20 ms·

Ok, my 2 cents. This happened because there isn’t enough vaccines in third world countries. They can’t afford them. The moral of the story? It doesn’t matter

• mgamache 5y ago
  Sorry, a vaccine that still allows infection at a significant rate will continue to foster evolution. It may slow the process, but not change the result. There’s just no way the current vaccines stop this.
• trashcan_ 5y ago
  There aren’t enough administered vaccines. Many areas have vaccine doses but lack infrastructure to deliver them or just simply have ineffective government.
• mattrighetti 5y ago
  The fact that this has been discovered in Africa doesn’t mean that it originated there in the first place. > Several scientists said they suspected that the variant had been spreading undetected in countries with lackluster sequencing efforts before it surfaced in Botswana and South Africa, giving it more time to scatter globally. Nevertheless, European nations did not find the variant until after South Africa alerted them to it, demonstrating the gaps in their own surveillance efforts. [0] More on this can also be found here [1]. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/27/world/africa/coronavirus-omicron-africa.html?referringSource=articleShare https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/27/world/africa/coronavirus-... [1] https://www.linkedin.com/posts/graemecodrington_interesting-update-from-the-botswana-government-activity-6870630515469238272-Kw8q https://www.linkedin.com/posts/graemecodrington_interesting-...
  • pedalpete 5y ago
    This is correct, but I don't believe it devalues the original comment any less. Any part of the world where vaccination rates are lower allows (I assume) any variant to grow in that region, and then makes it easier to export to other parts of the world.
    • mattrighetti 5y ago
      That seems to be disputed too, this is an interesting read: Increases in COVID-19 are unrelated to levels of vaccination across 68 countries and 2947 counties in the United States.[0] > At the country-level, there appears to be no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days > Notably, Israel with over 60% of their population fully vaccinated had the highest COVID-19 cases per 1 million people in the last 7 days. The lack of a meaningful association between percentage population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases is further exemplified, for instance, by comparison of Iceland and Portugal. Both countries have over 75% of their population fully vaccinated and have more COVID-19 cases per 1 million people than countries such as Vietnam and South Africa that have around 10% of their population fully vaccinated. > There also appears to be no significant signaling of COVID-19 cases decreasing with higher percentages of population fully vaccinated Of course that could be different for third world countries. [0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8481107/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8481107/
      • ant6n 5y ago
        That article is garbage, full of randomly picked data points, not accounting for other variables, blatant misinterpretations and convenient omissions. Anti-vaxxers love posting it.
        • mattrighetti 5y ago
          Can you elaborate more on that? Legitimate question, I came across this a couple days ago on some other thread here on HN.
• newaccount2021 5y ago
  even if you produce and freely distribute enough vaccines, you will never achieve adequate vaccination rates there is no "eradicating" covid, that is a non-goal
• mr_sturd 5y ago
  Very true; and even if Omicron turns out to be less dangerous than previous variants, it's a case of when, not if, a deadlier variant will emerge from a poorly-vaccinated population.
  • samwillis 5y ago
    History shows that as a Virus mutates and evolves they tend towards more transmissibility but lower morality rate. There is a high chance Covid-19 will flow the same path. That’s not to say that a more deadly variant won’t appear it almost certainly will (or has already) but it is unlikely to become the dominant variant.
    • pm90 5y ago
      I don’t think this helps much. We know that mortality rate has not been incredibly high even for the original variant, but it managed to overwhelm the medical facilities of nations regardless. Unless the mortality rate drops dramatically, down to what’s observed with eg the flu, it’s still concerning.
    • flatiron 5y ago
      Yep. From what I’ve read we are waiting for the “common cold” version of Covid. Where it dominates, is an inconvenience, and we can just live with it.
    • LasersGoPew 5y ago
      The current vaccines don't prevent infection, reinfection, or transmission -- which eliminates much of the selective pressure for lower mortality. We could end up with a situation where everyone alive on earth is vaccinated, carries the virus, receives regular boosters, and anyone who isn't or who misses a few boosters, faces certain death. Similar to Marek’s disease in chickens.
      • aisengard 5y ago
        Nothing completely prevents infection, but vaccines are the best way to mitigate it.
• Hermel 5y ago
  I don't think the virus could ever be stopped with today's vaccines, even if everyone was vaccinated. Data from fully or almost fully vaccinated countries clearly show that this doesn't eliminate the virus. It of course helps, but we have to depart from the idea that the "zero covid" strategies work.
  • djbusby 5y ago
    We got to zero polio. What's stopping it from happening here?
    • artificial 5y ago
      Different type of disease for starters. No animal reservoirs either and the vaccine is effective with a single dose (and doesn’t require boosters). Perhaps we can focus on more health generally? Diet and exercise to curb the massive obesity in the western world.
      • flatiron 5y ago
        Honestly I think it’s easier to cure Covid than western obesity.
        • chrisjs95 5y ago
          It's probably easier to cure every type of Cancer than it is to cure obesity.
      • gus_massa 5y ago
        The number and type of recommended polio vaccines depends, but the WHO recommends at least four doses: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polio_vaccine#Schedule https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polio_vaccine#Schedule
        • artificial 5y ago
          Interesting. The CDC[0] in the US (IPOV insert [1]) states a single doze of 0.5ml for children and adults. [0] https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/polio/hcp/composition-dosage-administration.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/polio/hcp/composition-dosag... [1] https://www.fda.gov/media/75695/download https://www.fda.gov/media/75695/download
• cheaprentalyeti 5y ago
  If the vaccines are only retarding infection and transmission instead of blocking it, then all they're doing is giving the virus a space to evolve in.
  • lots2learn 5y ago
    They teach the immune system how to fight the virus, reducing duration and quantity of infection, which reduces opportunities for the virus to replicate and potentially mutate.
    • cheaprentalyeti 5y ago
      A non-sterilizing vaccine only increases the evolutionary pressure on the virus to evolve to be vaccine-resistant. Such a vaccine more or less becomes like taking a half-course of antibiotics.
      • karlicoss 5y ago
        Hmm, is that really so? As far as I understand, for bacteria a more significant factor is horizontal gene exchange (because their genome mutation rate is much lower, presumably because they are more complicated than viruses). Viruses can't do gene exchange, so the only factor for developing resistance is the total number of viral particles produced, so even if it's a weak vaccine or half dose of antiviral drug, it would be helpful
        • mythrwy 5y ago
          At a population level view he is exactly right. A partial dose of antibiotics scenario is exactly what we have done with these vaccines.
  • fidesomnes 5y ago
    and that is the crux of this medically dangerous experiment.
• pbhjpbhj 5y ago
  OK, free at the point of need, but it still needs to be paid for; do you have a suggestion. If countries take the vaccine supplies and then sell them on, what do we do then -- install a new government so we can get vaccines distributed? What if people won't take the vaccine that came from USA/China/Russia/local state they don't trust, do we somehow force them? I'm for your proposal in the general aspect of it, but how do we take it forward as an actual plan? I still don't think we'll eradicate it, but perhaps with lower levels of community transmission we'll reduce the flare ups of problematic variants?
  • lemming 5y ago
    If the vaccine is free, why would anyone need to sell it on?
    • dragontamer 5y ago
      The US government made it free to citizens. But nothing is actually free. When some nation donates 1-million doses, there will be a market value for those doses: maybe $20 million for the batch or so. It's not even black market vs grey market. This is just standard market economies between nations.
    • admax88qqq 5y ago
      People will pay to skip the queue, which creates a perverse incentive to hoard and limit distribution to incentive paying. Corrupt officials receiving free vaccine shipments could very well do this.
    • pbhjpbhj 5y ago
      I assumed we wouldn't be able to supply 100% of the globe at the same instant, maybe we'd distribute ~20% in a first wave (to the most vulnerable people). That means that those who are rich[er] but don't meet the criteria are going to be in a position to want to buy. If the country/county/area/suburb next door is poor, and a locality has lots of cases then I'm guessing anyone who can afford it has an incentive to acquire a dose of vaccine early, or a booster dose, by buying out someone in that neighbouring locality. You need strong local government without corruption to distribute vaccines fairly.
• xg15 5y ago
  Absolutely true, but not the whole story unfortunately. While many African countries need more vaccines, South Africa was in the process of throttling shipments because less and less people were getting vaccinated. So the other big challenge is raising acceptance of the vaccines and fighting denialism.
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  • ageofwant 5y ago
    Due to low trust in government after decades of corruption and mismanagement of basically everything who can blame them ? And who stepped into into this void of authority... Facebook, bastion of truth and science and critical thinking. America's inability to curb its own propaganda machines and its capitalism uber alles rhetoric and group-think boomerangs right back. This pandemic has certainly shaken a lot of nuts out of the rug, but where did those nuts came from ?
    • syshum 5y ago
      Ahh yes, lets blame capitalism for all things. You do realize that capitalism created the vaccine in the first place? That with out capitalism you would have no vaccine to complain about people refusing to take? I really am tried to seeing capitalism blamed on all the worlds problem when it has been capitalism more than anything else that has brought both peace and prosperity to the world
      • HanShotFirst 5y ago
        I was shocked to discover, several months after the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were approved in America and trumpeted as proof of the speed and efficacy of our modern, capitalist medical system... that the Sinopharm and Sputnik V vaccines were both released much earlier, and they actually work very well.
        • Nursie 5y ago
• 2-718-281-828 5y ago
  If I was African I'd argue against vaccination. People in Africa are less obese and younger than folks from the developed regions. So, Covid won't cause much problems there to begin with. And vaccination just handicaps the pandemy turning endemic.
• marcosdumay 5y ago
  > They can’t afford them. This is better said as "they are not produced fast enough". That will lead you directly to the solution, instead of losing time discussing the price. It's a very similar thing, the price poor countries pay is not enough to justify investing in extra productive capacity. There is a confounding factor that new capacity takes a long time to arrive, but even when that is taken into account, there are just not enough vaccines and there won't be on the near future.
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• DeusExMachina 5y ago
  There is no way to eradicate covid everywhere, simultaneously or otherwise. It's now widely accepted that the virus continues to circulate even in vaccinated people. Besides, you are not even going to vaccinate 100% of any western country, let alone all of them or the entire world. Milder mutation are what is actually going to make the virus endemic, like it happened to the Spanish flu. Reports from the South African government seem to suggest that this variant is mild, although it's early to say.
  • ant6n 5y ago
    There do exist viruses that have been virtually eradicated with vaccines, even if they weren't 100% effective (cf Polio). We probably won't eradicate Corona with the first gen vaccines, but that isn't the point anyway. The point ist that we should reduce it enough so that mutations are less likely.
    • DeusExMachina 5y ago
      Polio was a different kind of virus, though, with a different kind of vaccine. We never got a vaccine for other coronaviruses either, it's unlikely that we will get it for this. Also, there is solid literature on the fact that vaccines during an epidemic cause stress that induces the virus to mutate. https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org https://www.voiceforscienceandsolidarity.org
      • supernovae 5y ago
        None of Geerts papers are peer reviewed or based on scientific research/data. Stress doesn't cause mutations. Mutations happen because of genetics and whatever mutations increase their suvival end up being the mutations prevelent in society. What viruses need though are willing hosts who aren't vaccinated who carry the virus, allow it to thrive and mutate and more importantly - those who spread it. Blaming vaccinations is like blaming immune systems when the real issue is people who carry the disease and allow it to continue to spread.
        • 5y ago
• b3nji 5y ago
  Why did South Africa refuse more shipments of the vaccines on Nov 24th if your theory is correct? https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-24/s-africa-wants-j-j-pfizer-vaccine-delivery-delay-news24-says https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-24/s-africa-...
• whatanattitude 5y ago
  Does this vaccine eradicate the virus? I’m vaccinated and boosted btw. I don’t think vaccines are going to make the virus go away. People vaccinated still carry load and spread it.
• kubav 5y ago
  Totally agree. I am 30 and already got 2 jabs. I will probably need to get 3rd in less than 6 months to be able to normally live (covid pass in Europe). Risk to person of my age is low even without vaccine. I got myself vaccinated only to help the society (and to get covid pass) but I do not feel that I am helping if they are wasting vaccines on people like me instead of sending them to people who actually need them. It is sad that this is official EU policy to require re vaccination of young people (official recommendation to member states is that vaccine is effective for 9 months for all ages). Not to mention that climate in central Europe effectively stops virus from May to October so it will be way more efficient to vaccinate people in August and September.
  • sxg 5y ago
    Vaccination is less of a supply problem and more of a distribution and demand problem. One vaccine administered in the western world does not mean one vaccine has been made unavailable to the third world. It's similar to food scarcity, the primary problem is poor infrastructure making distribution networks extremely inefficient.
    • kubav 5y ago
      Distribution in the country is not the problem (look what "Medecins sans frontires" do). Mostly 3rd world countries do not have medical standards as high as in first world so you can instruct taxi drivers how to jab people and give them trunk full of vaccines and they will empty it in the same day without problems. And it will be still safe enough as those vaccines are applied to muscles. I think it is the problem of supply and demand because EU and even more US* are making vaccines way more expensive. * EU is buying vaccines together to not compete for price between states but the price is probably way higher than African countries can pay. Imagine the whole world teamed up together and vulnerable people would be vaccinated at the same time before young healthy people as it is done now in EU.
      • fomine3 5y ago
        Paying more by richest countries is fine, but it should help get vaccines cheaper for developing country.
• throwaway894345 5y ago
  I agree with this—not only do we have the usual moral imperative to help others, but it’s actually in our primary interest. The US has actually done exceedingly well here, having delivered more donations than all other countries combined (not sure if this is still the case; I haven’t checked in a couple of months). But there’s still more work to do and other rich countries need to get on board quickly. Apropos of nothing, I was just listening to NPR and they had someone on to talk about how we don’t donate vaccines to third world countries because they are predominantly non-white and how this is “vaccine apartheid” rather than the more likely “rich countries provide for their own citizens before providing for others” sort of thing. Is there any legitimacy to this, or is it just racemongering?
  • gotoeleven 5y ago
    Most third world countries don't have the infrastructure to reliably deliver refrigerated vaccines at scale. And they've got to deliver two doses, months apart. Its very "on brand" as the kids say now on twitter for NPR to platform a race-baiter though. The west, a product of mostly european people, came up with the vaccine but blah blah blah racism. Come up with your own vaccine then NPR race bait lady.
    • supernovae 5y ago
      Nonsense. Africa is miles ahead of many countries because they have been frought with epidemics. The South African variant is only called south African because they have the technology to do genomics on the strain to identify that it has mutated and there is a new mutation running around.
      • throwaway894345 5y ago
        Having had epidemics previously or having advanced genomic capability doesn’t imply a robust logistics network for the world’s first RNA vaccines which require particularly cold refrigeration.
        • 5y ago
• sol_invictus 5y ago
  Well, your 2 cents would be wrong since SA is actively rejecting vaccines due to low intake: https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/exclusive-south-africa-delays-covid-vaccine-deliveries-inoculations-slow-2021-11-24/ https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/exclusive-south-africa-...
• DyslexicAtheist 5y ago
  would this be enough? isn't SARS-COV2, being a zoonotic virus forming strains and evolving in the massive available reservoir of animals? afaik MERS also spreads from contact to camels, H5N1 in birds etc. Is controlling mutations actually possible in a way that goes beyond merely managing the (inevitable) fallout?
• goodluckchuck 5y ago
  > we’ll never get out of this Eradication has never been on the table. Listen to their words: Mitigation. Pandemic. Flatten the curve. We’ve all known, the whole time, that there is no stopping coronaviruses. It would be like eradicating retroviruses, or bacteria. It’s too broad of a category, and too virulent. Viruses of this sort always have and always will be around. We’ll only get past the fear of it getting worse when we identify and eliminate the original source.
• hx2a 5y ago
  > The only way you’ll stop this thing from mutating into a variant not covered by the vaccine is by eradicating it everywhere, simultaneously. Even if it were possible and achievable to vaccinate all humans, we'd still have a problem because COVID has spread to other mammal species. There's no reasonable plan that I know of to vaccinate animals in the wild. https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2021/11/10/1054224204/how-sars-cov-2-in-american-deer-could-alter-the-course-of-the-global-pandemic https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2021/11/10/1054224... > We’re all in this together. When COVID spreads in Africa and makes a new strain, it may as well be on your own doorstep. The world needs to step up and distribute vaccines to every corner of the globe, for FREE, or we’ll never get out of this. But you're 100% right about this. I don't want what I said about your last sentence to diminish the importance of wealthy nations sharing the vaccine with other countries. We're all in this together. The idea that a country can vaccinate only their own citizens and then consider this problem solved is completely false.
  • sol_invictus 5y ago
    Whats your plan to solve logistical problems with the vaccines in Africa? https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/covid-19-vaccine-deliveries-continent-increase-logistics-hampers-inoculation-2021-11-25/ https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/covid-19-vaccine-delive...
    • mrhands556 5y ago
      Africa has the youngest population in the world and they deal with viruses on a daily basis that are much more deadly than covid to young people. It will be hard to entice people to get vaccinated for covid in these situations.
• disambiguation 5y ago
  Have they open sourced the vaccine recipe? I feel like that would help greatly to this end.
  • adzm 5y ago
    Yes, it is on GitHub even. https://github.com/NAalytics/Assemblies-of-putative-SARS-CoV2-spike-encoding-mRNA-sequences-for-vaccines-BNT-162b2-and-mRNA-1273/blob/main/Assemblies%20of%20putative%20SARS-CoV2-spike-encoding%20mRNA%20sequences%20for%20vaccines%20BNT-162b2%20and%20mRNA-1273.docx.pdf https://github.com/NAalytics/Assemblies-of-putative-SARS-CoV...
    • em3rgent0rdr 5y ago
      Though this is just the RNA sequence, not a full recipe on how to create the vaccine. It is like proving one source file but no Make file and no list of open source dependencies.
• nimbleal 5y ago
  Do the vaccines have a significant enough impact on transmissibility for that to be true? My understanding is that, while they significantly improve instances of serious illness and death, the effect on transmission is limited (or at least not high enough for “eradication” to be on the cards). All for greater support of less developed countries in terms of vaccine supplies, but not sure this is the argument for it.
  • Tagbert 5y ago
    The most recent study that I’ve seen showed a 71% reduction in infection rates for unvaccinated people living with vaccinated people. That suggests a pretty strong transmissibility effect.
    • curmudgeon22 5y ago
      This study says much less than 71% reduction, 25% of vaccinated and 38% of unvaccinated people got Covid when living with an infected person. https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2638 https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2638
      • sneak 5y ago
        35% reduction is still pretty good.
        • nimbleal 5y ago
          The question is — is it significant enough for: a) eradication to be a possibility (intuitively, it would seem not); or, failing that b) to lower the possibility of novel mutations emerging to a negligible level (I don’t have the knowledge to answer, so this is a genuine question, but again intuition would suggest not) if, say, 99% of the population is vaccinated.
          • HanaShiratori 5y ago
            Wouldn't any kind of reduction be a good thing? Even if it just prevents severe illness / hospitalization by the stated amount I'd consider it a win.
• throwawaymanbot 5y ago
  Its as if we ALL have to pull together as Humans with our fellow Humans.. Perhaps it wont be an alien invasion that makes us realize this after all.. but a virus. We must Help each other, or else... A decade or more of this...
• dp-hackernews 5y ago
  You Are Immune Against Every Disease. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmpuerlbJu0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LmpuerlbJu0
• BLKNSLVR 5y ago
  Totally agree, and it's the macro version of what I realised after having a discussion with a co-worker who's begrudgingly getting the vaccine, but is against being 'forced' to do it. I understand the negative reaction to any authority figure forcing something, and I react negatively, to the point of using technical workarounds, to Australia's metadata retention rules and other privacy-related political BS. Living in a functioning society requires the sacrifice of some freedoms for the benefits that a society provides. People that can get the vaccine have a certain responsibility to get vaccinated on behalf of those members of that society that cannot get vaccinated for valid health reasons, or even for the sake of children currently below the vaccination age range. The vaccinated are forming a shield around the more vulnerable members of their society. Freedom of personal choice versus 'doing your bit' to protect the weak, elderly, and vulnerable. And most of us have family and friends and co-workers and acquaintances that will fall into this vulnerable category that we'd probably rather they stay alive for a little longer. I just don't hear it presented this way very much. There's a lot of publicity around the actions of the freedom flag-wavers without too much of the other side of that particular coin being explained. Like the economics of uber-capitalism being an unhealthy extension of capitalism, this is an unhealthy uber-individualism outgrowth of individualism. It's far more prevalent than I thought it would be, probably because we've had it so good for so long - nearly 80 years since WWII ended. Edited to add two explanatory things: 1. If COVID sticks around, or if there's a new "thing" in one, two, three, decades' time, we'll be getting into that 'vulnerable' category. When that happens, how will you feel about large groups of 'kids' (25 - 45 year olds) protesting getting vaccinated against a disease that may be very mild for them but fatal for you? 2. I personally know someone, of my age, with COVID-long. The symptoms are something like chronic fatigue syndrome. As a result they're essentially a non-productive member of society who used to be a productive member of society.
  • aakresearch 5y ago
    > 1. If COVID sticks around, ... we'll be getting into that 'vulnerable' category. When that happens, how will you feel about large groups of 'kids' ... protesting getting vaccinated against a disease that may be very mild for them but fatal for you? 1. I, personally, would not care about it in the slightest. If the current "response", dictating that I should fixate on this one thing, and, more importantly, strictly controlled and prosecuted if not fixated enough, holds any longer I simply won't be around in 10yrs. My "life score" is satisfying to me as it is, any day of life under lockdown, curfew, mask, vaccine mandates only subtracts from it. So I'm looking to "cut my losses" soon, so to speak. 2. It may also mean that "we" failed to give these "kids" proper upbringing. I, certainly, did fail. When the panic started our son, 16 at the time, one day wanted to casually go to the shops to buy some junk. Suggestion that maybe it is better to minimise the cumulative number of shop visits because of this new unknown virus out there, and get your chips and coke once a week in bulk rather than on whim, was met with "I don't care, I need my fix". Did we get emotional after that. Sure we did. Did we berate or disown him, or even forced him to not go? Not at all. Love is not conditional on absence of inconsiderate behavior. As it stands, my chance of dying within a year at my age is around 1/300. Covid, if caught, about doubles it. No point in losing respect to those respected before over such numbers. We will all die anyway. 3. Our kids were always accurately immunised according to the recommended schedule. Did it ever come to mind that "freeloaders" must be forced to do so by mandates? Quite the opposite, my thinking was always - isn't it a wonderful side-effect of vaccination that people can act according to their conscience. These childhood vaccines are so good now that everyone refusing them must have very good (for them) reasons to do so. I have absolutely no interest in knowing the reasons of their choice, but I was always very pleased that we were able to contribute to their ability to make such choice. (Although my expectation to be afforded the right to define my own "validity", "eligibility", "vulnerability" and "essential" status turned out to be naive. But that's on the society conscience, not mine). No medical procedure, however beneficial on a population level, must be forced upon people. I'm fine with myself dying for this principle. Maybe not quite so for my loving ones, but there is no escape from the fact that everyone is mortal. I'll hold the fort for my kids until they are 14, but after that I cannot do much more - they will have to settle their own scores and live with their conscience. It is far better to live a short but free life than a looong but thoroughly mandated and controlled.
• nradov 5y ago
  SARS-CoV-2 is endemic worldwide in humans and multiple animal species. It will never be eradicated no matter how many people are vaccinated. The vaccines are good at preventing deaths, however they don't reliably prevent infection or transmission. The current thinking is that new variants are most likely to evolve in immunocompromised patients who experience persistent infections. Vaccines aren't very effective for such patients. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/covid-variants-may-arise-in-people-with-compromised-immune-systems/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/covid-variants-ma... I completely agree that we should donate vaccines to low income countries. The US federal government has donated 264M doses so far with more on the way. https://www.state.gov/covid-19-recovery/vaccine-deliveries/ https://www.state.gov/covid-19-recovery/vaccine-deliveries/
  • sjg007 5y ago
    Vaccines are in fact absolutely critical to not only prevent variants in immunocompromised patients but save their lives.
    • nradov 5y ago
      You seem to be a little confused about how vaccines work. While I encourage everyone eligible to get vaccinated, vaccines aren't very effective in immunocompromised patients. Even those who are vaccinated are at risk of persistent infections (depending on their specific medical condition).
      • noahmasur 5y ago
        I think their point was that you need to have EVERYONE vaccinated in order to reduce spread and protect people for whom vaccines are ineffective.
        • nradov 5y ago
          I encourage everyone eligible to get vaccinated, but the virus is so contagious that there will be no significant protection for those whom the vaccines are ineffective. https://www.businessinsider.com/delta-variant-made-herd-immunity-not-possible-astrazeneca-developer-2021-8?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/delta-variant-made-herd-immu...
• aaron695 5y ago
  It's well know in South Africa they turning away vaccines because they have more than they need. So what's your conspiracy here? You might have a legitimate theory but you need to state what it is. Where in Africa did this come from were they can't afford vaccines? Some African country's that had to send vaccines back or destroy them - https://www.bbc.com/news/56940657 https://www.bbc.com/news/56940657
• throw868788 5y ago
  > The only way you’ll stop this thing from mutating into a variant not covered by the vaccine is by eradicating it everywhere, simultaneously. When I hear words like everything, everyone, everywhere to describe any system I get disheartened failure is almost assured. I wouldn't design software like that for example. Whether they are engineering systems, social systems, or in this case viruses. Relying on every part to comply is the opposite of redundancy. The probability of getting everyone to comply in a group as large as this planet all at once, at the same time without lags (e.g. vaccine rollouts), etc is sadly IMO extremely small. We probably need new approaches, some which may challenge the current status quo. I remember watching a video early in COVID where isolating populations into smaller groups allows quick treatment of each group and the ability to contain the spread (i.e. limiting the R factor). As long as highly available world air travel is around, reducing redundancy and increasing the interconnectness of our populations into a single system the virus will have an advantage IMO.
• maaand 5y ago
  IIRC my biology lessons in high school, viruses mutate in order to escape from vaccines. Just like mosquitoes mutate and adapted to DDT, we created new chemicals and then mosquitoes adapted to them, under evolutionary pressure. So vaccinated populations are creating the pressure on the virus to mutate. And un-vaccinated population may get effected (irrespective of which version of virus they encounter at the time).. my 2 cents.
  • supernovae 5y ago
    Viruses don't mutate to escape anything, evolution doesn't work that way. Viruses have short generation times and they replicate extraordinarily fast compared to what humans see in their lifetimes. Their fast replication allows the virus to experience mutations at a massive scale and mutations that increase its survival become dominent over time. Those mutations absolutely require an unvaccinated population to thrive but more importantly, a population with a laissez fair attitude that allows the mutation to spread to other humans. If you do everything in your power to cut down the transmission and vaccinate yourself, we could have defeated this thing. But nope.. and here we are.
• arbuge 5y ago
  > When COVID spreads in Africa and makes a new strain, it may as well be on your own doorstep. The world needs to step up and distribute vaccines to every corner of the globe, for FREE, or we’ll never get out of this. This isn't quite true. All epidemics come to an end eventually, vaccines or no vaccines. There were no vaccines to end the 1918 flu epidemic, but that one too died out just like all the ones before it in a few years' time. At a far greater cost to human life, of course, but we "got out" of it.
  • scotty79 5y ago
    > All epidemics come to an end eventually, vaccines or no vaccines. Yeah, but sometimes only after wiping half of all humans.
  • em3rgent0rdr 5y ago
    The 1918 flu epidemic arguably still persists to this day: > What’s even more remarkable about the 1918 flu, say infectious disease experts, is that it never really went away. After infecting an estimated 500 million people worldwide in 1918 and 1919 (a third of the global population), the H1N1 strain that caused the Spanish flu receded into the background and stuck around as the regular seasonal flu. > But every so often, direct descendants of the 1918 flu combined with bird flu or swine flu to create powerful new pandemic strains, which is exactly what happened in 1957, 1968 and 2009. Those later flu outbreaks, all created in part by the 1918 virus, claimed millions of additional lives, earning the 1918 flu the odious title of “the mother of all pandemics.” [1] https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/news/1918-flu-pandemic-never-ended https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/news/1918-...
    • em3rgent0rdr 5y ago
      > The impact of this pandemic was not limited to 1918–1919. All influenza A pandemics since that time, and indeed almost all cases of influenza A worldwide (excepting human infections from avian viruses such as H5N1 and H7N7), have been caused by descendants of the 1918 virus, including "drifted" H1N1 viruses and reassorted H2N2 and H3N2 viruses. The latter are composed of key genes from the 1918 virus, updated by subsequently incorporated avian influenza genes that code for novel surface proteins, making the 1918 virus indeed the "mother" of all pandemics. [1] https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/12/1/05-0979_article https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/12/1/05-0979_article
• peter303 5y ago
  Another possibility is a super contagious variant that is much less deadly. Then it replaces its competitor. Perhaps become endemic like the common cold.
  • jakeinspace 5y ago
    Although this would be a good outcome, my understanding is that the inherent mutation rate of the virus makes settling on a single variant or family of non-deadly variants unlikely. Even if a variant became endemic with a death rate of 0.05% for example, unless this mutation is at a near global optima in terms of transmissibility, I imagine it would be a precarious situation.
• boltzmann_brain 5y ago
  > we’ll never get out of this. what is flu
• doopy1 5y ago
  I think this will happen until a variant that's less deadly but more contagious burns through the population and leaves a trace of immunity.
• jacquesm 5y ago
  Spot on. That said, there are a lot of vaccine skeptical people in 3rd world countries as well.
• vbezhenar 5y ago
  I'm living in a third-world country (Kazakhstan). Plenty of people here are against any vaccination. Plenty of people are vaccinated, but strongly against any re-vactination. I don't know why that happens, why west was able to vaccinate majority of people. Vaccine is not an issue here, it's free, you just spend a hour and get vaccinated in a nearby hospital. Government is trying to push vaccination through their throats, but it is met with extreme resistance (and some dirty politicians are even building their agenda on anti-vaccination). I guess, we don't have good enough brain washing media compared to a civilized world. And when people are using their own heads, without trusting government, it sometimes results in a wrong common knowledge.
• joelbondurant 5y ago
  If you'd take personal responsibility for the world and wear 2 masks to sleep, the common cold would go extinct in 2 weeks, but you're a selfish asshole killing tens of trillions of grand mothers every day you deny it.
• nova22033 5y ago
  The world needs to step up and distribute vaccines to every corner of the globe, for FREE, or we’ll never get out of this. The problem in South Africa is vaccine hesitancy, not vaccine availability https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2021-11-24/exclusive-south-africa-delays-covid-vaccine-deliveries-as-inoculations-slow https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2021-11-24/exclus...
• mythrwy 5y ago
  Disagree. Not only will what you suggest not happen, ever, because it's logistically impossible but the idea that it's the unvaccinated causing vaccine evading variants is ass backwards.