Dear Editor,
This is an interesting article, surveying further new trends in managing ongoing consequences from this Pandemic.
In the article, Dr Anika Singanayagam is quoted as saying, with no explanatory comment, that “Again, first generation covid vaccines were evaluated against reducing hospital admissions and death in the challenging first year of the pandemic. They wouldn’t have been expected to generate sterilising immunity and block transmission.”
I believe we should challenge the second sentence for an explanation – Why should Covid vaccines not be expected to generate sterilising immunity and block transmission? This is an important feature of many of our other vaccines, such as MMR, Polio, Influenza, Hepatitis B, and even original Vaccinia (Smallpox), to the extent that one could say the prime aim of Vacciniation was to produce sterilising immunisation and block transmission!
The final paragraph, also quoting Dr Singayagam, also needs challenging, as it does not concur with the facts of vaccination. The implication stated is that existing vaccines that best prevent infection and transmission are those delivered ‘more locally’ rather than elsewhere presumably. Yet, Influenza, MMR, Polio, HepB, Smallpox, VZV, HepA, Typhoid, Cholera, immunisations are all given in the arm or buttock, not anywhere near the location of action, and act by stimulating general immunity, not anything local. There also seems to be a lack of knowledge that the lungs ARE a part of the respiratory tract.
Examples of vaccines given ‘more locally’ would include oral Polio – associated with outbreaks of vaccine-derived infection!
Another would be children’s nasal influenza vaccine, which is primarily used to avoid the needle-delivered route which is so damaging to doctor-child relationships.
I would love to see an explanation of these comments which could enlighten us as to their rational scientific basis.
Yours sincerely,
David Church
Re: What do we know about covid vaccines and preventing transmission?