• Welcome to AlpineZone, the largest online community of skiers and snowboarders in the Northeast!

    You may have to REGISTER before you can post. Registering is FREE, gets rid of the majority of advertisements, and lets you participate in giveaways and other AlpineZone events!

Permanent Industry Changes in the Post-COVID World

dblskifanatic

Active member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
611
Points
28
Of course it is still a possibility. No one ever said it wasn't. However it is a substantially LOWER possibility than without the vaccines. And the more people that get the vaccines, the lower that possibility chance continues to go. That should be the key takeaway. Unless we can 100% eliminate the virus globally, a "possibility" of something will always exist.

So my point is there will always be a possibility of variants just like the flu each year. Just like the flu vaccine, it does not stop all variants. Covid Sars-2 was used for this vaccine, Covid-19 maybe used for future vaccines. The objective is always to try and keep up.
 

Smellytele

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
7,999
Points
63
Location
Right where I want to be
So my point is there will always be a possibility of variants just like the flu each year. Just like the flu vaccine, it does not stop all variants. Covid Sars-2 was used for this vaccine, Covid-19 maybe used for future vaccines. The objective is always to try and keep up.
So are you saying get the vaccine as it is 90-95% effective against the original strain then move forward? Or are you saying something different where we still wear masks and not congregate with others?
Or something in between?
 

skiur

Active member
Joined
Jan 27, 2012
Messages
913
Points
28
I'm a little confused as to what point dblskifanatic is trying to make as well.
 

Edd

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 8, 2006
Messages
5,603
Points
63
Location
Newmarket, NH
So are you saying get the vaccine as it is 90-95% effective against the original strain then move forward? Or are you saying something different where we still wear masks and not congregate with others?
Or something in between?
It’s hard to tell. He’s said many times how much he travels and eats out but follows the guidelines and wants a normal life and is getting the vaccine reluctantly because he doesn’t know what’s in it but he’s getting it so he’s ok but still he’s got some doubt so don’t be overconfident and on and on and on….he’s not anti mask or anti vaccine but he’s got some doubts and questions and on and on…
 

machski

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 5, 2014
Messages
2,387
Points
48
Location
Northwood, NH (Sunday River, ME)
So my point is there will always be a possibility of variants just like the flu each year. Just like the flu vaccine, it does not stop all variants. Covid Sars-2 was used for this vaccine, Covid-19 maybe used for future vaccines. The objective is always to try and keep up.
One point you are missing on the m-RNA vaccines anyway, these target the spike protein of the virus, which while slightly changed in the mutation strains, is still an integral part of the mutated viruses. Probably why they are still quite effective against most of the known mutated strains right now.
 

dblskifanatic

Active member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
611
Points
28
So are you saying get the vaccine as it is 90-95% effective against the original strain then move forward? Or are you saying something different where we still wear masks and not congregate with others?
Or something in between?

A majority of the population have gotten the vaccine thus far. The concern from the CDC is - how effective will the vaccines be against the variants that are already present. I loss track but there are at least 3 know variants. We are not going to stop this virus from mutating so we will always be in some kind of annual covid vaccine protocol like the flu. The flu vaccine is always modified and uses strains that are studied and surveilled.

The point - The same will probably apply to covid vaccines - at this time they are suggesting 6-8 months for a refresh (still unknown). The fact that people can still get covid albeit will lesser symptoms tells me that it still has opportunity to spread. IDK - feels like a big fucken science experiment going forward.

I am not saying anything about masks, That is a different topic as I think there will be a certain percentage that will self mandate out of future fears.
 

cdskier

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
4,369
Points
83
Location
NJ
A majority of the population have gotten the vaccine thus far. The concern from the CDC is - how effective will the vaccines be against the variants that are already present. I loss track but there are at least 3 know variants. We are not going to stop this virus from mutating so we will always be in some kind of annual covid vaccine protocol like the flu. The flu vaccine is always modified and uses strains that are studied and surveilled.

The point - The same will probably apply to covid vaccines - at this time they are suggesting 6-8 months for a refresh (still unknown). The fact that people can still get covid albeit will lesser symptoms tells me that it still has opportunity to spread. IDK - feels like a big fucken science experiment going forward.

I am not saying anything about masks, That is a different topic as I think there will be a certain percentage that will self mandate out of future fears.

There is a lot of inaccurate information you're reading somewhere or misinterpretation of information or just a basic misunderstanding of how certain things work. The flu is different than COVID. The Vaccines target each differently as well. Using the need to get annual flu shots as the logic behind why we'd need annual COVID vaccines is not a good assumption to make. Influenza is actually a group of different viruses and each strain mutates quite rapidly. With flu shots, we're actually trying to basically make an educated guess which particular strains will be prevalent in the upcoming flu season. Sometimes they're right. Sometimes they're not. But by the following flu season, you're almost guaranteed to have completely different strains being dominant, which is why you need to make a new shot.

As for the suggestion of 6-8 months for a booster, nowhere has that actually been made. If that was accurate, the people that got their shots back in December would already need to be lining up for boosters. The 6-8 month number that people keep hearing is taken substantially out of context. What scientists have said is that so far, studies show that the body still has good immunity at least 6-8 months after vaccination. They don't know how much longer than that it will last because you literally need to wait and see what goes on as time progresses. Scientists can't hop in a time machine and jump forward 2 years to see if people still have sufficient immunity. They need to simply wait until we get to that point to see what people still have in their bodies. Immunity could last only a few more months...or it could last years. We simply won't know until we actually hit those time-frames since people were first vaccinated.
 

dblskifanatic

Active member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
611
Points
28
There is a lot of inaccurate information you're reading somewhere or misinterpretation of information or just a basic misunderstanding of how certain things work. The flu is different than COVID. The Vaccines target each differently as well. Using the need to get annual flu shots as the logic behind why we'd need annual COVID vaccines is not a good assumption to make. Influenza is actually a group of different viruses and each strain mutates quite rapidly. With flu shots, we're actually trying to basically make an educated guess which particular strains will be prevalent in the upcoming flu season. Sometimes they're right. Sometimes they're not. But by the following flu season, you're almost guaranteed to have completely different strains being dominant, which is why you need to make a new shot.

As for the suggestion of 6-8 months for a booster, nowhere has that actually been made. If that was accurate, the people that got their shots back in December would already need to be lining up for boosters. The 6-8 month number that people keep hearing is taken substantially out of context. What scientists have said is that so far, studies show that the body still has good immunity at least 6-8 months after vaccination. They don't know how much longer than that it will last because you literally need to wait and see what goes on as time progresses. Scientists can't hop in a time machine and jump forward 2 years to see if people still have sufficient immunity. They need to simply wait until we get to that point to see what people still have in their bodies. Immunity could last only a few more months...or it could last years. We simply won't know until we actually hit those time-frames since people were first vaccinated.
 

BenedictGomez

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
10,865
Points
63
Location
PRNJ
One point you are missing on the m-RNA vaccines anyway, these target the spike protein of the virus, which while slightly changed in the mutation strains, is still an integral part of the mutated viruses. Probably why they are still quite effective against most of the known mutated strains right now.

This is correct, and the reason why is because the spike protein is essentially the key with which the virus uses to enter our cells. The fear is a future variant's spike will change enough to be naive to the vaccines, so the next gen COVID19 vaccines they'll develop will likely feature something different from the virus than the spike protein, some other protein for our body to recognize.
 

cdskier

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
4,369
Points
83
Location
NJ
This is one of those stupid media things where they write about stuff that gets people riled up about something with little basis in fact. Or they try to force scientists and experts into a corner and make definitive statements that they simply can't make until we have more data. The sheer number of times words like "may, might, possible, possibly, unknown, etc" are used in that article is ridiculous.

The most important thing to note at this point from that article is:
Currently, "the need for and timing for COVID-19 booster doses have not been established. No additional doses are recommended at this time," the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention notes on its website.
Worry about the rest once we actually KNOW for sure. Until then, everything else is just conjecture and speculation and really pointless to waste time thinking about.
 

dblskifanatic

Active member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
611
Points
28
This is one of those stupid media things where they write about stuff that gets people riled up about something with little basis in fact. Or they try to force scientists and experts into a corner and make definitive statements that they simply can't make until we have more data. The sheer number of times words like "may, might, possible, possibly, unknown, etc" are used in that article is ridiculous.

The most important thing to note at this point from that article is:

Worry about the rest once we actually KNOW for sure. Until then, everything else is just conjecture and speculation and really pointless to waste time thinking about.
OK

 

cdskier

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 26, 2015
Messages
4,369
Points
83
Location
NJ
OK


Again...this is all purely conjecture and speculation. None of those statements are actually based on any conclusive scientific study data (because they simply don't exist yet until we hit those time-frames).

“We are studying the durability of the antibody response,” he said. “It seems strong but there is some waning of that and no doubt the variants challenge ... they make these vaccines work harder. So I think for planning purposes, planning purposes only, I think we should expect that we may have to boost.”

Your use of this article again illustrates how easily people take things out of context. Basically what they're saying is "let's plan for a worst case scenario so we're ready for it in case it happens." What the articles leave out is that there's also a possibility that one isn't needed for years (or at all). We simply do not yet know (one way or the other). It depends on a lot of factors. Does the antibody response decline over time to a point where it no longer offers effective levels of immunity? We don't know. Will the virus mutate in a way that renders the current vaccines ineffective? We don't know. And unless someone has a time machine, we simply won't know until we hit those points...

And honestly, if a booster is needed at some point, what's the big deal?
 

dblskifanatic

Active member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
611
Points
28
You are making my point - nobody knows. But they are preparing for a booster "just in case". It is a real life science experiment that we all get to participate in. In fact, the UK has initiated a new trial to assess a third ‘booster’ dose of seven different Covid-19 vaccines.

yup no big deal - just a conversation. 🍻
 

BenedictGomez

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 26, 2011
Messages
10,865
Points
63
Location
PRNJ
Nine states have hit >=70% of adults vaccinated with at least 1 shot.

Connecticut
Hawaii
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
Rhode Island
Vermont
 

drjeff

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 18, 2006
Messages
17,443
Points
63
Location
Brooklyn, CT
So looking at those numbers the reason the overall is below 50% for 1 shot is the vaccine is not approved for kids under 12
That's a good chunk of the reason. Additional reasons are that the opening of the window for the 12 to 16 age group was only about 2 weeks ago, and some of that data, in addition to some adults that have gotten dose 1, but not dose 2 yet over that time frame as well.

The reality is, that for those now over the age of 18, the majority of those who want to get vaccinated have done so. The amount of time, and effort, and $$ that is likely to be spent to try and increase the percentage over 18 will be substantial, with probably not much of a change in the percentages, especially as society opens back up and if the trend of lower and lower COVID numbers and deaths continues.

Are we actually at a herd immunity standpoint?

Not sure.

Are we there within the "most vulnerable" portion of the population?

Maybe so
 

dblskifanatic

Active member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
611
Points
28
We are not at herd immunity - there is not actual percentage but 70-80% vaccinated/recovered from covid is what is being targeted by many health organizations.

This is a good description from John Hopkins

What are the possibilities for how herd immunity could play out?​

In the worst case (for example, if we stop distancing and mask wearing and remove limits on crowded indoor gatherings), we will continue to see additional waves of surging infection. The virus will infect—and kill—many more people before our vaccination program reaches everyone. And deaths aren’t the only problem. The more people the virus infects, the more chances it has to mutate. This can increase transmission risk, decrease the effectiveness of vaccines, and make the pandemic harder to control in the long run.

In the best case, we vaccinate people as quickly as possible while maintaining distancing and other prevention measures to keep infection levels low. This will take concerted effort on everyone’s part. But if we continue vaccinating the population at the current rate, in the U.S. we should see meaningful effects on transmission by the end of the summer of 2021. While there is not going to be a “herd immunity day” where life immediately goes back to normal, this approach gives us the best long-term chance of beating the pandemic.

The most likely outcome is somewhere in the middle of these extremes. During the spring and early summer (or longer, if efforts to vaccinate the population stall), we will likely continue to see infection rates rise and fall. When infection rates fall, we may relax distancing measures—but this can lead to a rebound in infections as people interact with each other more closely. We then may need to re-implement these measures to bring infections down again.
 

Smellytele

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
7,999
Points
63
Location
Right where I want to be
That's a good chunk of the reason. Additional reasons are that the opening of the window for the 12 to 16 age group was only about 2 weeks ago, and some of that data, in addition to some adults that have gotten dose 1, but not dose 2 yet over that time frame as well.

The reality is, that for those now over the age of 18, the majority of those who want to get vaccinated have done so. The amount of time, and effort, and $$ that is likely to be spent to try and increase the percentage over 18 will be substantial, with probably not much of a change in the percentages, especially as society opens back up and if the trend of lower and lower COVID numbers and deaths continues.

Are we actually at a herd immunity standpoint?

Not sure.

Are we there within the "most vulnerable" portion of the population?

Maybe so
As for 18+ getting both shots - I have 2 sons who fall in that and have had their 1st shots and are getting their 2nd this week. Oldest son just got his 2nd last week.
 
Top