muichimotsu
I Spit On Perfection
- May 16, 2006
- 6,529
- 1,648
- 36
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Skeptic
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Green
1. The first thing is recognizing that the vaccine we currently have is not giving a robust enough immunity to be adequately protective, so a mandate is useless. We need to go back to things like social distancing, act like you don't have the vaccine even if you do have the vaccine to prevent the spread, not saying the vaccine can't help those who have gotten it, but it's not an end all be all.
Not sure anyone said it was a be all end all, but it could've done something if we didn't have so much bad information being spread out and people having the ill education to interpret it to their benefit
2. Second thing is, start working on second generation vaccines, polyvalent, and focusing on viral proteins that are not the spike protein that is more prone to mutation, focus on other viral surface proteins like the Nucleocapsid protein that is the most prevalent antibody amoung people who have had the illness and recovered, and is currently protecting them from getting reinfected. Natural immunity wins out over the vaccine in that situation. Use that information, find out what antibodies are protecting them that the vaccines don't give. Also make sure that any vaccine you make has MULTIPLE proteins that they immunize you against, don't put all your eggs in one basket the way that they did with the first generation vaccines focusing on the spike protein at the expense of any other possible targets. They had such bad tunnelvision on this obvious target protein that they focused on it and as a result, a variant slips around. If a virus has to mutate MULTIPLE proteins to get around a vaccine it's much less likely to do so. All previous vaccines provided immunity vs multiple proteins, this is the first set of vaccines that only protects against a single protein as far as I know.
But is it though? My one example seems anecdotal, but natural immunity hardly seems that effective if it dies out in a few months and someone can get infected again
They're on a time crunch, what do you expect them to do? They only have so much money and resources in general and the goal was getting it out there. Ideally we could get something more robust, but the problem is our society has advanced to a point that we can't just wait it out, people are at risk of being freaking evicted because of how job opportunities are still floundering to a degree, among other systemic issues that are causing rampant suffering
I think most people would agree antiviral could do something, I believe you're referring to recimdivir (sp?). Certainly more likely than anti parasite drugs or a recent trend where people are gargling antibacterials3. More focus on early treatment regimens, people have used antiviral drugs early in the disease to limit replication along with steroids to limit inflammation, get them on prophylactic antibiotics to help prevent secondary bacterial infections that can be fatal, and blood thinners to limit blood clots that can be fatal. Do more studies on that, get some solid treatment regimens going rather than just throwing people on a ventilator and letting them die. Again, don't put your eggs all in 1 basket focusing entirely on the vaccine. Get treatment protocols.
4. We need to recognize that previously infected people do count towards herd immunity, they're not getting reinfected but the agenda right now is that only the vaccine provides protection which is a load of hogwash. Allow people who have been previously infected to be tested for antibody titers and T-cell titers. That can show them to be immune regardless of vaccination status
Again, need I point to the fact that the herd immunity doesn't work that way when they can still get infected, by your own logic?
Not getting reinfected by that strain is like playing Russian roulette and saying, "Oh boy, I didn't die that time, let's try it again and do double or nothing,". We shouldn't have to take this risk with something that could kill healthy people in their 20s because of a cytokine storm or even leave them crippled for life with lung scarring and the like
The vaccine provides more long term protection and would do better once we improve the formula, correct? Natural immunity is probably better in some respects, but that'd be like saying, "sure let's give everyone measles, they'll be okay," rather than inoculating us.
Upvote
0