Can you still be a vector

[bobk]

After vaccination ?

 

[robs1]

After vaccination ?

Of you touch something that has viral matter on it then you could spread it, not sure how you would spread it otherwise as I would assume your body kills it off quickly once vaccinated, it's a long time since I studied viral biology at oxford

 

[The Agrarian]

Yes, likely. There'll be huge variation in how much virus infected people shed, ranging from none to an awful lot, particularly from those who didn't not generate the best responses to the vaccine. But in the ideal scenario, where the majority of people take the vaccine, then the amount of virus circulating will be greatly reduced, and obviously most people in contact with shedders will already have immunity.

 

[The Agrarian]

T cells don't directly kill virus. They destroy infected cells. Therefore, by definition, a T cell response requires the host cells to have been infected.

 

[essex man]

If you are vaccinated and don't generate an immune response then you can spread it I guess, if you catch it later on.

 

[Hindsight]

If you are vaccinated and don't generate an immune response then you can spread it I guess, if you catch it later on.

If one is vaccinated and do not generate an immune response I presume one can catch Covid and go on to develop the disease which may or may not kill one? And that is the individual risk/gamble with vaccination. And hopefully minimized risk by having all the population vaccinated thus minimising virus circulating in the community.

 

[essex man]

But who should we vaccinate first .....
the ones with healthy immune systems who can't die but will be more likely to generate immune response and get is to herd immunity.

Or the ones that can die but less likely to generate immune response to vaccine.

Currently we focusing on the latter.

 

[Hindsight]

But who should we vaccinate first .....
the ones with healthy immune systems who can't die but will be more likely to generate immune response and get is to herd immunity.

Or the ones that can die but less likely to generate immune response to vaccine.

Currently we focusing on the latter.

Well as we know society has decided to protect the old and vulnerable first, rather than have them pile up at hospital and die in numbers the government on behalf of society has decided would be unacceptable. And thus take time to then reach herd immunity. Whole caboodle take all this year, I presume. Rightly or wrongly.

 

[The Agrarian]

Definitely the latter. The studies have shown even old people to develop a response to the vaccine in high numbers. So they should be the early target.

Vaccination is less about the individual, and more about the whole group. No vaccine is 100% effective, so it's all about using them to drive down the amount of circulating virus to low levels by removing as many potential hosts as possible. It's just the same as what happens during natural vaccination.i.e immunity from the disease itself, except without the suffering and loss of life.

 

[Sonoftheheir]

Has anyone heard what the plan is once the vaccination program has done? Are they going to accept that the virus is still out there and open up society? And if you get it you get it? Will they still worry about testing and isolating?

 

[essex man]

Definitely the latter. The studies have shown even old people to develop a response to the vaccine in high numbers. So they should be the early target.

Vaccination is less about the individual, and more about the whole group. No vaccine is 100% effective, so it's all about using them to drive down the amount of circulating virus to low levels by removing as many potential hosts as possible. It's just the same as what happens during natural vaccination.i.e immunity from the disease itself, except without the suffering and loss of life.

Yes exactly, the point is if you want to stop the deaths who do you vaccinate first?
If the vaccine doesn't work for the people who are dying then you are wasting vaccine vaccinating them.
Although old people may respond in high numbers, if it is the 10% of 85 year olds with poor immune systems who either die or fail to respond to vaccine are you better off using vaccine on young healthy people even though they can't die of virus.
Young healthy people move around more and more likely to spread it if infected.
If we going for herd immunity then best to vaccinate them?

 

[Hindsight]

Yes exactly, the point is if you want to stop the deaths who do you vaccinate first?
If the vaccine doesn't work for the people who are dying then you are wasting vaccine vaccinating them.
Although old people may respond in high numbers, if it is the 10% of 85 year olds with poor immune systems who either die or fail to respond to vaccine are you better off using vaccine on young healthy people even though they can't die of virus.
Young healthy people move around more and more likely to spread it if infected.
If we going for herd immunity then best to vaccinate them?

C/mon Essex man you know full well the older folk are being vaccinated first as it is politically impossible to allow them to die having contracted Covid. Just accept it as that will be the strategy of all governments. No government is going to allow a 10% cull of the 60+ age group. Such is the reality. Cheers.

 

[essex man]

I'm saying what's the point in vaccinating those who the vaccine doesn't work for

 

[essex man]

As in the best way to stop the virus and protect them is to vaccinate others first

 

[Hindsight]

As in the best way to stop the virus and protect them is to vaccinate others first

Again I say - hear what you say. I have no idea of the technical side to your case and argument. But I doubt any government in the western world is going to sacrifice older people. So older people will get vaccinated first. Simples. And that is what is happening on the ground. In a few day - say 60 - you case will be irrelevant anyway as all the old crinklies will be jabbed. Just chill old fella. I am just into the vulnerable age groups and have take view I just have to keep myself away from covid until April when my turn for vaccine comes. Let it go. Best wishes.

 

[wanton dwarf]

After vaccination ?

Yes.

You will still "Catch" Covid even after the Vaccine but won't develop the disease to any real extent due to your immune system hopefully .. how "Contagous" you will be during that time I don't know.

If your immune system is surpressed due to drugs or ill health you will still develop Covid and other diseases.

Also if you were exposed to high levels of Covid, say in an enclosed environment working with ill patients, fluids or bodies for hours you would still catch Covid.

 

[essex man]

You can develop disease and die with covid after having the vaccine if you do not develop an immune response after having the vaccine.
This will be the case in people with depleted immune systems who are therefore vulnerable to dying

 

[RushesToo]

You inject the old people first because even if they aren't 100% on their immune response they won't be taking up a hopsital bed. If you need bypass surgery at "some point in the future" you will now get it before you die from it. Full hospitals mean pre-emptive surgery gets stopped - not just bypasses, knees, hips and so forth - all that is called "elective" rather than emergency, which covers broken limbs and cuts etc.
You inject older people so elective surgery can continue.

 

[essex man]

But keep getting told it is younger people taking up hospital beds with covid?
If we want to reduce virus circulating we need to vaccinate people most responsive to it first? In order to better protect the old and vulnerable.

 

[ollie989898]

The NHS (and many of it's international equivalents), treats people in order of clinical need. We know there is a finite amount of vaccine and time is of the essence. It makes total sense to use that 10 million doses to protect front line NHS workers (who of course can spread it if they become infected) and the most vulnerable people in society. In this case, the most vulnerable will be elderly people or those with pre-existing conditions that make them at greatest risk from the virus.

There is little point in vaccinating huge swaths of the general public 'just because'. More vaccine will become available and it will be used, no doubt, worldwide.

For the vast majority of people infected, who get flu like symptoms, fever, a cough or even no symptoms at all, there is no need to prioritise them. It doesn't mean these people can wonder around like morons spreading it about though.

There are a small proportion of people in whom the vaccine won't work or who simply can't have it anyway. These people are the ones who will in turn be protected by herd immunity. You do not need 100% coverage or efficacy for this to be achieved.

Once the chain of infection is broken, the virus will be beaten as it will have no way to find itself in contact with enough naïve hosts. Infecting already immune people will see it killed in short order.

Regarding T cell immunity, T cells work in a few different ways and they have a few different flavours. T cells can release cytokines- chemical messages- that incite the rest of the immune system to wake up and get to work. This includes, inflammation, raising of the body's temperature etc. T cells also stimulate your B cells to dish out more antibodies or start finding the necessary ones that fit the epitope to the invading pathogen involved. T cells can also murder regular cells that they recognise as being already infected. To be fair, viruses can kill cells indirectly anyway and cells themselves have a self-destruct button mechanism called apoptosis that they may activate if necessary.

It is true that in elderly people their immune systems can be a bit dampened, however, many vaccines contain an adjuvant for this exact reason. You may have heard of some reports of allergic reactions to the Pfizer vaccine in a few individuals, this is likely due to the lipid coating scientists have used to coat the mRNA particles.