General Discussion

uponit7771

(93,532 posts)

18. Looks like they're were figuring for median Ro vs relative Ro that the median Ro is still sky high..

Reply to denem (Reply #11)

Thu Jul 23, 2020, 12:07 PM

Jul 2020

... and set

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

62 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

QUESTION: Wouldnt any CV19 vaccine have to be 98% effective vs 50% effective like some Flu vaccines? [View all] uponit7771 Jul 2020 OP

The issue is, as it stands 50% who get Covid have no or beachbumbob Jul 2020 #1

thx, I was thinking this when I heard the vaccine shenanigans in the British study where they test uponit7771 Jul 2020 #3

No. denem Jul 2020 #2

CDC says median R0 for CV19 is 6 (link) not three ... does that change anything? tia uponit7771 Jul 2020 #4

R0 is a moving target. denem Jul 2020 #11

Looks like they're were figuring for median Ro vs relative Ro that the median Ro is still sky high.. uponit7771 Jul 2020 #18

Problem is nothing points to any permanent immunity, matter of beachbumbob Jul 2020 #5

+1, this is what I'm seeing too. There are way too many studies showing immunity doesn't last uponit7771 Jul 2020 #7

That is not an established fact Fiendish Thingy Jul 2020 #8

Not going to debate this as fact been established on beachbumbob Jul 2020 #10

Post link to source - I think you are misremembering Fiendish Thingy Jul 2020 #13

No. There are people who have recovered, tested negative, become ill again Ms. Toad Jul 2020 #16

That link proves my point- 1 patient, small number of other patients in inconclusive research Fiendish Thingy Jul 2020 #19

No it disproves your point. Ms. Toad Jul 2020 #22

No, the Spanish study was 60,000 people who were tested for immunity (link) do NOT retain it uponit7771 Jul 2020 #20

I have never heard of a vaccine that is 50% effective- maybe 50/50 chance of effectiveness? Fiendish Thingy Jul 2020 #6

From AAFP: CDC Releases Interim Flu Vaccine Effectiveness Report (link) looks like its even less ... uponit7771 Jul 2020 #12

Glue vaccine is a guess as to yearly strains. mjvpi Jul 2020 #9

Correct. n/t Ms. Toad Jul 2020 #15

I am far more likely to take a COVID 19 vaccine that is 50% effective Ms. Toad Jul 2020 #14

Yes, I'm thinking absolute protection seeing this even a little bit of CV19 becomes horrible to ... uponit7771 Jul 2020 #24

I don't know duforsure Jul 2020 #17

It doesn't matter. Jirel Jul 2020 #21

early aids drugs were a cocktail mix to treat the symptoms, not provide immunity beachbumbob Jul 2020 #23

Obviously. You've missed the point. Jirel Jul 2020 #27

Its black and white as far as we know when it comes to transmission, that's an black/white that even uponit7771 Jul 2020 #25

It's anything but black and white. Jirel Jul 2020 #28

50% effectiveness doesn't mean the same no. of people get it but it contains their symptoms halfway gollygee Jul 2020 #49

Is that 50% per capita? It all depends on the per capita. There are many types of per capita. Midnight Writer Jul 2020 #26

I have a rational skepticism of anyone claiming not to be an anti-vaxxer, but using language like Aristus Jul 2020 #29

"... in the past sure it happened... " WTF? That's the point of my statement you can't dismiss what uponit7771 Jul 2020 #30

That's not what I said. Aristus Jul 2020 #31

temp uponit7771 Jul 2020 #32

I disagree 100%, Abbot labs lack of accuracy in CV19 test has most likely not been a net positive uponit7771 Jul 2020 #33

There's going to be a huge potential for miscommunication if a vaccine is developed Aristus Jul 2020 #34

Got it, that's true .. so what would be a safe way to react to a vaccine? uponit7771 Jul 2020 #36

The common cold (rhinovirus) has 160 strains gollygee Jul 2020 #43

I agree gollygee Jul 2020 #35

Not if its absolute immunity, that does no one good with the Case Fatality Rate is so high and the uponit7771 Jul 2020 #38

You were already told that isn't the R0 number gollygee Jul 2020 #40

That's not the median Ro that's a relative one. The median Ro is 6 is from the CDC and not 2.5 uponit7771 Jul 2020 #50

It's R-naught (or zero) and not the letter o gollygee Jul 2020 #53

The CDC says 6 & was done in July after your two articles, its 6 and uponit7771 Jul 2020 #56

Most scientists, including this week, are saying about 2.5 gollygee Jul 2020 #57

I wonder why the CDC declared a 5.7 median Ro then uponit7771 Jul 2020 #61

I looked at your link gollygee Jul 2020 #59

+1 BannonsLiver Jul 2020 #37

...or people who give Trump too much of the benefit of the doubt that he or his pharma cronies ... uponit7771 Jul 2020 #39

I'm operating on the belief those engineering the vaccine aren't exclusively Trump cronies BannonsLiver Jul 2020 #41

Not the engineers but the heads of the pharma companies are too involved with Trump admin on some uponit7771 Jul 2020 #47

The scientists working on this vaccine are not Trump cronies gollygee Jul 2020 #42

... Trump doesn't do science or scientist IE the reasons I'm rationally skeptical about anything .. uponit7771 Jul 2020 #44

He isn't working on a vaccine gollygee Jul 2020 #46

True, his pharma cronies are involved in working on one though. It sounds like I'll look for an uponit7771 Jul 2020 #54

They are scientists and not his cronies gollygee Jul 2020 #55

They can be both if its the guy who's associated with opperation warp speed and they sold their uponit7771 Jul 2020 #58

There's pretty much no chance of a vaccine before the election gollygee Jul 2020 #60

👍 uponit7771 Jul 2020 #62

Don't get your hopes up. This is not going to be an easy vaccine. hunter Jul 2020 #45

It wouldn't kill anyone fescuerescue Jul 2020 #48

And it would reduce the transmission rate gollygee Jul 2020 #51

Exactly. fescuerescue Jul 2020 #52