4 ms·

> My fear is that a lot of people won't bother with a vax if they think there's a 'cure'. Interesting. Indeed, should people bother with a vax if there's a hig

by rajup 5y ago

> My fear is that a lot of people won't bother with a vax if they think there's a 'cure'. Interesting. Indeed, should people bother with a vax if there's a highly effective cure? Is it worth all the teeth-gnashing and hair pulling on the part of the medical establishment, political establishment and media about people who would rather get COVID than get the vaccine? IMO this cure (once it starts rolling out ofc) is a reason to start rolling back vaccine and mask mandates rather than impose more mandates. [Disclaimer: Fully vaxxed, will take a booster, etc]

tsol 5y ago
Then you have the issue of people continuing to spread it to those who can't take a vaccine, including the immunocompromised. There is also the worry of the effects of long covid. Just yesterday I was reading a thread on here of people complaining about experiences of their loved ones with long term covid after effects not being able to find relief from doctors because, well, we still don't even know what causes it. Better to avoid an infection that let a virus ravage through your body hoping medication can reverse all the effects on the body
- orra 5y ago
  > spread it to those who can't take a vaccine, including the immunocompromised. I agree we should get vaccinated to reduce spread but, good news, this is wrong. UK clinical guidelines[1] state the immunocompromised and the immunosuppressed should get vaccinated. In fact, they basically recommend everybody be vaccinated. Pregnant? Yes. Mild allergies? Yes. History of anaphylaxis caused by a specific ingredient in the vaccine? Speak to a a specialist who should offer (where possible) an alternative vaccine. Moreover we know two doses of the vaccines produce an antibody response in the immunosuppressed. That said, three doses is a good idea[2] to boost that response to a more typical level. [1] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-the-green-book-chapter-14a https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-the-gree... [2] https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/1380269877009743872 https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/138026987700974387... and preceding thread
jollybean 5y ago
"should people bother with a vax if there's a highly effective cure?" Yes. COVID danger is it's virality, not it's lethality. 100% vaccinated population even at only 85% effectiveness means R0 is well below 1 and COVID cannot spread. 100% of COVID patients treated at 85% effectiveness of antiviral therapy means probably well over 1/2 the population still gets COVID, that's devastating. If this were about a non-communicable disease, then probably the vaccine would be a slightly better idea, but due to virality there's no doubt vaxxes are better. The best is to have both. Finally, the vaxx is $20, antiviral is $700, which is material. That said, if the 'cure' were 100% perfect, no side effects, cost $1 and could be given at any time after infection and prevents any further adverse effects, then we could probably just settle on that if we had to. I don't suspect we're going to hear a lot about this in the press, because the 'narrative' still needs to be 'get vaccinated'. What will happen is the CFR will come down to to this and other measures behind the scenes so to speak. Unless this thing comes down to $50 and is something any doctor can prescribe willy-nilly easy-peasy in which case I think there would be a big media campaign to 'inform us'.

by rajup 5y ago

tsol 5y ago

Then you have the issue of people continuing to spread it to those who can't take a vaccine, including the immunocompromised. There is also the worry of the effects of long covid. Just yesterday I was reading a thread on here of people complaining about experiences of their loved ones with long term covid after effects not being able to find relief from doctors because, well, we still don't even know what causes it. Better to avoid an infection that let a virus ravage through your body hoping medication can reverse all the effects on the body

orra 5y ago
> spread it to those who can't take a vaccine, including the immunocompromised. I agree we should get vaccinated to reduce spread but, good news, this is wrong. UK clinical guidelines[1] state the immunocompromised and the immunosuppressed should get vaccinated. In fact, they basically recommend everybody be vaccinated. Pregnant? Yes. Mild allergies? Yes. History of anaphylaxis caused by a specific ingredient in the vaccine? Speak to a a specialist who should offer (where possible) an alternative vaccine. Moreover we know two doses of the vaccines produce an antibody response in the immunosuppressed. That said, three doses is a good idea[2] to boost that response to a more typical level. [1] https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-the-green-book-chapter-14a https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-the-gree... [2] https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/1380269877009743872 https://twitter.com/sailorrooscout/status/138026987700974387... and preceding thread

jollybean 5y ago

"should people bother with a vax if there's a highly effective cure?" Yes. COVID danger is it's virality, not it's lethality. 100% vaccinated population even at only 85% effectiveness means R0 is well below 1 and COVID cannot spread. 100% of COVID patients treated at 85% effectiveness of antiviral therapy means probably well over 1/2 the population still gets COVID, that's devastating. If this were about a non-communicable disease, then probably the vaccine would be a slightly better idea, but due to virality there's no doubt vaxxes are better. The best is to have both. Finally, the vaxx is $20, antiviral is $700, which is material. That said, if the 'cure' were 100% perfect, no side effects, cost $1 and could be given at any time after infection and prevents any further adverse effects, then we could probably just settle on that if we had to. I don't suspect we're going to hear a lot about this in the press, because the 'narrative' still needs to be 'get vaccinated'. What will happen is the CFR will come down to to this and other measures behind the scenes so to speak. Unless this thing comes down to $50 and is something any doctor can prescribe willy-nilly easy-peasy in which case I think there would be a big media campaign to 'inform us'.