huge number of people who have had it already and continue to be re-exposed. I would be inclined to wonder if the fraction who turn up with re-infections have perhaps some immune system defect--like the rare birds who catch chicken pox twice.
* Yes, of course there's the possibility that people are being re-infected left and right and we don't know about it because they're asymptomatic the second time. Or the first, for that matter. That would suck, because we'd still have people transmitting it all over. But I would sort of expect such a thing to have been noticed before now, if only because of the trials. Some of them have "let's swab everyone regardless of COVID status" built in at various milestones along the way, and with 30,000 plus in both of the big trials here, I would have thought such a thing would show up in the data by now, at least as something to be further investigated.
Exactly.
From early on, the phenomenon of so-called super-spreaders was identified. This is rare but important. But also not well understood.
In general, your infectivity - i.e. how likely you are to infect someone else is a function of how much virus you're shedding. How many tens or hundreds or thousands or millions of viral particles you are breathing out. In general, the viral load (i.e. how many of the buggers you have in your system) will correlate with your infectivity and will also correlate with your level of symptoms.
Of course, part of the issue with Covid-19 is that you can share the disease with others before you know you're ill as symptoms haven't developed. But someone who's ill enough to be in hospital will be shedding more viral particles than someone who's walking around and hasn't even got a cough yet (slight over-simplification). Which is why clinical staff are being exposed to very high levels of the virus and part of the answer as to why healthy people without any underlying conditions get sick and die. (ENT surgeons being the classic example of this - performing a throat examination puts you at very high risk of contracting Covid-19).
So, in essence, there is a correlation between how sick someone is and how infective they are. It's not a perfect correlation and there will probably be a point for most people where they are still unwell but not infective (I'll try to remember to explain about PIMS-TS tomorrow, which is a very good example of this).
Superspreaders are the exception and it's not clear how they can be so infective without having symptoms of their own. But I haven't looked at the evidence on that in a few months, so it might be better understood now.
So my answer ultimately is, that I doubt there are many people being re-infected and being asymptomatic. There are certainly a lot (A LOT) of people being exposed without getting unwell but that's not the same thing... Of course, the dividing line between exposed and not infected and asymptomatic infection is sometimes very hard to draw.
NYTimes article describing Science article speculating on what will happen with the virus eventually: "The Future of the Coronavirus? An Annoying Childhood Infection"
Ohh - go on. I don't know anything about friction. I always used to approximate to viscous damping (which is just F=Rdx/dt) and tell students that friction was a bit more complicated!
Hah! I was only thinking about the bog standard F≤μR . My thought was that the immune response can match the viral load up to a certain point but above a certain point the immune response is not sufficient to prevent the virus becoming established, just as if the force is high enough friction will be overcome and the object will start to move.
I wasn't planning on delving into advanced tribology.
Yes, it was the part of the article I understood best! (Actually, it was overall really interesting - thanks for the link, @alienfromzog.)
Barnabas62Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
edited January 17
Latest weekly update.
Week ending 16 January
Global:
Total cases: 94,931,099 (prev. 90,059,506)
New cases during the week: 4,871,593 (prev. 5,089,298)
Daily Average: 695,942 (prev. 727,043)
Total deaths: 2,029,835 (prev. 1,933,708)
New deaths during the week: 96,127 (prev. 90,602)
Daily Average: 13,732 (prev. 12,943)
Europe:
Total cases: 27,338,947 (prev. 25,748,078)
New cases during the week: 1,590,869 (prev. 1,710,996)
Daily Average: 227,267 (prev. 244,428)
Total deaths: 623,794 (prev. 586,261)
New deaths during the week: 37,533 (prev. 35,807)
Daily average: 5,362 (prev. 5,115)
USA:
Total cases: 24,306,043 (prev. 22,699,938)
New cases during the week: 1,606,105 (prev. 1,795,085)
Daily Average: 229,444 (prev. 256,441)
Total deaths: 405,261 (prev. 381,480)
New deaths during the week: 23,781 (prev. 22,795)
Daily Average: 3,397 (prev. 3,256)
Europe, with about a tenth of the global population, accounted for 33% of the global new cases and 39% of the global deaths during the week.
The USA, with less than 5% of the global population, accounted for 33% of the global new cases and 25% of the global deaths during the week.
All weekly new cases figures are down slightly, but all weekly new deaths are up. No doubt that relates to the lag between new cases and deaths, but it may mean we will see overall death rates begin to decline in a couple of weeks. The prediction is that as more folks in the most vulnerable groups get vaccinated, death rates will decline first, then hospitalisations, then new cases rates. We'll see.
@alienfromzog Just another poster saying she appreciates all you're contributing to this thread. My poor little brain can't grasp a lot of it - but it's really useful and informative! Thank you.
@alienfromzog Just another poster saying she appreciates all you're contributing to this thread. My poor little brain can't grasp a lot of it - but it's really useful and informative! Thank you.
Trump truly has made the USA a world leader - in covid deaths. He's "assisted"/ enabled/ been responsible for more than 400,000 such deaths during his last year in office.
That's an "achievement" that (we pray) the new administration won't be able to match!
Not a great week here with the coronavirus surge continuing in South Africa. To date, more than 1.3 million cases of coronavirus and 38 800 deaths have been recorded, figures may be higher in rural areas.
From today's Guardian, abridged. I don't often feel like a 3rd-world reject, but right now...
'South Africa will have to buy doses of Oxford-AstraZeneca’s Covid-19 vaccine at a price nearly 2.5 times higher than most European countries.
The African continent’s worst virus-hit country has ordered at least 1.5m shots of the vaccine from the Serum Institute of India (SII), expected in February 2021.
A senior SA health official on Thursday told AFP those doses would cost $5.25 (€4.32) each – nearly two and a half times the amount paid by most European countries.'
Apparently allowing the pharma companies to experiment on the populace doesn't count; only paying money does. Jesus. But I still wonder why SA didn't pay in -- did they not have the money or was it bad management on the part of government officials?
Dr Fauci, now the chief medical advisor to Mr. Biden has announced the US will contribute to the dissemination of COVID vaccines to third world countries as well as rejoin WHO.
Apparently allowing the pharma companies to experiment on the populace doesn't count; only paying money does. Jesus. But I still wonder why SA didn't pay in -- did they not have the money or was it bad management on the part of government officials?
AstraZeneca have said they’ll supply at cost until next summer. But if SA are supplied via production in India, maybe that manufacture is not at cost. That sounds odd to me, as pricing I would have imagined would go along with IP, which resides in the UK. That’s all I have read.
Apparently allowing the pharma companies to experiment on the populace doesn't count; only paying money does. Jesus. But I still wonder why SA didn't pay in -- did they not have the money or was it bad management on the part of government officials?
AstraZeneca have said they’ll supply at cost until next summer. But if SA are supplied via production in India, maybe that manufacture is not at cost. That sounds odd to me, as pricing I would have imagined would go along with IP, which resides in the UK. That’s all I have read.
What about shipping costs? The further away from the production facility, the higher the shipping fees. Seems like if SA has the proper facilities for production, they should get the license to produce their own as well as supply other African countries.
Dr Fauci, now the chief medical advisor to Mr. Biden has announced the US will contribute to the dissemination of COVID vaccines to third world countries as well as rejoin WHO.
Dr Fauci, now the chief medical advisor to Mr. Biden has announced the US will contribute to the dissemination of COVID vaccines to third world countries as well as rejoin WHO.
That'll make mean-spirited, faux-Christian right-wingers foam at the mouth.
Dr Fauci, now the chief medical advisor to Mr. Biden has announced the US will contribute to the dissemination of COVID vaccines to third world countries as well as rejoin WHO.
That'll make mean-spirited, faux-Christian right-wingers foam at the mouth.
I can hear some Christian nationalists' heads exploding now.
Apparently allowing the pharma companies to experiment on the populace doesn't count; only paying money does. Jesus. But I still wonder why SA didn't pay in -- did they not have the money or was it bad management on the part of government officials?
It's a good question @Ruth. South Africa is the wealthiest country in Africa. Our local Progressive Health Forum is asking why by this date and with the new variant strain causing havoc here and abroad, SA has neither a secured vaccine supply nor a plan for mass inoculation in the foreseeable future. Why couldn't South Africa manufacture its own vaccines?
There is no local equivalent to the Serum Institute of India. South Africa simply does not have large-scale vaccine manufacturing capability. The Biovac Institute – a public-private partnership between the South African government and a consortium of South African healthcare companies – is beginning to get into vaccine manufacture. But this capability is still in its infancy. It’s miniscule compared to the COVID-19 vaccine market.
There are difficulties specific to South Africa as a developing nation: the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine wouldn't be appropriate for mass vaccination, often in remote rural areas because it requires storage at -70C. A single-dose vaccine would work much better given the limited medical infrastructure in the country.
There are reasons to believe that because South Africa contributed to the R&D of safe vaccines (clinical vaccine trials by Johnson & Johnson alongside a partnership between AstraZeneca Plc and the University of Oxford), it was led to believe it would get priority at a bargain price, as did Brazil and Mexico. South Africa is also participating in the World Health Organisation’s Covid-19 Global Vaccine Access Facility – known as the COVAX facility – which aims to pool resources and share vaccine development risk.
What is equally iniquitous is that South African medical aid schemes for the more affluent minority will pay in full for their members to receive vaccines. The danger is that only urban communities will receive vaccines this coming year. Furthermore, the logistics of nationwide distribution may be beyond the capacities of the South African govt at this stage and that additional expense of revamping and equipping an out-of-date medical infrastructure may be too much.
I'm sure most posters here will appreciate that a virus has no nationality. Flights to the UK, to Europe and to the US as well as to Australia and New Zealand, are taking off throughout the day and night from major South African cities. Numerous young South Africans hold dual citizenship and are resident in both Africa and the West. Flight bans don't apply to them and trade continues unhindered. The importance of securing safe and affordable vaccines isn't a national issue or special pleading on the part of South Africa (or any other developing nation), it should be a global priority before more variant strains emerge in the country.
I know the NZ Prime Minister has said NZ is buying sufficient vaccines for Pacific Islands too. The vaccine will not be rolled out here until the second quarter of the year, as there has been no known community transfer for a few months, although there is currently a suspected case in Northland.
Because of this, and the fact that everyone entering NZ has to spend at least 14 days in managed isolation, fewer people are using the tracer app on their phones or signing in on track and trace registers, which is of concern given the more contagious strains that have developed.
I got the Pfizer jab today. The only reason why it is available in our small university town is that the University had the capacity to store it at -70C.
They say Dippin' Dots icecream shops can do this. There was speculation about a possible partnership...
Much to my frustration, there are NO vaccines in the St. Louis area (aside from trial participants being switched over from placebo), and no real prospect of any either. And everybody and their brother has decided to create their own freaking registration forms online--namely, about four major medical systems plus four health departments, who all have separate forms and separate requirements and separate bullshit to fill out. For the grand prize of being on the list (with 50,000 other people already) to receive notification of when you can call and try to arrange an appointment. That is to say, you aren't signing up for an appointment--just for them to notify you of a time and date when you can compete with the entire metro area to jam up the phone lines simultaneously.
I've been watching my county's info and they know how many people have been vaccinated from vaccines they distributed but not how many in the county have been vaccinated by the VA (veterans) or CVS/Walgreens (which are vaccinating the nursing homes) since they get the vaccine from the federal government and don't have to report to the county. Kaiser and Sutter Health medical systems who get theirs directly from the state government weren't reporting but now seem to be showing up in the county dashboard. The Indian Health Service which also gets doses from the Federal government has reported to the county. 30,000 are known to have gotten both shots, but, the county population is 1.9 million. One hopes CVS/Walgreens are covering all the nursing homes; I suspect the county has a better idea of where they all are. The new administration ideally will come up with a way that ensuring all levels of government have the necessary info so the different groups can coordinate. At least the number of new positives is going down.
Barnabas62Purgatory Host, 8th Day Host, Epiphanies Host
Latest weekly update.
Week ending 23 January
Global:
Total cases: 99,299,820 (prev. 94,931,099)
New cases during the week: 4,368,721 (prev. 4,871,593)
Daily Average: 624,103 (prev. 695,942)
Total deaths: 2,128,780 (prev. 2,029,835)
New deaths during the week: 98,945 (prev. 96,127)
Daily Average: 14,135 (prev. 13,732)
Europe:
Total cases: 28,881,266 (prev. 27,338,947)
New cases during the week: 1,542,319 (prev. 1,590,869)
Daily Average: 220,231 (prev. 227,267)
Total deaths: 662,285 (prev. 623,794)
New deaths during the week: 38,491 (prev. 37,533)
Daily average: 5,499 (prev. 5,362)
USA:
Total cases: 25,566,789 (prev. 24,306,043)
New cases during the week: 1,260,746 (prev. 1,606,105)
Daily Average: 180,107 (prev. 229,444)
Total deaths: 427,635 (prev. 405,261)
New deaths during the week: 22,374 (prev. 23,781)
Daily Average: 3,196 (prev. 3,397)
Europe, with about a tenth of the global population, accounted for 35% of the global new cases and 39% of the global deaths during the week.
The USA, with less than 5% of the global population, accounted for 29% of the global new cases and 23% of the global deaths during the week.
All weekly new cases figures are down. Global and European weekly new deaths are up, USA slightly down.
The new administration ideally will come up with a way that ensuring all levels of government have the necessary info so the different groups can coordinate. At least the number of new positives is going down.
I think the most important thing is availability of vaccines. If there's plenty of vaccine around, people will be able to get it easily. If there's not much around, you get the nonsense @Lamb Chopped describes.
I'm not going on anyone's call list for a vaccine yet - I know I'm not a priority, so me putting my name on a list now is just causing extra work for people that have better things to do. I'll probably check in on progress every month, to see how well the state is doing, but I'm not expecting to get near a vaccine until some time after Easter at the earliest.
There are no lists or numbers to call in the U.K. You get the call when your turn comes up, at that point they give you a number to call to make the appointment.
It’s working well, over 500,000 have had their first doses, but availability of vaccine may become an issue.
Presumably there's some kind of list, or lists. Otherwise how is it determined when "your turn comes up"?
What I meant was you don’t need to ask to be on a list, there are no web sites or phone numbers to ring, we are explicitly told not to phone our doctors, they will phone us.
Presumably there's some kind of list, or lists. Otherwise how is it determined when "your turn comes up"?
You can guess your place on the list (age, whether you've got one of a list of priority conditions, whether you're in a priority occupation), and then estimate when you'll get the jab. In my case, if the Scottish government distribution goes to plan and uptake is similar to the 'flu jab, I'll be getting my first jab at the end of March. Of course, the distribution plan is contingent on vaccine supply. And, the timing depends on uptake (I suspect that a lot of 'flu jab no-shows is a "it's just 'flu, I'll be OK" and uptake of the vaccine will be higher in the older population (once it gets to the 20-40s ... well, bets are off on uptake then, though as I want to have restrictions eased I hope they do get their shots). Added to which, if it's decided that school staff, bus drivers, emergency services etc should get priority then I move further down the list.
That's awful DT. If I was able to pray any more, you'd have them In a way, I'm glad my father died in July of non-covid causes and that I was allowed to be with him. The disease is in his building for a while, and is going to run through it.
The province of Saskatchewan has had more deaths in the first three weeks of January than it had in the whole of 2020. And is leading the way in case counts per 100,000 people in Canada.
This is the province where the premier disregarded public health advice, decided to wait and see 'how current measures work' before acting. In late Oct (2 months later than recommended), he ordered masks in communities of more than 5,000 population, rode that for 5 weeks before ordering masks everywhere. (WTF!) Meanwhile, as conservative gov'ts are wont to do, listened to business leaders first before doctors. Left businesses wide open until Christmas Day, then put in 50% capacity regulations. (double WTF) Now we're into a strong and much worse awful second wave. This is 10 times and more daily cases than we were in the summer.
Meanwhile the premier blames the gov't of Canada for everything. We've a delay of vaccines due to a ramp-up renovation of a factory apparently. The idea that vaccines are a magic bullet to kill the virus and pandemic.... The B1.1.7 variant from the UK is Ontario now....
I expect that we'll get vaccinated eventually - older adults that we are, who can control exposure will be second-last before the vaccine is available generally. Meanwhile, I fully expect that that the world will need a second round of vaccines by the summer for this or another variant. Perhaps more than that. My thinking, when I suppress my emotions about COVID-19, is that it's going to be at least into 2022 before this pandemic is under control given virus variants. Perhaps 2023. And I'm not meaning worldwide, I'm meaning within our western, wealthy countries. World-wide, perhaps 2025. What I'm thinking is that we'll all have the current vaccine by the fall of 2021. Then we'll have another wave, and because those in control want to believe it, they'll delay public health restrictions, and the next "new wave" of a variant strain will be here.
I have hopes for better things. For one reason, because every person who gets vaccinated is one less petri dish for the freaking virus to mutate within. (Which is why they're working on vaccines for minks, etc. as well. Nobody needs that sort of reservoir.)
If we can convince as many doubters as possible to get the vaccine, we cut down the opportunities for new variants, and therefore the need for changed vaccines. Which they are already at work on, just in case, or so I understand. (They'd have to be idiots not to be...)
I think that for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines, at least, changing the vaccine to target a variant is pretty straightforward - knowing the new viral protein sequence, you just modify the mRNA base sequence accordingly. The rest of the processing (encapsulation of the mRNA in a lipid nanoparticle) remains the same. I haven't heard whether or not additional clinical trials would be required.
Comments
Story as described by my teacher daughter who describes it thus to her "littles" (kindergarten, grades 1 and 2) about the spike protein which joins up with cell membranes in our bodies. The virus is like a hand, and the vaccine is like a mitten you put over the hand. The new varieties of virus are like a hand with a finger missing or an extra long finger. The vaccine still covers them pretty well. Sometime in the future maybe the virus will look like a hand with a finger coming out sideways, or three thumbs or extra fingers. Will the mitten or the sock fit? or will the scientists need to knit a new one? She teaches outside year round, so mittens and sock analogies make instant sense to everyone.
But with effective test and trace, we could get proper control of the virus without a vaccine. If we'd locked down 2 weeks earlier and stayed locked down long enough (6 weeks probably would have been plenty) and then instituted effective test and trace and proper border controls, then we would have been counting infection rates in single figures for the past 6 months. And we would have had a full bounce back on the economy too.
That's not speculation, that's what the data shows.
If the vaccine gives 3 months coverage, that's probably enough to damp down this second peak completely.
FWIW, I strongly suspect the protection will last longer as the antibody levels are not the most important thing in viral immunity. But like most things Covid; we don't know yet.
AFZ
Not necessarily. It does get quite technical but it is at the least theoretically possible for a vaccine to induce better protection than exposure to the disease. Happy to expand on this if you'd like.
AFZ
So, this is a UK case report. Re-infection is possible with Covid-19.
I will point out three important things about this case
1. It appears that re-infection only occurred with a very high viral load
2. The second illness was demonstrably milder (indicating a degree of immunity).
3. I don't want to brush over this but it is only one case when literally millions have been infected so on the population level (especially when you consider point 1.) it remains unlikely to be a common phenomenon.
As I was saying quite recently, almost nothing in biology is binary. Immunity is not an on/off thing, it is a spectrum.
AFZ
For those of us of a physicsy temperament I wonder whether the analogy of static friction may be apt.
This, I think, is a really good review paper on Coryzal infections (the pretentious, medical name for the common cold), from the Lancet: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7112468/
(That's a free link to the whole text)
It has long been established that there is huge variety of viruses that cause a Cold and that many of these viruses are very mutation-prone and hence new strains are emerging all the time.
But I will quote this small exert from the paper
AFZ
Thanks AFZ - that reassures me that my previous general outlook was not wildly off-beam!
The bit in bold is what I'd like to highlight. The fact that reinfections are making the news and we can name the people who are known* to have been reinfected (rather than saying, "approximately 4,000 people were reinfected last week in Missouri") is actually very encouraging. It suggests that reinfection is in fact not a common thing at all, considering the huge number of people who have had it already and continue to be re-exposed. I would be inclined to wonder if the fraction who turn up with re-infections have perhaps some immune system defect--like the rare birds who catch chicken pox twice.
* Yes, of course there's the possibility that people are being re-infected left and right and we don't know about it because they're asymptomatic the second time. Or the first, for that matter. That would suck, because we'd still have people transmitting it all over. But I would sort of expect such a thing to have been noticed before now, if only because of the trials. Some of them have "let's swab everyone regardless of COVID status" built in at various milestones along the way, and with 30,000 plus in both of the big trials here, I would have thought such a thing would show up in the data by now, at least as something to be further investigated.
Exactly.
From early on, the phenomenon of so-called super-spreaders was identified. This is rare but important. But also not well understood.
In general, your infectivity - i.e. how likely you are to infect someone else is a function of how much virus you're shedding. How many tens or hundreds or thousands or millions of viral particles you are breathing out. In general, the viral load (i.e. how many of the buggers you have in your system) will correlate with your infectivity and will also correlate with your level of symptoms.
Of course, part of the issue with Covid-19 is that you can share the disease with others before you know you're ill as symptoms haven't developed. But someone who's ill enough to be in hospital will be shedding more viral particles than someone who's walking around and hasn't even got a cough yet (slight over-simplification). Which is why clinical staff are being exposed to very high levels of the virus and part of the answer as to why healthy people without any underlying conditions get sick and die. (ENT surgeons being the classic example of this - performing a throat examination puts you at very high risk of contracting Covid-19).
So, in essence, there is a correlation between how sick someone is and how infective they are. It's not a perfect correlation and there will probably be a point for most people where they are still unwell but not infective (I'll try to remember to explain about PIMS-TS tomorrow, which is a very good example of this).
Superspreaders are the exception and it's not clear how they can be so infective without having symptoms of their own. But I haven't looked at the evidence on that in a few months, so it might be better understood now.
So my answer ultimately is, that I doubt there are many people being re-infected and being asymptomatic. There are certainly a lot (A LOT) of people being exposed without getting unwell but that's not the same thing... Of course, the dividing line between exposed and not infected and asymptomatic infection is sometimes very hard to draw.
AFZ
Hah! I was only thinking about the bog standard F≤μR . My thought was that the immune response can match the viral load up to a certain point but above a certain point the immune response is not sufficient to prevent the virus becoming established, just as if the force is high enough friction will be overcome and the object will start to move.
I wasn't planning on delving into advanced tribology.
Week ending 16 January
Global:
Total cases: 94,931,099 (prev. 90,059,506)
New cases during the week: 4,871,593 (prev. 5,089,298)
Daily Average: 695,942 (prev. 727,043)
Total deaths: 2,029,835 (prev. 1,933,708)
New deaths during the week: 96,127 (prev. 90,602)
Daily Average: 13,732 (prev. 12,943)
Europe:
Total cases: 27,338,947 (prev. 25,748,078)
New cases during the week: 1,590,869 (prev. 1,710,996)
Daily Average: 227,267 (prev. 244,428)
Total deaths: 623,794 (prev. 586,261)
New deaths during the week: 37,533 (prev. 35,807)
Daily average: 5,362 (prev. 5,115)
USA:
Total cases: 24,306,043 (prev. 22,699,938)
New cases during the week: 1,606,105 (prev. 1,795,085)
Daily Average: 229,444 (prev. 256,441)
Total deaths: 405,261 (prev. 381,480)
New deaths during the week: 23,781 (prev. 22,795)
Daily Average: 3,397 (prev. 3,256)
Europe, with about a tenth of the global population, accounted for 33% of the global new cases and 39% of the global deaths during the week.
The USA, with less than 5% of the global population, accounted for 33% of the global new cases and 25% of the global deaths during the week.
All weekly new cases figures are down slightly, but all weekly new deaths are up. No doubt that relates to the lag between new cases and deaths, but it may mean we will see overall death rates begin to decline in a couple of weeks. The prediction is that as more folks in the most vulnerable groups get vaccinated, death rates will decline first, then hospitalisations, then new cases rates. We'll see.
That's an "achievement" that (we pray) the new administration won't be able to match!
From today's Guardian, abridged. I don't often feel like a 3rd-world reject, but right now...
'South Africa will have to buy doses of Oxford-AstraZeneca’s Covid-19 vaccine at a price nearly 2.5 times higher than most European countries.
The African continent’s worst virus-hit country has ordered at least 1.5m shots of the vaccine from the Serum Institute of India (SII), expected in February 2021.
A senior SA health official on Thursday told AFP those doses would cost $5.25 (€4.32) each – nearly two and a half times the amount paid by most European countries.'
AstraZeneca have said they’ll supply at cost until next summer. But if SA are supplied via production in India, maybe that manufacture is not at cost. That sounds odd to me, as pricing I would have imagined would go along with IP, which resides in the UK. That’s all I have read.
What about shipping costs? The further away from the production facility, the higher the shipping fees. Seems like if SA has the proper facilities for production, they should get the license to produce their own as well as supply other African countries.
Good man!
That'll make mean-spirited, faux-Christian right-wingers foam at the mouth.
I can hear some Christian nationalists' heads exploding now.
It's a good question @Ruth. South Africa is the wealthiest country in Africa. Our local Progressive Health Forum is asking why by this date and with the new variant strain causing havoc here and abroad, SA has neither a secured vaccine supply nor a plan for mass inoculation in the foreseeable future. Why couldn't South Africa manufacture its own vaccines?
There is no local equivalent to the Serum Institute of India. South Africa simply does not have large-scale vaccine manufacturing capability. The Biovac Institute – a public-private partnership between the South African government and a consortium of South African healthcare companies – is beginning to get into vaccine manufacture. But this capability is still in its infancy. It’s miniscule compared to the COVID-19 vaccine market.
There are difficulties specific to South Africa as a developing nation: the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine wouldn't be appropriate for mass vaccination, often in remote rural areas because it requires storage at -70C. A single-dose vaccine would work much better given the limited medical infrastructure in the country.
There are reasons to believe that because South Africa contributed to the R&D of safe vaccines (clinical vaccine trials by Johnson & Johnson alongside a partnership between AstraZeneca Plc and the University of Oxford), it was led to believe it would get priority at a bargain price, as did Brazil and Mexico. South Africa is also participating in the World Health Organisation’s Covid-19 Global Vaccine Access Facility – known as the COVAX facility – which aims to pool resources and share vaccine development risk.
What is equally iniquitous is that South African medical aid schemes for the more affluent minority will pay in full for their members to receive vaccines. The danger is that only urban communities will receive vaccines this coming year. Furthermore, the logistics of nationwide distribution may be beyond the capacities of the South African govt at this stage and that additional expense of revamping and equipping an out-of-date medical infrastructure may be too much.
I'm sure most posters here will appreciate that a virus has no nationality. Flights to the UK, to Europe and to the US as well as to Australia and New Zealand, are taking off throughout the day and night from major South African cities. Numerous young South Africans hold dual citizenship and are resident in both Africa and the West. Flight bans don't apply to them and trade continues unhindered. The importance of securing safe and affordable vaccines isn't a national issue or special pleading on the part of South Africa (or any other developing nation), it should be a global priority before more variant strains emerge in the country.
Because of this, and the fact that everyone entering NZ has to spend at least 14 days in managed isolation, fewer people are using the tracer app on their phones or signing in on track and trace registers, which is of concern given the more contagious strains that have developed.
Much to my frustration, there are NO vaccines in the St. Louis area (aside from trial participants being switched over from placebo), and no real prospect of any either. And everybody and their brother has decided to create their own freaking registration forms online--namely, about four major medical systems plus four health departments, who all have separate forms and separate requirements and separate bullshit to fill out. For the grand prize of being on the list (with 50,000 other people already) to receive notification of when you can call and try to arrange an appointment. That is to say, you aren't signing up for an appointment--just for them to notify you of a time and date when you can compete with the entire metro area to jam up the phone lines simultaneously.
This is so fucked.
Week ending 23 January
Global:
Total cases: 99,299,820 (prev. 94,931,099)
New cases during the week: 4,368,721 (prev. 4,871,593)
Daily Average: 624,103 (prev. 695,942)
Total deaths: 2,128,780 (prev. 2,029,835)
New deaths during the week: 98,945 (prev. 96,127)
Daily Average: 14,135 (prev. 13,732)
Europe:
Total cases: 28,881,266 (prev. 27,338,947)
New cases during the week: 1,542,319 (prev. 1,590,869)
Daily Average: 220,231 (prev. 227,267)
Total deaths: 662,285 (prev. 623,794)
New deaths during the week: 38,491 (prev. 37,533)
Daily average: 5,499 (prev. 5,362)
USA:
Total cases: 25,566,789 (prev. 24,306,043)
New cases during the week: 1,260,746 (prev. 1,606,105)
Daily Average: 180,107 (prev. 229,444)
Total deaths: 427,635 (prev. 405,261)
New deaths during the week: 22,374 (prev. 23,781)
Daily Average: 3,196 (prev. 3,397)
Europe, with about a tenth of the global population, accounted for 35% of the global new cases and 39% of the global deaths during the week.
The USA, with less than 5% of the global population, accounted for 29% of the global new cases and 23% of the global deaths during the week.
All weekly new cases figures are down. Global and European weekly new deaths are up, USA slightly down.
I think the most important thing is availability of vaccines. If there's plenty of vaccine around, people will be able to get it easily. If there's not much around, you get the nonsense @Lamb Chopped describes.
I'm not going on anyone's call list for a vaccine yet - I know I'm not a priority, so me putting my name on a list now is just causing extra work for people that have better things to do. I'll probably check in on progress every month, to see how well the state is doing, but I'm not expecting to get near a vaccine until some time after Easter at the earliest.
It’s working well, over 500,000 have had their first doses, but availability of vaccine may become an issue.
It’s projected that I’ll get mine between February and April - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55045639
It’s determined by age etc - heres the breakdown - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55045639
“You'll be invited to book an appointment as soon as it's your turn, by phone or letter.”
The province of Saskatchewan has had more deaths in the first three weeks of January than it had in the whole of 2020. And is leading the way in case counts per 100,000 people in Canada.
This is the province where the premier disregarded public health advice, decided to wait and see 'how current measures work' before acting. In late Oct (2 months later than recommended), he ordered masks in communities of more than 5,000 population, rode that for 5 weeks before ordering masks everywhere. (WTF!) Meanwhile, as conservative gov'ts are wont to do, listened to business leaders first before doctors. Left businesses wide open until Christmas Day, then put in 50% capacity regulations. (double WTF) Now we're into a strong and much worse awful second wave. This is 10 times and more daily cases than we were in the summer.
Meanwhile the premier blames the gov't of Canada for everything. We've a delay of vaccines due to a ramp-up renovation of a factory apparently. The idea that vaccines are a magic bullet to kill the virus and pandemic.... The B1.1.7 variant from the UK is Ontario now....
I expect that we'll get vaccinated eventually - older adults that we are, who can control exposure will be second-last before the vaccine is available generally. Meanwhile, I fully expect that that the world will need a second round of vaccines by the summer for this or another variant. Perhaps more than that. My thinking, when I suppress my emotions about COVID-19, is that it's going to be at least into 2022 before this pandemic is under control given virus variants. Perhaps 2023. And I'm not meaning worldwide, I'm meaning within our western, wealthy countries. World-wide, perhaps 2025. What I'm thinking is that we'll all have the current vaccine by the fall of 2021. Then we'll have another wave, and because those in control want to believe it, they'll delay public health restrictions, and the next "new wave" of a variant strain will be here.
If we can convince as many doubters as possible to get the vaccine, we cut down the opportunities for new variants, and therefore the need for changed vaccines. Which they are already at work on, just in case, or so I understand. (They'd have to be idiots not to be...)