Dr. Scott Gottlieb: "Vaccination doesn't mean people can return to pre-Covid life" ??

Where are you getting this from? There is no science that says that these vaccines will stop transmission!!! They even go as far as to say that these vaccines likely won't stop transmission, thus continuing the masks, lockdowns and social distancing. To call this anti-science is the absolute height of ignorance and hypocrisy. You are the anti-science information spreader here.

Explain this to me wrote:

Where are you getting this from? There is no science that says that these vaccines will stop transmission!!! They even go as far as to say that these vaccines likely won't stop transmission, thus continuing the masks, lockdowns and social distancing. To call this anti-science is the absolute height of ignorance and hypocrisy. You are the anti-science information spreader here.

No they don't. The Moderna and Pfizer trials only read out symptomatic cases as the end point. They haven't collected the data yet to determine asymptomatic cases with the vaccine. That's why they won't make a statement about transmissibility -- they didn't measure it in the trials. There is every reason to believe that a highly effective vaccine reduces viral load and infection period plenty, therefore reducing transmission. Companies have to be careful to not overstate claims or you will (rightly) call them out.

h54 wrote:

Fear mongers like Harambe and Roy are disgusting. People like you who distort facts and who try to manipulate people's opinions with lies are not better.

Thanks for the callout bro :)

Gottlieb is being overly pessimistic. Every reason to believe vaccinations will accelerate and we should get enough of the population vaccinated to start affecting deaths and hospitalizations during the spring. The big concern is the British strain that seems to make control measures much less effective. I hope we can outrun that -- but that shouldn't adjust the timeline too much (to see a silver lining). I would think June/July is a great target for dropping restrictions, but only a prediction!

Especially since Biden seems to actually care about the virus, I expect a more coordinated response in a few weeks.

Also see here for evidence that the Pfizer vaccine should work on the British strain:

I saw a Wall Street Journal article indicating that a proposal for studying transmissibility after the moderna vaccine didn’t receive federal funding. Are you aware of any ongoing studies on the transmissibility effect of the moderna or Pfizer vaccines ? And by the way, why in the world didn’t they fund that study?

0/10

Your fearmongering know-it-all attitude is getting annoying.

Gotllieb , when pressed by the cnbc host, said large gatherings would be unlikely even in the fall. No concerts or attending sporting events. And probably, no races of any size will occur.

I don't know a single person who has become seriously ill by the virus. I know many people who have lost their jobs and their businesses due to the shut downs. My nephew's school work has deteriorated dramatically with the online classes.

At some point, people will rise up to question the gov't officials mandating these lockdowns while they themselves travel and violate every mandate they impose on the rest of us. Why people trust the morons in gov't ( republican and democrat) to micro manage their daily lives has been a revelation to me. The pioneer spirit is over in this country. This is a country of terrified sheep who just go along with whatever they're told, no matter how much it destroys their freedoms.

trashcan wrote:

I saw a Wall Street Journal article indicating that a proposal for studying transmissibility after the moderna vaccine didn’t receive federal funding. Are you aware of any ongoing studies on the transmissibility effect of the moderna or Pfizer vaccines ? And by the way, why in the world didn’t they fund that study?

Transmissibility studies likely require a LOT of more viral events in both arms to ensure you get good data from contact tracing? I'm sure it's doable but it's much trickier than just looking at the people you jabbed.

I know for one of the mRNA trials they are going to do serological studies on participants and report that, so we should have a good idea of asymptomatic infection ratio between the arms. If the vaccine prevents asymptomatic infections, that's a really strong data point that transmission should be very low.

bladerunner wrote:

I don't know a single person who has become seriously ill by the virus.

Are you trying to insinuate the virus isn't serious because you haven't seen a serious case? At least the government stooges welding you in your house (lol) have more critical thinking than that.

Harambe wrote:

I would think June/July is a great target for dropping restrictions, but only a prediction!

Dr. Gottileb is predicting -- and judging by his cheerful demeanour, he is in approval of the idea -- that there will be a permanent partial lockdown in America, including such measures as no 1000+ in-person events during the Fall season, temperature checks before entering any in-person events, etc.

jamin wrote:

Harambe wrote:

I would think June/July is a great target for dropping restrictions, but only a prediction!

Dr. Gottileb is predicting -- and judging by his cheerful demeanour, he is in approval of the idea -- that there will be a permanent partial lockdown in America, including such measures as no 1000+ in-person events during the Fall season, temperature checks before entering any in-person events, etc.

And you trust Gottlieb more than me? I have THOUSANDS of posts on LRC... come on man. How many times has Scott posted here?

trashcan wrote:

I think that given these circumstances, it is reasonable to say that it is likely that the vaccines will inhibit transmission, but we don’t know how much yet. /

This is the correct analysis, but for some reason (fear -> shares -> clicks) the media keeps running with the idea that the vaccine won't prevent infectiousness. See, for example the headline below: "Even After Getting Vaccinated, You Could Still Infect Others," but the actual scientists interviewed say things like this:

“I suspect the answer will be that people will not be able to transmit — that the virus will protect from transmission, because I think there will be enough antibodies made that will neutralize the virus even at the mucosal surface,” said Dr. Warner Greene, senior investigator at Gladstone Institutes, an independent, nonprofit research lab in San Francisco. “But it is just a guess at this point,” he added.

It’s a guess Bhattacharya agreed with. The Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines have, after all, turned out to be much more effective than those tricky flu vaccines. “If you have a vaccine that’s 95 percent effective at reducing symptoms, there is no universe in which it wouldn’t also reduce the likelihood of transmission. It’s just not possible,” he said. “So we’re not talking about whether it reduces transmission or not, we just want to get an extent as to how much.”

The situation I have in my mind is an infection of the mucosa while the underlying tissue remains unaffected. Like a treetop fire with wet underbrush. Would the serological studies pick that up?

trashcan wrote:

Harambe wrote:

Transmissibility studies likely require a LOT of more viral events in both arms to ensure you get good data from contact tracing? I'm sure it's doable but it's much trickier than just looking at the people you jabbed.

I know for one of the mRNA trials they are going to do serological studies on participants and report that, so we should have a good idea of asymptomatic infection ratio between the arms. If the vaccine prevents asymptomatic infections, that's a really strong data point that transmission should be very low.

The situation I have in my mind is an infection of the mucosa while the underlying tissue remains unaffected. Like a treetop fire with wet underbrush. Would the serological studies pick that up?

I don't know. I know mucousal immunity can use different types of antibodies than other immune responses. Everything I've seen from immunologists suggests there is a strong likelihood that a 95% effective vaccine has a corresponding effect on transmission. I would assume they are factoring your scenario in that, but maybe not!

h54 wrote:

The mod who deletes posts criticising Jamin is not impartial.

Exactly this.

This is possible sure - no vaccine is 100% effective. The massive decrease in systemic viral load is very likely to override these concerns. Think of it this way: asymptomatic spread is very rare, and the vaccines prevent symptoms 95% of the time - so you'd have to conclude asymptomatic spread is the only way to have transmissibility after vaccines. If the vaccine drops the R0 of the virus by 75-90% that will effectively eradicate it in a few months. Especially if we continue to limit superspreader events until then.

trashcan wrote:

Harambe wrote:

Transmissibility studies likely require a LOT of more viral events in both arms to ensure you get good data from contact tracing? I'm sure it's doable but it's much trickier than just looking at the people you jabbed.

I know for one of the mRNA trials they are going to do serological studies on participants and report that, so we should have a good idea of asymptomatic infection ratio between the arms. If the vaccine prevents asymptomatic infections, that's a really strong data point that transmission should be very low.

The situation I have in my mind is an infection of the mucosa while the underlying tissue remains unaffected. Like a treetop fire with wet underbrush. Would the serological studies pick that up?

jamin wrote:

"Just like things were different after 9/11"

I warned you guys! The Coronavirus-Industrial Complex is trying to steal 2021+ from us like they did 2020.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4PA47aeHDw&ab_channel=CNBCTelevision

Absolutely. A systematic and systemic authoritarian takeover. Unfortunately, too many people are programmed to shout "conspiracy theory" at anything outside their narrow purview.

Do we have to guess what your point is?

Well the concern is that vaccinated asymptomatic spread would function differently than unvaccinated asymptomatic spread.

That is absolutely possible. I think it is probable, although very unsure to what degree.

Again I go back to killed vaccines. Is the rather poor ratio of transmission reduction to protection of the vaccinated a result of the generally weaker protection afforded by that kind of vaccine or would the ratio be different from live vaccines regardless of level of protection? I lean towards the latter, and addressing this problem has been the subject of considerable research.

On the plus side I think a lot of the vaccine herd immunity calculations are discounting the effect of previously infected individuals, and the different characteristics of the infected vs the vaccinated with regards to their disease-spreading behavior(as in % needed for herd immunity is different)

Dr. Scott Gottlieb: "Vaccination doesn't mean people can return to pre-Covid life" ??

WAAAAHHHHH dad says I can't play with my friends and I don't feel like understanding his reasoning waaaaahhhhh

Dude what are you missing out on?