Interesting (if long-winded) discussion. I agree completely with the distinctions you have made between infection and disease and how those two have been (deliberately?) confounded in the media. For too long, people have accepted PCR positivity as a 'case'. Not only wrong but very misleading.
As for variants, 'delta' or otherwise, their emergence is completely predictable. That's what viruses do, especially RNA viruses with very high mutation rates. The other completely predictable thing is that emergent variants would be more infectious but less virulent. Again, not particularly insightful. Virology 101.
So, I would encourage you to step out of the vaccines only mindset for a moment which leads inevitably to chasing vaiants endlessly and consider an important role for antivirals. Take ivermectin for instance. A Nobel prize-winning drug, cheap, very benign and now with countless clinical studies all pointing towards its effectiveness in suppressing early disease and with potential prophylactic utility. A serious public health policy would take this drug and distribute it widely, to be used in conjunction with vaccines. Telling people to wait until they are seriously ill before seeking medical help, especially when there are reasonable treatments available borders on criminal IMHO.
Your "In Depth" about breakthrough infections reminded me of the 6 nasal spray vaccines now in various stages of testing for COVID-19. One proposed advantage of such a vaccine is that they would be expected to produce high antibody (IgE?) levels in the nasal secretions, and thus act as a barrier to initial infection, rather than allowing the immune system to resist an infection after several replication cycles. What do you think?
Interesting (if long-winded) discussion. I agree completely with the distinctions you have made between infection and disease and how those two have been (deliberately?) confounded in the media. For too long, people have accepted PCR positivity as a 'case'. Not only wrong but very misleading.
As for variants, 'delta' or otherwise, their emergence is completely predictable. That's what viruses do, especially RNA viruses with very high mutation rates. The other completely predictable thing is that emergent variants would be more infectious but less virulent. Again, not particularly insightful. Virology 101.
So, I would encourage you to step out of the vaccines only mindset for a moment which leads inevitably to chasing vaiants endlessly and consider an important role for antivirals. Take ivermectin for instance. A Nobel prize-winning drug, cheap, very benign and now with countless clinical studies all pointing towards its effectiveness in suppressing early disease and with potential prophylactic utility. A serious public health policy would take this drug and distribute it widely, to be used in conjunction with vaccines. Telling people to wait until they are seriously ill before seeking medical help, especially when there are reasonable treatments available borders on criminal IMHO.
Your "In Depth" about breakthrough infections reminded me of the 6 nasal spray vaccines now in various stages of testing for COVID-19. One proposed advantage of such a vaccine is that they would be expected to produce high antibody (IgE?) levels in the nasal secretions, and thus act as a barrier to initial infection, rather than allowing the immune system to resist an infection after several replication cycles. What do you think?