Genetic Research Shows Rapid Immune Response in Children Protects Them From COVID-19:
Discovery of importance of interferon response in preventing serious infection will underpin new diagnostics and therapeutics.
Fundamental differences in the immune response of adults and children can help to explain why children are much less likely to become seriously ill from SARS-CoV-2, according to new research from the Wellcome Sanger Institute, University College London, and their collaborators.
The study, published in the journal Nature, is the most comprehensive single-cell study to compare SARS-CoV-2 infection in adults and children across multiple organs. Researchers found that a stronger 'innate' immune response in the airways of children, characterized by the rapid deployment of interferons, helped to restrict viral replication early on. In adults, a less rapid immune response meant the virus was better able to invade other parts of the body where the infection was harder to control.
[...] A nasal swab to measure the immune response in newly infected adults could be used to identify those at higher risk who may be candidates for pre-emptive monoclonal antibody treatment. Recent research has also suggested inhalation of interferons could be a viable therapy.
The immune system that we are born with is not the same as the one we have as adults. The 'innate' immune system of children is better able to recognize dangerous viruses or bacteria automatically, triggering 'naïve' B and T cells that can adapt to the threat. Adults have a more 'adaptive' immune system containing a huge repertoire of 'memory' B and T cell types, which have been trained through past exposure to respond to a particular threat. Though the adult immune system also has an innate response, it is more active in children.
One of the key mechanisms of both immune systems is a group of proteins called interferons, which are released in the presence of viral or bacterial threats and tell nearby cells to tighten their defenses. Interferons are proteins with strong anti-viral activity and their production will typically lead to the activation of B and T cells, which kill infected cells and prevent the pathogen from spreading further.
For this study, researchers at University College London (UCL) and affiliated hospitals4 collected and processed matched airway and blood samples from 19 pediatric and 18 adult COVID-19 patients with symptoms ranging from asymptomatic to severe, as well as control samples from 41 healthy children and adults.
[...] Analysis showed that interferons were more strongly expressed in healthy children compared to adults, with a more rapid immune response to infection in children's airways. This would help to restrict viral replication early on and give children an immediate advantage in preventing the virus from infecting the blood and other organs.
[...] This research was funded by Wellcome, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, Rosetrees Trust, Action Medical Research, Medical Research Council and the European Union's Horizon 2020 program.
Journal Reference:
Masahiro Yoshida, Kaylee B. Worlock, Ni Huang, et al. Local and systemic responses to SARS-CoV-2 infection in children and adults [open], Nature (DOI: 10.1038/s41586-021-04345-x)
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @12:28PM (21 children)
Unless a child has some pre-existing condition that would render him vulnerable if infected by any viral infection, routine vaccination of children for coronavirus never made any sense.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Username on Monday January 24 2022, @01:13PM (6 children)
Science was never a qualifier for mandates. Fascism just comes naturally to some.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @03:15PM
Found the inbreds.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @03:43PM (4 children)
The data show that vaccinating children will prevent more cases of COVID-related myocarditis than the cases of myocarditis that would be caused by vaccination. Even though the benefits of vaccinating children against COVID are smaller than for adults, it's still beneficial. The science says that vaccine mandates make sense and that they would hasten the end of the pandemic.
Your opposition to vaccine mandates and mask mandates isn't about freedom. Stop pretending you care about freedom. The right doesn't care about freedom one bit.
Let's take Nebraska Governor Pete Ricketts, for example. He's basically Ron DeSantis, Jr. in terms of his policies on COVID. Here's an article from November 2020: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/nebraska/articles/2020-11-12/nebraska-again-reports-more-than-2-000-new-virus-cases [usnews.com].
Now, Pete Ricketts and state Attorney General Doug Peterson are suing to overturn a mask mandate for the city of Omaha. That's happening right now, even as Omaha hospitals are struggling with the volume of COVID patients. Apparently it's acceptable to dramatically restrict public gatherings and force businesses to close, but it's too much to tell people they have to wear masks. Forcing my business to close is a far bigger infringement of my freedom than mandating masks.
Whether it's about vaccines or masks, stop pretending that your opposition is about freedom. It's not. The right is willing to close businesses and restrict gatherings because they haven't politicized those things the way they've politicized vaccines and masks.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25 2022, @02:23AM (3 children)
WHAT data? Links or it didn't happen.
Ah, the same thing "the science" were saying about every failed measure these past two years, and the same ever-broken promise? Donkeys, carrots, rinse, repeat?
No dude, it is 2022, anyone with a brain now understands it is what THE LIARS say.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25 2022, @02:43AM (1 child)
Idiots: "We refuse all safety measures!"
Everyone else: "You're going to make things worse! Please at least wear a mask!"
Idiots: "Tyranny! Muh rats!"
*later*
Idiots: "Seeee your safety measures did nothing!"
Everyone else: "Jesus Christ these fucking idiots."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25 2022, @03:26AM
Somehow, the more "safety measures" the populace gets saddled with, the more infections and deaths follow. You need total idiots indeed, to fail to notice this "little" fact after near two years. You paid shills (pardonnez-moi, "influencers") calling your mangy selves "everyone else" just does not fly with people living in the real world.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25 2022, @04:00AM
I'll refer you to the SN story about the FDA's approval of the vaccine for kids of ages 5-11: https://soylentnews.org/article.pl?sid=21/10/28/0144228 [soylentnews.org].
It's more like a segment of the population, to which you clearly belong, has undermined every effort (e.g., masks, vaccines, etc...) that could allow for a return to something more normal. The reasons for opposing the mitigations don't work. A large randomized controlled trial showed that masks do work. Serious side effects from the vaccines are quite rare and they have been very effective at preventing severe COVID. Despite that, there continue to be misinformation and conspiracy theories, particularly about vaccines.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by choose another one on Monday January 24 2022, @01:16PM (11 children)
So, why do we vaccinate kids against Rubella then? Rubella acquired as a child, kills practically zero children, I can't even find a pre-vaccine death rate for it.
Thought about it yet? Understand it yet?
[Hint: rubella is very bad for pregnant women and particularly the fetus in utero, we routinely vaccinate children against rubella _purely_ to protect other people they come into contact with. Now apply same logic to covid]
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @01:53PM (10 children)
The difference is the rubella vaccine is safe and works.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by choose another one on Monday January 24 2022, @03:19PM (9 children)
I guess you missed the bit in the 90s when the rubella vaccine (mmr) was (incorrectly and fraudulently) blamed for lots of cases of autism in kids?
Yes, mmr is safe (as safe as it gets) - but that didn't stop anti-vaxxers then.
Covid vaccines are about as safe as it gets, and very very widely tested now (nearly 10Billion doses given to date) - still doesn't stop the anti-vaxxers.
Oh, and they are known work, again proven with mass population-level testing now. How did the UK get through the Delta wave without the lockdowns needed to control Alpha, and without the hospital chaos Alpha caused _despite_ Delta being more dangerous than Alpha? Mostly vaccinated population, that's why (natural immunity lasts a few months at most and prior alpha infection doesn't protect much against Delta based on the experience of people I know, some of whom are on their third covid infection now).
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @03:54PM (7 children)
Bullshit on natural immunity being short lived.
And if you define the vaccines as "working": are you due for your first booster or second? Because protection only lasts for a couple or a few months according to "the science." So many vaxxed and boostered people catching and spreading COVID right now. The majority, in fact. Please make sure your "science" is fully up to date. The Omicron strain has changed everything as far as spread/deadliness. (It spreads much more readily and is less deadly. The current vaccines are obsolete.)
Israel is the most vaxxed and boosted country in the world (many people having 4 shots), and it is spreading through Israel in waves just like in any other country. Odds are you will catch it. The good news is that Omicron should give you long lasting immunity.
(Score: 4, Informative) by choose another one on Monday January 24 2022, @04:09PM (1 child)
Bullshit?
I have multiple relatives, unvaccinated because they are children, who are catching covid every 3-4months - it's rife in our schools (because the kids are unvaccinated) and if you are regularly exposed that's how long immunity lasts.
The vaccines fade but still protect from hospitalization and death at six months out (and may be better after 3rd or 4th) - that's better than the natural immunity (and before you say second or subsequent infections are milder - no they aren't, at least not in my family).
Covid "boosters" may be yearly or even six-monthly - nothing new there, we already have annual flu vaccines, and it's only annual because flu is seasonal, covid might settle to seasonal but hasn't yet, the waves are clearly more rapid.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25 2022, @02:32AM
Stop with the charade already. Cold is cold is cold, and it is what schoolchildren were and are catching. Vaccines do not protect shit since omicron, as Israeli data abundantly show. And your ill-gotten gains from this propaganda gig will turn into dust anyway when the economy gives up the ghost.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Monday January 24 2022, @04:31PM
I guess you missed that bit about people getting repeat infections.
Yep, so we get repeated booster shots too. You're not veering into rocket science territory bud. It is that simple.
And another mutation will change it again, but not necessarily for the better. There's an awful lot of hope being placed on omicron.
Except, of course, if it doesn't say because you didn't get long lasting immunity in the first place or a new covid variant goes through that the immunity isn't effective against.
(Score: 2) by choose another one on Monday January 24 2022, @06:33PM (2 children)
More on that natural immunity thing:
News tonight says Sarah Palin ("unvaccinated of course") has just tested positive for Covid. _Again._
[there's also Novax Jokervitch's awfully timely (allowed him to apply for an exemption through a process that had a deadline several days before...) second (or third?) positive, but that may be bullshit itself]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @07:28PM
We found Covid Sarah [wikipedia.org]?? How many have to die, before she is caught and locked up?
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25 2022, @02:38AM
And the only thing inconveniencing her any, was the test and not the virus. _Again._
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25 2022, @09:19AM
Did your kids get their Tetanus shots? How come you need 4 by first birthday?? Must be complete shit vaccines!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25 2022, @02:05AM
An anti-vaxxer's anectodal evidence is just as reliable as your own. Give it a rest.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @01:19PM
I'm modding you up even though I disagree. This was a point of discussion with the emergency use authorization (EUA) for the Pfizer vaccine in kids. The occurrence of myocarditis, in particular, was of concern. However, based on trials, even in kids, it seems like the risk of developing myocarditis from COVID is still somewhat higher than the risk from vaccination. The risks versus the benefits weren't as clear cut as in adults, but the evidence still suggests that children are better off being vaccinated than getting COVID. It should be pointed out that the approval took place when Delta was still the dominant variant, though Omicron has now nearly eliminated Delta altogether. Again, I disagree with you, but I modded you up because this point was raised when the EUA for the Pfizer vaccine was debated.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday January 24 2022, @05:59PM
So, um, you're saying that Democrats may be on to something here? The reason Democrats are dying of covid in lower numbers is because, as stated on Fox News, Democrats drink the blood of children.
The server will be down for replacement of vacuum tubes, belts, worn parts and lubrication of gears and bearings.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Rich on Monday January 24 2022, @01:03PM (3 children)
On top of the quoted paper (which is dated Dec. '21), there is more brand new research (not yet reviewed); Omicron seems to be less efficient than Delta at disabling this interferon mechanism:
https://aktuelles.uni-frankfurt.de/englisch/researchers-of-the-university-of-kent-and-goethe-university-find-explanation-why-the-omicron-variant-causes-less-severe-disease/ [uni-frankfurt.de]
(Score: 0, Troll) by Username on Monday January 24 2022, @01:11PM (2 children)
Be careful, you're treading in "antivax" territory.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Rich on Monday January 24 2022, @04:15PM (1 child)
That implies that the pro-vax (to which I belong) camp should selectively filter information. This is bogus and would reduce credibility. The Uni Frankfurt side has Sandra Ciesek on board, head of their local virology research, but also a doctor at the uni hospital. Together with Christian Drosten of Charite Berlin (who also studied in Frankfurt, btw), she's the major source for communicating the science side of things to the larger public (e.g. via the "NDR Podcast"). In terms of competence, these two are worlds apart from any government related sources, which are catastrophically bad and worse, haven't improved when they had two years to do so.
I think the research helps, together with other sources, making somewhat informed decisions about one's specific vax schedule and/or personal "lockdown" measures.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @05:04PM
Welcome to CovidNews. You must be new here. (Covid is people!)
(Score: 1, Troll) by Barenflimski on Monday January 24 2022, @01:54PM (17 children)
This is exactly the reason why all kids need to be masked up and locked down and treated like prisoners.
Thank god for the wonderful people trying to keep my kids safe outside the bounds of science, because who knows, they might be that one kid that this study doesn't refer to. What if there was a kid that got through the medical system and they didn't know he had an interferon problem and was the one to die? We must protect every fringe case possibility across all kids, and arguably for all of time. What if they brought it home to grandma? Its totally unimaginable, because its clear that if a kid were to get it, 3 adults will die.
There is something so comforting about watching my children be told that touching other people will make you sick and die. Eating like prisoners, 6 feet away from each other, sipping milk through straws so as not to breath on each other is natural. Hugging went out with the hippies in the 70's anyhow. People do best when we tell them what they can and can't do, not when they do what they feel is natural, because natural is dirty, leads to covid and eventually pregnancy. Plus, I know how hard it is to untrain them if they were to ever experience what I experienced. I wouldn't want them to feel what I feel, so best they learn that today that anything they "want to do" is likely "not safe."
Lock em down! Mask em up!
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @01:58PM
Control and cowardice. That's what this is all about. And displaying fealty to Dear Leader, North Korea style.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @02:23PM (15 children)
The right took COVID seriously during the first surge in China. A lot of the right wingers online were warning people to stock up on food and get N95 masks back in December 2019 and January 2020, before the first COVID cases were reported in the US. The right wingers were taking it very seriously, back when it was just called the "novel coronavirus" and wasn't a big story with the mainstream media. Trump reacted quickly on shutting down flights from China. When Trump started getting criticized for not ramping up testing and the lack of supplies for healthcare workers, that's when the right started making excuses. Instead of encouraging people to take COVID seriously, they downplayed it. While they had once said that people should wear masks, they started saying masks were useless and mask mandates were about fascism. The narrative changed as an excuse to defend Trump. The right hasn't looked back since then, continuing to claim that COVID is no big deal despite all of the evidence to the contrary. Even as Trump has recently said they're wrong, the right continues to downplay COVID.
Your characterization of this is absurd, but it's typical of right wing rhetoric. At best, your post is hyperbole. But it ignores the fact that the FDA's advisory board was much more hesitant to approve Pfizer's vaccine for children of ages 5-11. They decided to do so because the risk of heart-related complications from COVID appeared to be significantly higher than from vaccination. Even ignoring the impact vaccinating children has on adults, even just taken in isolation, the data supported that vaccinating children was beneficial for them. This is based on facts and data, not whatever it is you're saying it's about.
This has gone so far that even Trump says that people like you are idiots. He's repeatedly touted the benefits of vaccination, saying that the vaccines are safe and effective. Meanwhile, many hospitals in the US have been overwhelmed with COVID patients, a great many of whom are unvaccinated. If the adults would get vaccinated, perhaps it wouldn't be such a problem if children happened to get COVID. But because the adults won't get vaccinated and hospitals are struggling to keep up with the COVID patients, we're stuck with these restrictions.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @02:33PM (6 children)
The restrictions have not done anything to wipe out the coronavirus. Whatever utility there MAY have been in the beginning for restrictions, they are long gone. The current Omicron strain of the virus spreads through the population, vaxxed or unvaxxed. Masks do nothing to stop the virus. (They never did.) The good news is that everyone had been or very soon will be exposed to the virus naturally or through vaccination, so there is no point in pretending that the virus is anything other than endemic at this point. Several formerly strict restrictions countries in Europe (UK being one) agree!
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @02:56PM (4 children)
The data say that you're full of shit: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02457-y [nature.com]. The randomized controlled trial showed that masks work.
But like I said, for the right, this isn't about facts and data. Your reaction to my post just provides another example of this.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @03:04PM (3 children)
From your link:
"The team found that the number of symptomatic cases was lower in treatment villages than in control villages. The decrease was a modest 9% ..."
This is far from enough to stop the spread of COVID. Masks are almost all theater to show you are "doing something."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @03:10PM (1 child)
Once again, you cherry pick what you want to hear. Let's provide appropriate context:
To be clear, 42% is far below the 95% target that's usually set for universal masking. The authors propose that because of the testing strategy, they likely didn't capture the additional reduction in asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic cases. If perhaps 70% or maybe 95% of the population had wore masks, it's likely that the reduction would have been substantially greater than 9%.
(Score: 0, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @03:58PM
You showed me a study with real-world data. I quoted the study's own conclusion based on that real world data. Now you are shifting the goal posts to some perfect fantasy scenario you just came up with and imagine that would work even better. You do not have data.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25 2022, @03:11AM
If there was ever a more obvious goal post shifting, I've never seen it. Straight from masks do "nothing" and "never did" to masks don't do "enough" and "almost all" ineffective. Now if only those terms weren't so weaselly, we might have been able to see another one.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25 2022, @09:22AM
Except that for vaxxed, it's less deadly than yearly flu and for the unvaxxed, it's 1/3 a Delta, so expect another half a million dead.
Have fun
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Barenflimski on Monday January 24 2022, @03:59PM (6 children)
It must be an amazing world to live in where you hear someone say something, and you immediately come up with something about political parties. And then, you point your finger and start talking about how "they politicized this."
I think folks like you have had your head in the sand for so long that you don't see that regardless of your feelz and how you box up the world, you don't see the reality of what is going on.
For you and folks like you, I get that your MO is that every last life should be saved and otherwise if people don't think exactly like you, we get, "You're the real humanitarian aren't you?!" or "Clearly your opinion doesn't matter." I don't live in a world and don't want to live in a world where we put bumpers on every corner and the default thought is that everything in life will kill me, because short of a nuclear winter, I'll likely still be here tomorrow with the rest of you.
I'm about as middle of the road as they come, so when folks like you tell me that I'm now a republican and right, it really speaks volumes about you and what has gone on in your head and the dwindling crew that want to keep acting like that.
Democrats fleeing -> https://news.gallup.com/poll/388781/political-party-preferences-shifted-greatly-during-2021.aspx [gallup.com]
Cloth masks useless per CNN "experts" -> "Cloth masks are little more than facial decorations." said CNN Medical Analyst Dr. Leana Wen
I can't wait to now be told, "If everyone just got vaccinated and wore masks, we wouldn't have COVID because republicans and anti-maskers and anti-vaxxers brought us Delta(India) Omicron(South Africa) Alpha (UK)" Please, please, we've got the bingo board up over here and I've got 10 bucks on this.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @04:27PM (5 children)
I responded as I did because your original post was a gross exaggeration that doesn't come anywhere close to reality. Nobody is saying that kids in school are going to bring COVID home, and that it's going to cause the adults at home to die. When you post something that so dramatically misrepresents the situation, it's very hard to believe it's being posted in good faith. There's no straw left in the barn because you've taken it all to build straw men. The restrictions that are in place right now are general efforts to reduce transmission because of COVID patients once again pushing the limits of what hospitals can handle. In many states, COVID hospitalizations and ICU hospitalizations have been as high as last winter. Pediatric hospitalizations have been at their highest levels since the start of the pandemic, though that's probably not nearly as serious of an issue as the overall level of hospitalizations.
The restrictions you decry are short term mitigations to get the situation under control, not to treat children like prisoners. And if you don't want people to assume you're a right winger, don't start off by repeating the same nonsense arguments. When you start off with something that's so asininely absurd, you shouldn't expect better replies.
Long term mask mandates and social distancing in schools aren't good ideas. They do make sense as short term measures to try to limit the severity of the current wave of COVID. The point is to slow down the spread of Omicron to protect the healthcare system. Once cases plunge, as they already are in many parts of the US, the restrictions probably aren't needed. As a long term policy, I don't agree with the restrictions. But they do make sense as part of a larger set of mitigations in the short term. Unless there's some new variant that causes another surge in the near future, it probably doesn't make sense to have those restrictions in place in March. Long term, restrictions probably cause developmental harm in children. But many of the restrictions you're describing are short term mitigations to respond to the current surge.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by Barenflimski on Monday January 24 2022, @05:05PM (4 children)
I'm offended you accuse me of appropriating "right wing language." I would suggest to anyone that looks at the world like its a computer program, that they need to put down the machine and try to understand humans. Humans have more than just 1 goal.
I think folks like you and the rest of the crew have completely overstepped your bounds and used strawmen non stop. The CDC and then the news treated every person in the United States like they lived in New York City and told us that if we didn't do exactly what they said that "The health system would be overrun!" along with about every other gloom and doom scenario. During every single step of this, I've been told that I'm an idiot and that I don't understand by a whole bunch of characters that are reading someone elses study and watching talking heads who now claim they're the only experts. On top of that, they've been consistently wrong on a large portion of the crap they spew, like, "Masks will reduce spread. I mean data!" If masks worked, then we wouldn't have some of the highest rates of COVID. Or are you going to now say that only the anti-maskers are getting covid? Give me a break. Your talking points sounds like farts in the wind.
I have yet to see any health system near me be anywhere near completely overrun. Are health care workers busy? Yup. So am I, but you don't see me on the nightly news complaining that I get calls at all hours of the day and never get enough sleep because of them. Just because a couple hospitals in one city are super busy, that doesn't mean the exact same thing is going on in every other city in a large country that spreads multiple time zones.
Short term? Give me a break. You can honestly say that with a straight face?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @05:39PM
To these people, there is no world outside airline ticker designations. If you don't reside in their fascist utopia, you aren't a real person, just a trivial peasant. Grow some more corn! Quit complaining and pick that cotton!
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @05:41PM (2 children)
The CDC isn't mandating masks or physical distancing in schools. Those decisions are made at the state and local levels. The CDC provides guidance but they're not issuing the mandates you complained about. You already knew the CDC lacked the authority to mandate the things you're objecting to. State and local officials can and have disregarded CDC guidance.
The extent to which masks are effective depends on the type of masks people wear and the proportion of people who wear masks. Cloth masks are better than not wearing a mask at all, but surgical masks provide better protection, and N95 masks are even better. If more people wear masks, it's going to be more effective at reducing the spread of COVID. Masks are one tool to prevent the spread of COVID, but things like staying home when you're sick, physical distancing where possible, and avoiding large gatherings are also useful. It's like you're complaining about getting malware on your computer when you used antivirus software, but not taking any other precautions like blocking scripts and ads in your browser, installing security updates, using common sense to avoid sketchy websites, and making backups. Antivirus software has a place, but there's a lot more to security than that. The same is true with masks.
I provided a link to a discussion about a clinical trial involving masks. You can find it elsewhere in this thread. Masks work, but their effectiveness depends on the type of mask and how many people wear them.
As for your comment about only anti-maskers getting COVID, that's just another straw man. All along, the point of wearing masks hasn't really been to protect the wearer, but to prevent people who are asymptomatic or only have mild symptoms from unknowingly spreading COVID to others. No, it wouldn't just be anti-maskers getting COVID because the point of masks has never been to protect the wearer. You already knew that. That's why the randomized controlled trial that I linked to elsewhere in this thread, one where multiple populations are tested in the trial, is really needed to assess the efficacy of masks. The point of wearing a mask isn't so much to protect yourself but to protect others around you in case you have COVID and don't know it.
Perhaps some of the mitigations you complain about have prevented the hospitals from being overrun.
Again, that's misrepresenting the issue. It's not about individual workers being busy but hospitals lacking the resources to adequately treat patients. But you already knew that.
(Score: 2) by Barenflimski on Tuesday January 25 2022, @12:41AM (1 child)
I'm not sure you have any idea what I'm talking about. Read my first post. My kids have been totally manhandled by the CDC, and then the local idiots that follow the CNN guidelines. If you think this is normal, then good for you. I think its terrible. It is harmful and I'm seeing it daily.
To you folks, everything not perfectly in line with your talking points, seems to be a "strawman." You folks have totally missed the mark.
I could care less how "safe" folks like you think you've made the world, when you've made a world unlivable and harmful to others.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25 2022, @04:19AM
Perhaps I should have just called you a liar, particularly after the disinformation you posted about masks.
You want the restrictions to end? Great! So do I. I don't like masks, but I accept them as a necessary evil. But I want to get to a point where we can just do away with them. For that matter, I'd really like to do away with quarantines and perhaps not have to require strict isolation. But like I said, they're a necessary evil.
Vaccines are really effective at preventing severe COVID. When people get vaccinated and boosted, it's really unlikely they'll get sick enough to require hospitalization. That means the hospitals won't be overrun with COVID patients who are seriously ill, ending one of the main reasons for having continued restrictions. Of course, we still are at risk of hospitals being overloaded with COVID patients, as many hospitals are right now, because of low vaccination rates.
If you want these restrictions to end, getting more adults vaccinated is the fastest way to do so. How do you propose to increase the adult vaccination rate?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25 2022, @02:49AM
With no other data than the Chinese disinfo blitz, overcaution seemed prudent to many. Now, 2 years into the song-and-dance, everyone and their pets are abundantly informed by firsthand or secondhand experience, and the manufactured horror stories get discarded as the lies they are.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @03:59PM (6 children)
First, it's absolutely worthwhile to consider the benefits and risks of vaccinating children against COVID. There was substantial debate among scientists about whether COVID vaccines should be authorized for children at younger ages. There are risks involved such as myocarditis, and the benefits aren't as clear. The data still suggested that there was substantial benefit from being vaccinated. That is, children were less likely to get myocarditis from vaccination than from COVID. For that matter, it's completely reasonable to discuss the merits and issues with more boosters, particularly because the second Pfizer booster seems to have a diminished effect (five-fold increase an antibodies) versus the first booster (25-fold increase in antibodies). Of course, people here couldn't stop themselves from using those discussions as an opportunity to complain about vaccines, with posts like this [soylentnews.org] and hyperbole like this [soylentnews.org]. Yes, I posted replies in the subsequent discussion of those posts, but that's because the discussion had already been derailed. If the scientists can debate the merits of boosters and vaccinating kids, so can we. I'm just sick and tired of those discussions taking a hard right turn into politics.
Seriously, the news here is that inhaling interferons could be a viable treatment for COVID. Understanding why the immune response in kids generally prevents severe COVID is worthwhile not only for basic science, but to try to understand how to maybe promote a similar response in adults. If the key is interferons, it suggests some merit to the idea of inhaled interferons. I'd still want to know how effective it is, and if it's necessary to receive the interferons early in the course of COVID or if it can still be effective later on. Still, more effective treatments for COVID bring us closer to ending the pandemic.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by choose another one on Monday January 24 2022, @04:23PM (1 child)
> Still, more effective treatments for COVID bring us closer to ending the pandemic.
There's a teeny weeny problem. Testing. Most of the treatments that have come out that look really good require treatment, as you say, "early in the course of COVID". That means you need to be testing either all the time, or whenever anyone has the first symptoms of a cold which might be covid.
Widespread testing like that _is_ going to stop. It has to, it's actually unaffordable - cost of the "test" bit of test and trace in the UK is >10x the cost of the vaccines (and that's paying premium early-adopter guaranteed delivery for the latter). It's about 10% of the cost of the _entire_ healthcare system - testing for one disease.
I predict (in the UK) testing will _only_ take place when you are hospitalized due to symptoms pointing to covid, that change will happen within a few months (maybe weeks), it's why the vaccine mandate on healthcare workers (because vaccines uptodate give about the same protection from staff-to-patient transmission as the current twice a week testing but at fraction of cost - the testing is going away). Unfortunately that means that by the time you get tested and show positive it's going to be too late for most of these therapies.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 25 2022, @03:12AM
Right, just like most antivirals; for example Tamiflu is a wonder if used in the first 24 hours, so-so if in the next 24, mostly useless after that.
Wrong. When you have symptoms of something that you need antivirals for, you absolutely would not miss them. And then you self-medicate with said antiviral, and wait a bit; if it is the right antiviral, then again, you absolutely would not fail to notice the effect. Having a flu wave, or a COVID wave, will also be a big hint as to which antiviral you need.
Keeping this type of antivirals prescription only instead of OTC, is literally killing people for money ("exclusive OTC rights" my ass).
(Score: 0, Troll) by DrkShadow on Monday January 24 2022, @05:09PM (3 children)
You're ignoring all of the other costs, like:
- Impaling your kid in the arm with a steel rod
- Taking half a day to take your kids to get them jabbed every few months
- Getting them in the car (like trying to take a pet to the vet?)
- The next-to-nothing benefit that they receive for this
- The actual cost of the vaccine (manufacturing, distribution, etc), especially vs its current efficacy
- The higher insurance premiums that you'll be paying shortly for repeatedly medicating the entire populace against the sniffles
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @06:02PM (2 children)
You forgot a couple of costs:
1) The time required to think up misleading arguments to post online
2) Actually taking the time to post those misleading points
What's misleading? There's just not a lot of support for vaccinating people beyond the initial two doses of the mRNA vaccine and one booster a few months later. Israel has administered second boosters, but that seems very unlikely to happen elsewhere. It's unlikely that people are going to be "jabbed every few months."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @06:31PM (1 child)
Parent said:
"It's unlikely that people are going to be "jabbed every few months."
You are right, but not because there is a lack of people promoting it. (One Soylentil already said he'd be willing to do it every 6 months. Pfizer would be totally cool with that, BTW.)
What will make this "unlikely" is people catching COVID even after being boosted or seeing someone they know to whom that happened and then being told they need yet another vaccine booster to be "protected", where "protected" does not mean you won't catch it again! Most of these folks will sense that they have been sold on a false premise and that they have gained enough immunity *as it is*. Many, many formerly pro-vaxxers will declare themselves "done" with vaccines, and the court decisions (for nearly all employees) mean that Biden cannot force them to get another jab.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday January 24 2022, @08:10PM
A lot of scientists are skeptical of giving additional boosters. Antibodies wane over time, but there should still be strong protection against severe disease from other parts of the immune system. If it's enough to keep people out of the hospital and to prevent more severe issues like long COVID, additional boosters shouldn't be needed. If variants change enough to evade immune protection, there might be a need for variant-specific boosters at some point. But I don't think there's a lot of support for just giving a second booster.
The initial booster provided a 25-fold increase in antibodies. Perhaps more importantly, it seems to have caused the production of a greater range of antibodies, some of which might bind better to new variants with more mutations to the spike protein. The second booster provided a 5-fold increase in antibodies, and I haven't heard anything about producing more diverse antibodies versus the initial booster. It seems like there are diminishing returns with additional boosters, and it's less clear that the benefits of the second booster are needed. It's not clear what antibody levels are needed to prevent infection, which makes it hard to know how useful the second booster really is. At some point, original antigenic sin may also become an issue.
It made a lot of sense to give the initial booster. The general consensus I've seen from scientists recently is to support the first booster. It seems like there's a whole lot less support for giving additional boosters. I think it's going to be quite difficult to get approval for additional boosters unless they are specific to new variants. I'd be surprised if there were additional boosters using the mRNA vaccines designed for the ancestral strain of SARS-CoV-2, except for immunocompromised people.
That's my reasoning for saying that additional boosters are unlikely.