Covid19 has arrived next door. Mum, son and grandma. He’s a junior doctor so probably brought it home from work. All are fully vaccinated. Mum and grandma have no symptoms but son has had mild symptoms which are starting to ease off today. They are isolating, of course.
He didn’t think it was Covid, just a cold - but the routine lateral flow test picked it up, thankfully.
Genuine question, because I'm puzzled: if they were all fully vaccinated, doesn't that rather cast aspersions on the effectiveness of the vaccine?
Don't get me wrong - I'm absolutely not an anti-vaxxer (I've been Prescotted*) - but isn't the point of vaccines that they stop you getting the disease?
Vaccinations are about 90% - 95% effective after 2 doses plus a few weeks, they are not 100% effective so some people will still get it but they will probably have milder symptoms. We don’t know how recently these people have had the second dose either - it might not be long enough to build immunity yet.
These are breakthrough cases. Even Pfizer is only about 95% effective (in the trials--in real life that may differ a bit). The 5% that still get COVID even after full vaccination are the breakthrough cases like this one. They are normally very mild or asymptomatic. My husband was one (Moderna trial). He had no idea he was a breakthrough case until a swab at a trial visit picked it up. He gave it to no one, even partly vaccinated (at the time) me.
I rather suspect that genetics plays some role, as you've got a whole family here, presumably all blood relatives. But I don't think anyone has had time to look into this.
I do know (anecdata) that my son's response to the shots (and to COVID itself) seems to be intermediate between my husband's and mine. It would be fascinating to get some real data.
But in any case, the fact that you know of one breakthrough case (if we count these interrelated people as possibly possessing a genetic vulnerability) is... really to be expected, don't you think? Because if 5% of vaccinees still get it, and maybe half of those are symptomatic (now I'm making up shit for numbers, I have no idea on the symptomatic thing), and you know roughly how many people in daily life... I suspect most of us are going to know at least one breakthrough case.
It would only be a problem if you started knowing a whole ton of breakthrough cases.
I thought the point of the vaccine was not that it would make us immune to the disease, but that it would mean that we had less virulent cases if/when we caught it. The goal was not eradication of the disease, but continued lessening of strain on the medical system.
I thought the point of the vaccine was not that it would make us immune to the disease, but that it would mean that we had less virulent cases if/when we caught it. The goal was not eradication of the disease, but continued lessening of strain on the medical system.
It doesn't matter so much what the "point" is or the "goal" was - it matters what it actually does. Functional eradication of a virus is certainly possible with 95% effective vaccination, if you vaccinate enough people. We seem, however, to have a large pool of people who want to act as breeding hosts for the virus.
I thought the point of the vaccine was not that it would make us immune to the disease, but that it would mean that we had less virulent cases if/when we caught it. The goal was not eradication of the disease, but continued lessening of strain on the medical system.
It doesn't matter so much what the "point" is or the "goal" was - it matters what it actually does. Functional eradication of a virus is certainly possible with 95% effective vaccination, if you vaccinate enough people. We seem, however, to have a large pool of people who want to act as breeding hosts for the virus.
Not sure where your strong reaction to my comment is coming from...
I was simply trying to point out that if we expected the immunization to provide immunity, it would fail to meet that expectation. Even when I'm fully immunized, I know that I can still catch COVID-19 and shouldn't be surprised to find that I do.
I was simply trying to point out that if we expected the immunization to provide immunity, it would fail to meet that expectation. Even when I'm fully immunized, I know that I can still catch COVID-19 and shouldn't be surprised to find that I do.
OK - fair enough. You're saying that if a person thought that being vaccinated meant they were completely immune from Covid-19, they'd be wrong. Yes, they would.
They are very much less likely to have significant effects (hospitalization and/or death) from Covid, much less likely to have any symptoms at all, and also less likely to infect other people.
Whether you should be surprised or not depends on what you do. I'd be surprised if I caught Covid - not only have I been fully vaccinated, but my exposure to risky situations is low. If I was a nurse on a Covid ward, my exposure would be high, and so even though I'd be vaccinated, I'd not be too surprised to have a mild dose of Covid.
I was simply trying to point out that if we expected the immunization to provide immunity, it would fail to meet that expectation. Even when I'm fully immunized, I know that I can still catch COVID-19 and shouldn't be surprised to find that I do.
OK - fair enough. You're saying that if a person thought that being vaccinated meant they were completely immune from Covid-19, they'd be wrong. Yes, they would.
They are very much less likely to have significant effects (hospitalization and/or death) from Covid, much less likely to have any symptoms at all, and also less likely to infect other people.
Whether you should be surprised or not depends on what you do. I'd be surprised if I caught Covid - not only have I been fully vaccinated, but my exposure to risky situations is low. If I was a nurse on a Covid ward, my exposure would be high, and so even though I'd be vaccinated, I'd not be too surprised to have a mild dose of Covid.
I think you and I are on the same page. I work with people outside of my household on a regular basis. Many of those people live and/or work in settings in which they are vulnerable to Covid. As a consequence, I, too, am more vulnerable than some other people might be.
We might need some clarification here. In what follows, I am using the word "immune" in its colloquial sense, to mean "can't catch it." I'm not talking about various levels of protection, such as catching it but having one's risk of death much, much lower. I just mean the binary: catch it, or don't.
The research done during the trials and afterward on the vaccines gives us various rates of immunity. Pfizer's, for instance, was 95% immunity. That was a group rate, not an individual rate. It means that out of 100 vaccinated people going about their lives in a community where the virus is circulating, roughly five of them can be expected to catch it. The risk for any particular individual is still unknown.
We're playing games with statistics and probability here. If someone vaccinated DOES come down with it, in retrospect we can say they were not "immune" (again, in the sense of "can't catch it at all"). If someone does NOT come down with it, they may be immune (very likely) or they may be non-immune and simply very lucky (never came into contact with an infected person in close enough quarters to let the virus make the jump).
So as long as you don't catch it, your immune status is unknown. The fact that you haven't caught it till now could be due to the vaccine response, or it could be due to you being lucky. The longer you go on without catching it, the more likely it is that you personally are immune--but you never reduce the possibility of an incredible run of luck to zero. (In practice, most people breathe a sigh of relief after a few months and get on with life. Nobody with sense holds out for 100% certainty, because you'd have to spend your life worrying.)
Now this is all very frustrating, and in fact there are people working on identifying ways we can say "this individual is immune" by looking at stuff in their blood. That would be helpful in a lot of ways, including telling us if or when someone needs a booster shot, as well as quickly identifying those unlucky few for whom the vaccine simply doesn't work (instead of finding out the hard way). But we're not there yet with this work. So in the meantime, we go on our best guess and the info we have--which is that the vaccines are FABULOUS, and that almost everybody who gets them is in fact immune (again, =won't catch it).
So what does this mean for me as an individual? It means that a) I get the freaking vaccine (which I have done); b) I don't knowingly put myself at risk by doing stupid things, like spending an evening on the couch canoodling with my beloved who has just been diagnosed with COVID, just in case I turn out to be one of the five percent unlucky ones; c) I pay attention to anything in the news that says "Yo, time to get a booster shot, the scientists say so;" and d) I get on with my life. If I suspect I might be one of the people who has a defective immune system for whatever reason, or my doctor tells me I am, I take extra precautions.
I am fairly sure (correct me, O scientists, if I speak wrongly) that with COVID it's not a thing where you can be a normal fully immune (in the sense of not catching it) vaccinated human being, but if you work in a COVID ward daily, you're still likely to catch it, because your exposures come so often. If you're immune, you're immune, and the exposures would just serve to set your immune system more on guard--rather like mini-boosters. The only exception I can think of would be if you got a freaking humongous dose of virus particles (I don't know, deliberately huffed a test tube full of the buggers?) and they managed to overwhelm your system by sheer brute numbers, at least for a while. But short of deliberate sabotage, I don't see it. O scientists and doctors here, is that correct?
The vaccine efficacy has been determined against an easily measured parameter - development of covid symptoms. So, the 95% efficacy* is against developing covid19 - it's not against catching the coronavirus that's responsible for covid19. The ideal vaccine prevents infection (if the virus doesn't get a foothold then you're not going to get sick & you're not going to transmit it) but that's more difficult to measure.
It appears that the vaccines we have do not prevent infection, but boost the immune response such that the infection is cleared up much more quickly before it gets established and causes illness. That also means the vaccine suppresses the amount of virus present within the respiratory system, and/or the time that the virus is present, and thus also reduces the amount of virus breathed out and/or the duration of an infectious period. That would mean that the vaccine does reduce transmission of the virus, but not with the 95% efficacy* against disease development.
* different vaccines have different efficacies, and the efficacy will be variable with time after vaccination.
I had Jab the Second a fortnight ago (I'm one of those odd people who do look at the needle as it goes in... ), and, as with Jab the First, I was in-and-out of the vaccination centre in 10 minutes or so.
Side effects made themselves manifest at 3am next morning, wiping me out for the rest of the day, and causing me to miss my Pilates session chiz chiz chiz...
Glad to hear you've been Prescotted though - hope the side-effects didn't last too long!
Actually, I was sorry to miss the usual 50 minutes' worth of Pain, but I couldn't even have walked to the car. It was all I could do to get to the phone to cancel the appointment - the *wiping-out* lasted for about 48 hours, I guess...much worse than Jab the First, whose effects lasted just 2-3 hours. Odd, innit?
Having had my 2nd jab booked for weeks, and arranged cover at work and everything, they suddenly decided to move it to a day when we're away, so I had to rebook. Now I have it next Tuesday, which is better because it's a day I don't work, but it's only a week earlier than the original. Seems a lot of faffing about for not much benefit.
We had our second jabs on Sunday and were able to combine them with an overnight stay with Nenlet1 and son in law, which was really lovely. No after-effects from the jab for Mr Nen and just a bit of a sore arm for me.
I don't know what to think about going back to Zumba classes in real life. Rumour has it that, while they're held in a big hall and socially distanced, the hall itself is very full and without open doors or windows.
My yoga class starts back next monday for a small number of us, and we have wide doors we can open and get a through breeze. I'm really glad as I haven't been able to attend the online one for 2 months as there just isn't room in the small lounge to do yoga when it is also my husband's office. My mental and physical health seems to have suffered because of this and I'm hoping the yoga will improve my dysfunctional breathing.
My weekly Pilates session is 1:1, but the studio (a prefabricated cedarwood building) is spacious, light, and has lots of opening windows. It's a very pleasant environment in which to suffer.
I don't know how many people the Torturer has in her biggest class - maybe 5 or 6? - but there seems to be room for all if a dividing screen is folded back.
Our Pilates class (for 12) is held in a big hall, with open doors on both sides. Spots are laid out on the floor so we know where to lay out our mats, and our instructor makes sure we do not face head-to-head at any point.
I can't tell you have fantastic it has been to be back in a live class - I have no motivation at all to do Zoom or recorded classes at home
2nd jab today for me. I got the oil changed in the car while I still had the energy, but I don't feel bad yet - which is good as I am supposed to drive to Essex tomorrow. Fingers crossed - first time at Mum and Dad's in nearly a year.
My friend still hasn't had his first, and our areas are building up cases again. He has registered with the GP, followed advice from a receptionist to email, used the address on their thoroughly confusing web site to do so, and heard nothing back. He does not know his NHS number yet.
I can't tell you have fantastic it has been to be back in a live class - I have no motivation at all to do Zoom or recorded classes at home
Neither do I, and part of me longs to be back in class. I love Zumba and before Covid I was doing four classes a week and was certainly more fit than I am now.
I did do one class last year, in the window of opportunity that opened up for leisure centres before lockdown happened again, and it was great except that I was very conscious there were a lot of us (over 50) leaping around in one room for an hour, huffing and puffing, so if one of us in the room had had the virus the likelihood was that we all had it by the end. I guess the difference now is that we're all likely to have had at least one, if not both vaccines, being mostly people of *cough* a certain age *cough*.
Hope your drive goes well today @mark_in_manchester , I'm sure your parents will be delighted to see you. Glad your son's feeling better @Lamb Chopped .
My friend still hasn't had his first, and our areas are building up cases again. He has registered with the GP, followed advice from a receptionist to email, used the address on their thoroughly confusing web site to do so, and heard nothing back. He does not know his NHS number yet.
Has he tried again on the website now he is registered with a GP? You do not need an nhs number on the website as long as you are registered with a GP - I don't know mine yet booked an appointment.
When I went for my second jab I forgot to take anything with my NHS number on so, when I was booking in, the person taking my details looked me up somewhere and wrote my NHS number down on a piece of paper so I'd have it handy at the next stage.
When I went for my second jab I forgot to take anything with my NHS number on so, when I was booking in, the person taking my details looked me up somewhere and wrote my NHS number down on a piece of paper so I'd have it handy at the next stage.
Still no info on when the vaccines will be available in Christchurch for over 65s, despite it being available up north to anyone over 16. I think however that their need is greater than ours and our District Health Board is not the most competent. I would like my first dose at least before August so I can feel more relaxed about visiting my brother in care. People in that setting are so vulnerable.
Thanks, we'll try that. But they haven't yet confirmed in any way that he is in fact registered. Thay've had the form handed in, and eyeballed the ID and the utility bill with this address, but nothing since.
And, as we keep commenting to each other, he can't be the only one with a problem.
In other news, another month, another course of Prednisolone, which is likely to affect the booked vaccination next week. It adds to the complications: two steroids, anti-histamines at maximum dose and carrying Epipens so contraindicated for Pfizer, under 40 so contraindicated for AstraZeneca, shot immune system, hence the urticaria and angioedema that the next dose of Prednisolone is trying to get under control. The GP isn't sure the standard vaccination site will touch her with a bargepole, that it's linked to a major hospital may help, or may get her referred to the hospital's more complicated vaccinations site. Or they may wait until her appointment at the same hospital for immune system/allergies next month. In the meantime, we're still shielding.
And the Guides keep agitating that "we're opening up, why can't we start meeting in person?" Because it's complicated that's why. The other leader has a extremely clinically vulnerable husband (diabetes, breathing problems, obese), and she's been insisting not meeting in person until she's covered by her second vaccine, but that's been bought forward to the 5th June, so she's up to starting face to face from 30 June. Well, she will be when I point out the research of three weeks, not two.
Boogie, phoning every day is not going to deal with it. It is always engaged.
One morning I tried by ringing just before 8.30, when answering is supposed to start, on the principle that if I were connected to the message telling me to ring at 8.30 actually at 8.30, nobody else would be able to get through. But it went directly to engaged. And I can't, for some reason, use ringback on that number.
Boogie, phoning every day is not going to deal with it. It is always engaged.
One morning I tried by ringing just before 8.30, when answering is supposed to start, on the principle that if I were connected to the message telling me to ring at 8.30 actually at 8.30, nobody else would be able to get through. But it went directly to engaged. And I can't, for some reason, use ringback on that number.
Try making a written complaint and/or speaking to the practice manager.
The first person has died in our county of Covid, who was fully vaccinated. She was 65 and in poor health. The report said the Covid was a mutated strain of the disease.
Got a phone call from a friend yesterday about an unannounced 'pop-up' vaccination clinic at a nearby pharmacy. The had 90 doses available, so now we both have our second shots, and both times through word of mouth connections.
I've just done a YouGov survey on alcohol, and my recent alcohol consumption. They had a choice of 15 locations where I might have consumed alcohol recently, but by some inexplicable oversight "alone, at my desk, as part of a Zoom Communion service" wasn't one of the options.
In fact, there was no mention of church or communion wine at any point in the survey. I've been drinking mead as a substitute for wine during Zoom Communions, but "mead" wasn't an option either. I had to keep ticking the "other" box.
Anti-vaccine "expert" claims vaccine causes forks and keys to stick to your forehead because you get magnetized.
Haven't you seen - there's a metal attached to the protein!
Clearly we should remove all possibility of this person being magnetized by having her voluntarily relinquish all that magnetic iron in her body. It's a metal, after all - she can't need that.
Comments
He didn’t think it was Covid, just a cold - but the routine lateral flow test picked it up, thankfully.
Don't get me wrong - I'm absolutely not an anti-vaxxer (I've been Prescotted*) - but isn't the point of vaccines that they stop you getting the disease?
* two jags
I rather suspect that genetics plays some role, as you've got a whole family here, presumably all blood relatives. But I don't think anyone has had time to look into this.
I do know (anecdata) that my son's response to the shots (and to COVID itself) seems to be intermediate between my husband's and mine. It would be fascinating to get some real data.
But in any case, the fact that you know of one breakthrough case (if we count these interrelated people as possibly possessing a genetic vulnerability) is... really to be expected, don't you think? Because if 5% of vaccinees still get it, and maybe half of those are symptomatic (now I'm making up shit for numbers, I have no idea on the symptomatic thing), and you know roughly how many people in daily life... I suspect most of us are going to know at least one breakthrough case.
It would only be a problem if you started knowing a whole ton of breakthrough cases.
It doesn't matter so much what the "point" is or the "goal" was - it matters what it actually does. Functional eradication of a virus is certainly possible with 95% effective vaccination, if you vaccinate enough people. We seem, however, to have a large pool of people who want to act as breeding hosts for the virus.
Not sure where your strong reaction to my comment is coming from...
I was simply trying to point out that if we expected the immunization to provide immunity, it would fail to meet that expectation. Even when I'm fully immunized, I know that I can still catch COVID-19 and shouldn't be surprised to find that I do.
OK - fair enough. You're saying that if a person thought that being vaccinated meant they were completely immune from Covid-19, they'd be wrong. Yes, they would.
They are very much less likely to have significant effects (hospitalization and/or death) from Covid, much less likely to have any symptoms at all, and also less likely to infect other people.
Whether you should be surprised or not depends on what you do. I'd be surprised if I caught Covid - not only have I been fully vaccinated, but my exposure to risky situations is low. If I was a nurse on a Covid ward, my exposure would be high, and so even though I'd be vaccinated, I'd not be too surprised to have a mild dose of Covid.
I think you and I are on the same page. I work with people outside of my household on a regular basis. Many of those people live and/or work in settings in which they are vulnerable to Covid. As a consequence, I, too, am more vulnerable than some other people might be.
The research done during the trials and afterward on the vaccines gives us various rates of immunity. Pfizer's, for instance, was 95% immunity. That was a group rate, not an individual rate. It means that out of 100 vaccinated people going about their lives in a community where the virus is circulating, roughly five of them can be expected to catch it. The risk for any particular individual is still unknown.
We're playing games with statistics and probability here. If someone vaccinated DOES come down with it, in retrospect we can say they were not "immune" (again, in the sense of "can't catch it at all"). If someone does NOT come down with it, they may be immune (very likely) or they may be non-immune and simply very lucky (never came into contact with an infected person in close enough quarters to let the virus make the jump).
So as long as you don't catch it, your immune status is unknown. The fact that you haven't caught it till now could be due to the vaccine response, or it could be due to you being lucky. The longer you go on without catching it, the more likely it is that you personally are immune--but you never reduce the possibility of an incredible run of luck to zero. (In practice, most people breathe a sigh of relief after a few months and get on with life. Nobody with sense holds out for 100% certainty, because you'd have to spend your life worrying.)
Now this is all very frustrating, and in fact there are people working on identifying ways we can say "this individual is immune" by looking at stuff in their blood. That would be helpful in a lot of ways, including telling us if or when someone needs a booster shot, as well as quickly identifying those unlucky few for whom the vaccine simply doesn't work (instead of finding out the hard way). But we're not there yet with this work. So in the meantime, we go on our best guess and the info we have--which is that the vaccines are FABULOUS, and that almost everybody who gets them is in fact immune (again, =won't catch it).
So what does this mean for me as an individual? It means that a) I get the freaking vaccine (which I have done); b) I don't knowingly put myself at risk by doing stupid things, like spending an evening on the couch canoodling with my beloved who has just been diagnosed with COVID, just in case I turn out to be one of the five percent unlucky ones; c) I pay attention to anything in the news that says "Yo, time to get a booster shot, the scientists say so;" and d) I get on with my life. If I suspect I might be one of the people who has a defective immune system for whatever reason, or my doctor tells me I am, I take extra precautions.
I am fairly sure (correct me, O scientists, if I speak wrongly) that with COVID it's not a thing where you can be a normal fully immune (in the sense of not catching it) vaccinated human being, but if you work in a COVID ward daily, you're still likely to catch it, because your exposures come so often. If you're immune, you're immune, and the exposures would just serve to set your immune system more on guard--rather like mini-boosters. The only exception I can think of would be if you got a freaking humongous dose of virus particles (I don't know, deliberately huffed a test tube full of the buggers?) and they managed to overwhelm your system by sheer brute numbers, at least for a while. But short of deliberate sabotage, I don't see it. O scientists and doctors here, is that correct?
It appears that the vaccines we have do not prevent infection, but boost the immune response such that the infection is cleared up much more quickly before it gets established and causes illness. That also means the vaccine suppresses the amount of virus present within the respiratory system, and/or the time that the virus is present, and thus also reduces the amount of virus breathed out and/or the duration of an infectious period. That would mean that the vaccine does reduce transmission of the virus, but not with the 95% efficacy* against disease development.
* different vaccines have different efficacies, and the efficacy will be variable with time after vaccination.
Side effects made themselves manifest at 3am next morning, wiping me out for the rest of the day, and causing me to miss my Pilates session chiz chiz chiz...
Glad to hear you've been Prescotted though - hope the side-effects didn't last too long!
Actually, I was sorry to miss the usual 50 minutes' worth of Pain, but I couldn't even have walked to the car. It was all I could do to get to the phone to cancel the appointment - the *wiping-out* lasted for about 48 hours, I guess...much worse than Jab the First, whose effects lasted just 2-3 hours. Odd, innit?
I don't know what to think about going back to Zumba classes in real life. Rumour has it that, while they're held in a big hall and socially distanced, the hall itself is very full and without open doors or windows.
I don't know how many people the Torturer has in her biggest class - maybe 5 or 6? - but there seems to be room for all if a dividing screen is folded back.
I can't tell you have fantastic it has been to be back in a live class - I have no motivation at all to do Zoom or recorded classes at home
With my second jab, I started to feel feverish around 15-18 hours afterwards. I felt pretty grotty, but could manage with paracetamol.
I did do one class last year, in the window of opportunity that opened up for leisure centres before lockdown happened again, and it was great except that I was very conscious there were a lot of us (over 50) leaping around in one room for an hour, huffing and puffing, so if one of us in the room had had the virus the likelihood was that we all had it by the end. I guess the difference now is that we're all likely to have had at least one, if not both vaccines, being mostly people of *cough* a certain age *cough*.
Hope your drive goes well today @mark_in_manchester , I'm sure your parents will be delighted to see you. Glad your son's feeling better @Lamb Chopped .
Has he tried again on the website now he is registered with a GP? You do not need an nhs number on the website as long as you are registered with a GP - I don't know mine yet booked an appointment.
Did they write down the time for you as well?
https://youtube.com/watch?v=-tjHlFPTwVk
I'll see meself out...
Still no info on when the vaccines will be available in Christchurch for over 65s, despite it being available up north to anyone over 16. I think however that their need is greater than ours and our District Health Board is not the most competent. I would like my first dose at least before August so I can feel more relaxed about visiting my brother in care. People in that setting are so vulnerable.
And, as we keep commenting to each other, he can't be the only one with a problem.
Phone them every day until it’s sorted.
And the Guides keep agitating that "we're opening up, why can't we start meeting in person?" Because it's complicated that's why. The other leader has a extremely clinically vulnerable husband (diabetes, breathing problems, obese), and she's been insisting not meeting in person until she's covered by her second vaccine, but that's been bought forward to the 5th June, so she's up to starting face to face from 30 June. Well, she will be when I point out the research of three weeks, not two.
Back to the GP...
@KarlLB I was serious about the clinical trial, if you can’t tolerate the injection you might be able to get the vaccine as a nasal spray
Problem is they're going to want to monitor antibody levels later on which I'm guessing would involve blood tests.
One morning I tried by ringing just before 8.30, when answering is supposed to start, on the principle that if I were connected to the message telling me to ring at 8.30 actually at 8.30, nobody else would be able to get through. But it went directly to engaged. And I can't, for some reason, use ringback on that number.
Addendum - I just checked. Will involve blood tests and anyway volunteers need to be at least 13 years younger than me.
Good thought but it's a dead end
Try making a written complaint and/or speaking to the practice manager.
In fact, there was no mention of church or communion wine at any point in the survey. I've been drinking mead as a substitute for wine during Zoom Communions, but "mead" wasn't an option either. I had to keep ticking the "other" box.
Anti-vaccine "expert" claims vaccine causes forks and keys to stick to your forehead because you get magnetized.
https://twitter.com/TheTNHoller/status/1402408416228806663?s=20
Haven't you seen - there's a metal attached to the protein!
Clearly we should remove all possibility of this person being magnetized by having her voluntarily relinquish all that magnetic iron in her body. It's a metal, after all - she can't need that.
Is that just the crappiest superpower ever?