>> >>none of the vaccines is claiming that they reduce the likelihood of transmission
>>
>> Certainly the anti-vax folk are saying that but it's ridiculous to think that vaccination won't
>> reduce infectiousness. If you don't have the disease you won't be coughing as much virus
>> around for a start, even if you had virus on board and without considering the
>> actual viral load.
>>
Oh I agree its likely to help. But it’s disingenuous to dismiss it as an anti-vax statement, because it’s not proven or even claimed by the manufacturers yet. And it’s important because asymptomatic carriers of the virus are quite capable of spreading it widely, and are probably spreading it to more people in absolute terms since estimates are that 80% of carriers are asymptomatic. You don’t need to cough to spread it...breathing normally will do that, with the risk being higher in confined spaces and over extended periods of time. Super-spreaders can be asymptomatic. So if we want to get rid of social distancing it has to be able to prevent transmission as well.
That testing, which is of course now happening, is therefore important. And while it’s likely to be the case that it helps prevent transmission it’s not a certainty with the Pfizer vaccine, which uses different technology to most vaccines. It wouldn’t stop me taking if I’m offered it, and I expect by the time I am they’ll have the results. The AstraZeneca one and others using that approach seems more certain to prevent transmission, because other vaccines made that way do. They’ll also be a lot cheaper, which is another reason I think that’s what’ll be in the armoury by the time I make it to the top of the list!
|