• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

I get vaccine hesitancy, but...

Dave Watchman

Active Member
Remember, "given the high vaccine uptake," which means lots of people are getting vacccinated. If you have a population of 80% vaccinated, 20% not, and "imperfect efficacy," then sure you may have more deaths among the larger group -- simply because it's a larger group. But it will not be in the same proportion. Later in the same article that you cite, Imperial College's Professor Neil Ferguson said current UK COVID trends "are looking very positive, and support the decision to substantially relax restrictions". And he also said vaccines have played a major role in reducing hospital admissions and deaths, as well as significantly reducing transmission.

I know.

I know.

I though of this too.

It's like if the whole world got both jabs.

But it still can't explain the columns in that chart where the unvaccinated clearly won the fight against Covid.

And don't forget this is against the dreaded Delta Variant.

I would rather find myself in their number, the unvaccinated, when the saints go marching in.

aMqtwce.jpeg


Unvaccinated: 23 / 19,573 = 0.0011750881316099
Fully vaccinated: 12 / 1,785 = 0.0067226890756303
Difference: 0.0067226890756303 / 0.0011750881316099 = 5.721x

The fully vaccinated crowds is about 5.721 times more likely to die, according to this data.

I want to see what the next chart looks like.

This sample is too small.
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
I know.

I know.

I though of this too.

It's like if the whole world got both jabs.

But it still can't explain the columns in that chart where the unvaccinated clearly won the fight against Covid.

And don't forget this is against the dreaded Delta Variant.

I would rather find myself in their number, the unvaccinated, when the saints go marching in.

aMqtwce.jpeg


Unvaccinated: 23 / 19,573 = 0.0011750881316099
Fully vaccinated: 12 / 1,785 = 0.0067226890756303
Difference: 0.0067226890756303 / 0.0011750881316099 = 5.721x

The fully vaccinated crowds is about 5.721 times more likely to die, according to this data.

I want to see what the next chart looks like.

This sample is too small.
Where did you find this table? I'd like to look at it myself, in context, because there's something seriously amiss. Much larger data samples suggest something far, far different.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
It's fairly easy actually.

Elementary my Dear Watson.

Even with me being on my side of the pond.



That's not the way it worked for 800,000 Filipino kids in 2016 and a same style of vaccine made for dengue.

gettyimages-921966814_custom-3f17f93a66253d5bde5d53213373194981c07101-s1200.jpg


Sometimes the mRNA Vaccine backfires and goes sideways and causes a person's immune system to "drop it's shields'. It transports the pathogen directly into the cell, Trogan horse style.

It happened with a vaccine made for chickens.

And it turned dengue fever into dengue hemorrhagic fever in the Filipino kids.

I just typed that from memory.

If ADE were to appear in Covid, we would see it in an example where higher numbers of the vaccinated would succumb to the illness. And the unvaccinated would show lower numbers of an impact. Like how that chart is showing now.

I still think that we'll know more in two weeks.

You can google for more.
Dengue is not relevant: COVID-19 Vaccines: Should We Fear ADE? - PubMed
QUOTE

Abstract
Might COVID-19 vaccines sensitize humans to antibody-dependent enhanced (ADE) breakthrough infections? This is unlikely because coronavirus diseases in humans lack the clinical, epidemiological, biological, or pathological attributes of ADE disease exemplified by dengue viruses (DENV). In contrast to DENV, SARS and MERS CoVs predominantly infect respiratory epithelium, not macrophages. Severe disease centers on older persons with preexisting conditions and not infants or individuals with previous coronavirus infections. Live virus challenge of animals given SARS or MERS vaccines resulted in vaccine hypersensitivity reactions (VAH), similar to those in humans given inactivated measles or respiratory syncytial virus vaccines. Safe and effective COVID-19 vaccines must avoid VAH.

Keywords: SARS-CoV-2; T cells; antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE); coronavirus; dengue; dengue hemorrhagic fever; hypersensitivity; immunopathology; vaccine; vaccine adverse events.

© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail: [email protected].

UNQUOTE
 

Dave Watchman

Active Member
Where did you find this table? I'd like to look at it myself, in context, because there's something seriously amiss. Much larger data samples suggest something far, far different.

I put the link to it right below the chart when I first posted it on page one.

aMqtwce.jpeg



5ee231255d.gif
 

Dave Watchman

Active Member

Alls you gotta do is google it man.

Or not and just enjoy the day.

Are you in the UK?

I'm also a UVb guy, so I like Vitamine D.

I always think of the UK and Russia as cloudy and overcast with reduced natural sunlight.

That's another reason why I keep my eye on them.

Russia is moving on up the case number today, 14,723.

This map shows how much higher up the UK is from me across the pond:

BqnIzn2.png


London is like the equivalent to Hudson Bay.

And you can try this link:

Antibody-dependent enhancement and SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and therapies

Abstract
Antibody-based drugs and vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are being expedited through preclinical and clinical development. Data from the study of SARS-CoV and other respiratory viruses suggest that anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies could exacerbate COVID-19 through antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE).

Previous respiratory syncytial virus and dengue virus vaccine studies revealed human clinical safety risks related to ADE, resulting in failed vaccine trials. Here, we describe key ADE mechanisms and discuss mitigation strategies for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and therapies in development. We also outline recently published data to evaluate the risks and opportunities for antibody-based protection against SARS-CoV-2.

Conclusion
ADE has been observed in SARS, MERS and other human respiratory virus infections including RSV and measles, which suggests a real risk of ADE for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and antibody-based interventions. However, clinical data has not yet fully established a role for ADE in human COVID-19 pathology. Steps to reduce the risks of ADE from immunotherapies include the induction or delivery of high doses of potent neutralizing antibodies, rather than lower concentrations of non-neutralizing antibodies that would be more likely to cause ADE.

Antibody-dependent enhancement and SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and therapies | Nature Microbiology

This one scroll down for:

Discussion
Our knowledge of B-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination remains incomplete. We urgently need information about the nature of polyclonal vaccine-induced responses as well as unbiased, in depth analyses of plasmablast responses. Our data provide important new insights into these responses in comparison with immune responses to natural infection. Indeed, SARS-CoV-2 infection results in a very heterogeneous antibody response to the spike protein in terms of antibody quantity. In contrast, mRNA vaccination appears to induce a high antibody response of relatively homogenous titers.

However, we also found that vaccinees generate more non-neutralizing antibodies than COVID-19 survivors resulting in a lower ratio of neutralizing to binding antibodies. These data were already apparent in the early phase clinical trials but remained unrecognized at the time (Walsh et al., 2020). Interestingly, low titer convalescent serum had the highest relative amount of neutralizing antibodies, whereas the proportion of binding antibodies was increased in sera with higher measured antibody titers. The majority of plasmablasts sampled after vaccination do, in fact, produce non-neutralizing antibodies. Two recent studies have performed a similarly unbiased plasmablast analysis for individuals naturally infected with SARS-CoV-2 (Cho et al., 2021; Huang et al., 2021). Of course, the antibody response after SARS-CoV-2 infection is not only targeting the spike protein but several other proteins expressed by the virus. When accounting for spike binding only, these studies report proportions of 44% and 25% neutralizing antibodies (Cho et al., 2021; Huang et al., 2021). While plasmablast analysis is in general not quantitative (e.g. one clone per clonotype is selected etc.) our analysis of post-vaccination plasmablasts found a lower number of neutralizing antibodies (17%).

Future studies are needed to reveal the role of non-neutralizing antibodies in SARS-CoV-2 immune protection. Indeed, antibody functions other than neutralization have been shown to correlate with protection (Bartsch et al., 2021; Gorman et al., 2021; Schäfer et al., 2021). The importance of absolute antibody titers and not ratios is underscored by the fact that post-vaccination neutralization titers were equal to or exceeded the titers found in the high responder convalescent group.

The plasmablast response to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination is dominated by non-neutralizing antibodies and targets both the NTD and the RBD

The articles claim a real risk of ADE for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and antibody-based interventions, but that the clinical data has not yet fully established.

We watch it unfold in real time.

That's why I'm looking at charts from the UK.

I can tell you guys something that you may not know, smarter eyebrows than mine have been raised over that chart this weekend.

It's like, Uh OH Spaghettio
 

Evangelicalhumanist

"Truth" isn't a thing...
Premium Member
Thank you, I didn't spot that. I will try to force my miniscule brain into understanding at least a little of what's presented in that link, although it's sure to cause a headache. Do you know how many words are in that over 2 syllables long?!? :D:rolleyes:
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
Alls you gotta do is google it man.

Or not and just enjoy the day.

Are you in the UK?

I'm also a UVb guy, so I like Vitamine D.

I always think of the UK and Russia as cloudy and overcast with reduced natural sunlight.

That's another reason why I keep my eye on them.

Russia is moving on up the case number today, 14,723.

This map shows how much higher up the UK is from me across the pond:

BqnIzn2.png


London is like the equivalent to Hudson Bay.

And you can try this link:

Antibody-dependent enhancement and SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and therapies

Abstract
Antibody-based drugs and vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) are being expedited through preclinical and clinical development. Data from the study of SARS-CoV and other respiratory viruses suggest that anti-SARS-CoV-2 antibodies could exacerbate COVID-19 through antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE).

Previous respiratory syncytial virus and dengue virus vaccine studies revealed human clinical safety risks related to ADE, resulting in failed vaccine trials. Here, we describe key ADE mechanisms and discuss mitigation strategies for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and therapies in development. We also outline recently published data to evaluate the risks and opportunities for antibody-based protection against SARS-CoV-2.

Conclusion
ADE has been observed in SARS, MERS and other human respiratory virus infections including RSV and measles, which suggests a real risk of ADE for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and antibody-based interventions. However, clinical data has not yet fully established a role for ADE in human COVID-19 pathology. Steps to reduce the risks of ADE from immunotherapies include the induction or delivery of high doses of potent neutralizing antibodies, rather than lower concentrations of non-neutralizing antibodies that would be more likely to cause ADE.

Antibody-dependent enhancement and SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and therapies | Nature Microbiology

This one scroll down for:

Discussion
Our knowledge of B-cell responses to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination remains incomplete. We urgently need information about the nature of polyclonal vaccine-induced responses as well as unbiased, in depth analyses of plasmablast responses. Our data provide important new insights into these responses in comparison with immune responses to natural infection. Indeed, SARS-CoV-2 infection results in a very heterogeneous antibody response to the spike protein in terms of antibody quantity. In contrast, mRNA vaccination appears to induce a high antibody response of relatively homogenous titers.

However, we also found that vaccinees generate more non-neutralizing antibodies than COVID-19 survivors resulting in a lower ratio of neutralizing to binding antibodies. These data were already apparent in the early phase clinical trials but remained unrecognized at the time (Walsh et al., 2020). Interestingly, low titer convalescent serum had the highest relative amount of neutralizing antibodies, whereas the proportion of binding antibodies was increased in sera with higher measured antibody titers. The majority of plasmablasts sampled after vaccination do, in fact, produce non-neutralizing antibodies. Two recent studies have performed a similarly unbiased plasmablast analysis for individuals naturally infected with SARS-CoV-2 (Cho et al., 2021; Huang et al., 2021). Of course, the antibody response after SARS-CoV-2 infection is not only targeting the spike protein but several other proteins expressed by the virus. When accounting for spike binding only, these studies report proportions of 44% and 25% neutralizing antibodies (Cho et al., 2021; Huang et al., 2021). While plasmablast analysis is in general not quantitative (e.g. one clone per clonotype is selected etc.) our analysis of post-vaccination plasmablasts found a lower number of neutralizing antibodies (17%).

Future studies are needed to reveal the role of non-neutralizing antibodies in SARS-CoV-2 immune protection. Indeed, antibody functions other than neutralization have been shown to correlate with protection (Bartsch et al., 2021; Gorman et al., 2021; Schäfer et al., 2021). The importance of absolute antibody titers and not ratios is underscored by the fact that post-vaccination neutralization titers were equal to or exceeded the titers found in the high responder convalescent group.

The plasmablast response to SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination is dominated by non-neutralizing antibodies and targets both the NTD and the RBD

The articles claim a real risk of ADE for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines and antibody-based interventions, but that the clinical data has not yet fully established.

We watch it unfold in real time.

That's why I'm looking at charts from the UK.

I can tell you guys something that you may not know, smarter eyebrows than mine have been raised over that chart this weekend.

It's like, Uh OH Spaghettio
That is a discussion of theoretical potential from last September, before any of the vaccine trials were signed off.

It's out of date by 9 months.

Instead of reheating out of date papers, why not read something more up to date, that takes account of the huge experience we have built up since those papers were written, now that hundreds of millions of doses have been given across the world? For example this: https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/91648 from March this year.

QUOTE

ADE a Non-Issue With COVID Vaccines

Scientists say that ADE is pretty much a non-issue with COVID-19 vaccines, but what are they basing this on?


From the early stages of COVID-19 vaccine development, scientists sought to target a SARS-CoV-2 protein that was least likely to cause ADE. For example, when they found out that targeting the nucleoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 might cause ADE, they quickly abandoned that approach. The safest route seemed to be targeting the S2 subunit of the spike protein, and they ran with that, wrote Derek Lowe, PhD, in his Science Translational Medicine blog "In the Pipeline."

Scientists designed animal studies to look for ADE. They looked for it in human trials, and they've been looking for it in the real-world data for COVID-19 vaccines with emergency use authorization. So far, they haven't seen signs of it. In fact, the opposite is happening, Lowe noted.

"[W]hat seems to be beyond doubt is that the vaccinated subjects, over and over, show up with no severe coronavirus cases and no hospitalizations. That is the opposite of what you would expect if ADE were happening," he wrote.


Furthermore, ADE is an acute problem, and it can be very dramatic. If it was an issue with these vaccines, we would have spotted it by now, said Brian Lichty, PhD, an associate professor in pathology and molecular medicine at McMaster University in Toronto.

"It'll kill you quickly. In all the places I'm aware of ADE happening, it is an acute, mostly cytokine-driven event," he told MedPage Today.

The one exception may be an inactivated whole-cell, or "killed," vaccine developed by China. That vaccine uses alum, the same adjuvant that was used in the measles and RSV vaccines that caused ADE in the 1960s. The Chinese inactivated whole-cell vaccine could "conceivably" generate ADE like those older vaccines, according to Bloom.

"I don't think that vaccine is ever going to see the light of day in the U.S., and it may not even be worth mentioning. There have been no actual cases of ADE with the Chinese whole-cell killed vaccine, or if so, it hasn't been reported," he said.


UNQUOTE

The article goes on to explain some of the reasons why ADE is far less likely with these new technology vaccines than with more traditional types.
 
Last edited:

Dave Watchman

Active Member
That is a discussion of theoretical potential from last September, before any of the vaccine trials were signed off.

It's out of date by 9 months.

Instead of reheating out of date papers, why not read something more up to date, that takes account of the huge experience we have built up since those papers were written, now that hundreds of millions of doses have been given across the world? For example this: https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/91648 from March this year.

QUOTE

ADE a Non-Issue With COVID Vaccines

Scientists say that ADE is pretty much a non-issue with COVID-19 vaccines, but what are they basing this on?


From the early stages of COVID-19 vaccine development, scientists sought to target a SARS-CoV-2 protein that was least likely to cause ADE. For example, when they found out that targeting the nucleoprotein of SARS-CoV-2 might cause ADE, they quickly abandoned that approach. The safest route seemed to be targeting the S2 subunit of the spike protein, and they ran with that, wrote Derek Lowe, PhD, in his Science Translational Medicine blog "In the Pipeline."

Scientists designed animal studies to look for ADE. They looked for it in human trials, and they've been looking for it in the real-world data for COVID-19 vaccines with emergency use authorization. So far, they haven't seen signs of it. In fact, the opposite is happening, Lowe noted.

"[W]hat seems to be beyond doubt is that the vaccinated subjects, over and over, show up with no severe coronavirus cases and no hospitalizations. That is the opposite of what you would expect if ADE were happening," he wrote.


Furthermore, ADE is an acute problem, and it can be very dramatic. If it was an issue with these vaccines, we would have spotted it by now, said Brian Lichty, PhD, an associate professor in pathology and molecular medicine at McMaster University in Toronto.

"It'll kill you quickly. In all the places I'm aware of ADE happening, it is an acute, mostly cytokine-driven event," he told MedPage Today.

The one exception may be an inactivated whole-cell, or "killed," vaccine developed by China. That vaccine uses alum, the same adjuvant that was used in the measles and RSV vaccines that caused ADE in the 1960s. The Chinese inactivated whole-cell vaccine could "conceivably" generate ADE like those older vaccines, according to Bloom.

"I don't think that vaccine is ever going to see the light of day in the U.S., and it may not even be worth mentioning. There have been no actual cases of ADE with the Chinese whole-cell killed vaccine, or if so, it hasn't been reported," he said.


UNQUOTE

The article goes on to explain some of the reasons why ADE is far less likely with these new technology vaccines than with more traditional types.

Alrighty then.

You win the internet today.
 
Top