I think that the comment about pick-up basketball was made to Chris Hayes back in September…The two of them are going to play in the 3rd or 4th quarter of 2021, according to Hayes.
He says masks and distancing through the roll out of the vaccine. So I guess it depends (as it always has) on how fast the vaccine can get out there. And maybe 70% versus 90% could speed things up too.
Honestly, for me, it’s 99% about schools. If all kids and educators are vaccinated (and educators are part of the first batch) then we can have normal school. Do we think colleges can mandate the vaccine? I’m assuming they can. Many (all?) are already mandating the flu vaccine for spring.
Working in a high school, I know plenty of kids who opted to delay college for a year or two in order to give the virus a chance to be gone first. It’s not ideal, but nothing with Covid is. They just have chosen it as their best option. I also know students who have gone to (and continued) college, both public and private. They tell me it’s different, but it still works.
Med school lad is in the middle of interviewing for residencies right now (has one today TBH). They’re all virtual this year. He’ll have to rank all of his choices without having gotten to see them to know if he likes the city/setting/vibe and everything else that comes with a visit that one can’t grasp online. He’s not the only one in his situation. Such is life. He and his peers are still excited and enjoying the process - plus will have stories to tell for eons.
It’s definitely helpful to be able to roll with the punches when it’s impossible to stop them.
If they get an asymptomatic contagious case, then they could still pose a risk if they are in contact with people for whom the vaccine is less effective, or who are medically unable to get the vaccine.
Of course, we do not know if the vaccine will allow people get asymptomatic infections (particularly contagious ones), since that is not being checked. I.e. it is a possibility, though not a certainty. But until we know more about whether this is the case, you may want to behave as if it were a possibility.
Great points, and I also can’t wait for the more specific age-segmented data. I took a look at CDC’s age breakdowns for all deaths involving covid through 11/4. And certainly it skews elderly. 58% have been 75+ years; 80% have been in people 65+. So we can all agree it is imperative that this vaccine helps the elderly (yeah, I’m finally in the 50+ group myself…I think I’ll always prefer “older adult” to “elderly”, but you are right that we need to be clearer).
Pfizer reported that nearly half of its US participants are between ages of 56 and 85. Of course that could mean all of those people are exactly 57 years old and no one was in their 80s, but that seems unlikely. So I do find that reassuring that they had a very large number of people 56-85 involved, and since effectiveness of over 90% means barely anyone (less than 10%) with the vaccine got covid, it really seems like it has to be quite effective even in the elderly. Time will tell, but it seems “reasonable” to expect effectiveness in that age group (perhaps not 90%+, but effectiveness). I mean, it will remain a question until we get the data, but I’m thinking it doesn’t seem like it’s something to ruminate over. But I guess we can’t help it; most of us have elderly loved ones, and just generally, who doesn’t love the elderly?
By the way, I wonder if people over 85 will be allowed to take the vaccine, or if Pfizer and the others need to scramble to include people 85+ (or maybe they did have some 85+ in the trial, fingers crossed). It will certainly be important to test them (my father-in-law is 86 and such a doll–I’ll be livid if he isn’t eligible).
Probably not a big surprise. Those who have more risk from the actual virus may have plenty of incentive to try even an experimental vaccine.
Here’s a compendium of expert reactions to the Pfizer news. All the experts say this is welcome, positive news, as does everyone here. Several experts raise exactly the issues @ucbalumnus, @EmptyNestSoon2 and I have been discussing, about preventing infection/transmission and about whether the vaccine works in the elderly.
Prof Jonathan Ball, Professor of Molecular Virology, University of Nottingham, said:
“It’s great news that the Pfizer vaccine is reported to be 90% effective, but it’s important to understand what that means. For a vaccine to be truly effective it needs to protect those most vulnerable from suffering severe COVID-19 or prevent those less vulnerable from becoming infected and then transmitting the virus to others. Simply reducing the appearance of symptoms in people who would otherwise have experienced mild infection, is unlikely to have a major benefit. Indeed, in a worst-case scenario if vaccinated people become infected with the virus and assume they are protected it might mean they can still spread the virus asymptomatically…"
Dr Colin Butter, Associate Professor and Programme Leader in Bioveterinary Science, University of Lincoln, said:
“…Presently there is no published data on whether the vaccine protects only against clinical disease or also prevents transmission to another individual. If the former, then individuals will be well protected but herd immunity won’t be reached…”
Prof Azra Ghani, Chair in Infectious Disease Epidemiology, Imperial College London, said:
““The primary efficacy being reported is based on symptomatic cases. So this does not tell us whether it prevents the same level of infections nor anything about onward transmission.”
Dr Penny Ward, Visiting Professor in Pharmaceutical Medicine at King’s College London and Chair of the Education and Standards Committee of the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Medicine, said:
"There are several limitations both in general and for this vaccine in particular. Firstly the information provided does not allow us to understand the severity of illness among placebo and vaccine recipients, which it is important to understand, as the objective is not only to prevent symptoms of milder disease but to prevent hospitalisation and death. Secondly the duration of protection offered cannot be assessed. Longer periods of follow up are required during an ongoing outbreak to determine need for repeated booster doses. Lastly, we need to match the data on illness with information on protection against asymptomatic infection; protection against infection as well as against illness would reduce the severity of an outbreak within the community and enable more effective control of the disease enabling communities to return to something more like normal life. "
I am optimistic with this news. And if anyone who would be allowed to get it in the first wave doesn’t want it, I will send my phone number and take your spot.
@“Cardinal Fang” so we should just throw in the towel. This news not good enough. Masks for years and years.
Can you explain why we keep hearing that, once this vaccine and others like it are widely available, life will go back to normal? Is this message just incorrect? Someone should tell t college presidents I’ve heard who have said vaccine equals normality on campus.
Maybe you should call and let them know… Lol. You /we will be wearing masks through 2021 at least. It’s not what your thinking… This virus won’t act the way your thinking. Start planning your kids to be going to college with masks and hybrid classes. That isn’t going anywhere. But we can continue that on your other thread.
@homerdog I’m with you 100%. I am astonished by all the posters who think they know more about how the virus will act than Dr. Fauci and know more about what colleges will do than the college presidents themselves.
Bowdoin president said “normal school” in fall if there’s a vaccine. Normal is no masks. He had a very conservative plan that we all know by now. Closed campus, testing twice a week, all remote class, only 50% of kids on campus. He would be the last college president to throw caution to the wind. He has all kinds of connections with the scientific community and he’s saying school will be normal in fall. I’m going with that.
Well you don’t actually know that either. I appreciate the points that are being made. We don’t know if it prevents the disease or just the symptomatic disease. The 90%+ is a great start, though. It may prevent asymptomatic spread, we don’t know. There’s a whole host of what ifs I can come up with (what if this new Mrna technology screws up something long term? Etc), but I’m going to be optimistic. I’m taking my cues from Fauci.
Bowdoin is a small college in a small town in a state which currently has one of the lowest Covid rates nationwide. So that’s an environment where a vaccine will make a huge difference.
It’s not so easy at larger universities or colleges of all sizes located in higher population areas.
I seriously doubt anyone knows what will happen in the fall of 2021 as I’m pretty sure accurate crystal balls have been out of stock for some time now. I expect most of us have hope of some sort. Life goes along better with hope. IRL we’ll all make decisions when the time is much closer based upon whatever the facts are then.
What needs to be understood is that this preliminary vaccine result, if it holds up, can give a range of results, based on outcomes that have not been revealed yet or are not specifically being checked for in this trial.
It is almost certain that the result will be an improvement over the current situation, but how much of an improvement is uncertain. Best case is that it is 90+% effective at preventing illness (including severe illness) even in vulnerable populations and 90+% effective at preventing asymptomatic transmission. Worst case is that while it may be 90+% effective at preventing illness generally, it is much less effective at protecting vulnerable populations and preventing asymptomatic transmission. While the trial results will presumably indicate effectiveness by age, the trial is not checking for asymptomatic infection or transmission, so that will presumably need further study.
The only “throw in the towel” that I have been seeing recently is that many people have basically given up on COVID-19 mitigation already, even if this potentially very effective vaccine is just a few months away. But they are not waiting for the vaccine in having crowded indoor gatherings, eating in indoor restaurants, etc…
No question this is good news, but I, too, am wary about a vaccine that doesn’t actually prevent transmission. I fully expect to be wearing a mask for at least another year. I would love it though if I could travel again.
I spent several hours last weekend digging up garden beds with a mask on within talking distance of friends at a community garden. Masks are not the end of the world.
There seems to also be potential good news soon on the Moderna vaccine, which uses a similar approach but only has to be kept at -4 F. Heck, I can get -4 in my freezer!
Come on folks, mask up, don’t have parties, wait it out.
Why keep playing this as either total trust or "throw in the towel? Don’t you see the wide expanse between the two extremes?
This is a great point and why I said what I said. Of course no one can predict but it’s just not a vaccine and we are good. There is more to it then that. Also we need like 70 - 80%to get the vaccine. Good luck with that. I am just being a realist. I would love to be wrong. No ego here. Just remind me again in the fall what we are all doing. I wish it was as easy as a vaccine and we’re done. The world needs to buy in. The USA has a whole sector that won’t wear a mask, doesn’t believe this is real, and current situation isn’t helping at all. Next administration should help.
There are no long term studies. This is bring fast tracked. I understand why. But we don’t even now how long any immunity would be for regardless of having 1 or 2 doses. So again. Just being a realist here not being pessimistic. Don’t throw away your masks.