Jump to content

Menu

The Vaccine Thread


JennyD

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

There was one myocarditis case in the Novavax trial. Could be coincidental, or maybe not. 

Seems like the largest risk with mRNA is for males under 30 or 40. Not as much for females and not at all for females over 30, so far. Young men could take J&J, women mRNA if wanting to avoid known side effects? I guess I’d be pretty nervous with that family history, too, though.

Edited by Penelope
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Many news outlets are reporting the same thing from Israel with regards to Pfizer, although I haven’t seen the actual studies so again a grain of salt. 
 

“The vaccine protected 64% of inoculated people from infection during an outbreak of the Delta variant, down from 94% before, according to Israel’s Health Ministry. It was 94% effective at preventing severe illness in the same period, compared with 97% before, the ministry said….”

”During the period that coincided with the Delta outbreak, 1,271 of 1,528 total new infections were fully vaccinated individuals, as were 23 of 37 hospitalizations and 11 of 17 cases of severe illness, the ministry said.”

Here is that article for reference. You can find the same information under various news outlets worldwide. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/pfizers-covid-19-vaccine-is-less-effective-against-delta-variant-israeli-data-show-11625572796

 

Edited by melmichigan
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, melmichigan said:

Many news outlets are reporting the same thing from Israel with regards to Pfizer, although I haven’t seen the actual studies so again a grain of salt. 
 

“The vaccine protected 64% of inoculated people from infection during an outbreak of the Delta variant, down from 94% before, according to Israel’s Health Ministry. It was 94% effective at preventing severe illness in the same period, compared with 97% before, the ministry said….”

”During the period that coincided with the Delta outbreak, 1,271 of 1,528 total new infections were fully vaccinated individuals, as were 23 of 37 hospitalizations and 11 of 17 cases of severe illness, the ministry said.”

Here is that article for reference. You can find the same information under various news outlets worldwide. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/pfizers-covid-19-vaccine-is-less-effective-against-delta-variant-israeli-data-show-11625572796

 

It looks like vaccinated people are worse off than unvaccinated people with regards to Delta. What am I missing? (I feel like it's very obvious but I can't see it, lol)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, whitestavern said:

It looks like vaccinated people are worse off than unvaccinated people with regards to Delta. What am I missing? (I feel like it's very obvious but I can't see it, lol)

If it were the UK it would be that the very vulnerable were more likely to have been vaccinated and also more likely to be badly affected despite the vaccine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Laura Corin said:

If it were the UK it would be that the very vulnerable were more likely to have been vaccinated and also more likely to be badly affected despite the vaccine.

That makes sense. It's scary though. Part of me feels like I should tell my mother to continue wearing a mask (she's relatively healthy but is a lung cancer survivor) but she was literally petrified of Covid for 12 months (and very depressed) and is finally going out and doing things again. I don't want to scare her back into quarantining at home. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, whitestavern said:

It looks like vaccinated people are worse off than unvaccinated people with regards to Delta. What am I missing? (I feel like it's very obvious but I can't see it, lol)

When the vax rate is high, let's say 90%, you would expect a 9:1 ratio of vax to unvax to fall ill if the vax made no difference.  If instead it was a 2:1 ratio, the vaccine would have prevented infection in the 7 vax'd people who would have fallen ill if they had didn't work.I

I think UK is over 90% for their seniors.  They are probably aggregating data by age cohorts.

Edited by Syllieann
  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, popmom said:

 

My husband had J&J back in April. He would like to boost that with the Pfizer. Has anyone done this? Or heard whether its even allowed? I'm wondering if our insurance would reject it. 

In light of the article about Germany shared above....if one does follow up the AZ or J&J with a mRNA vaccine, would one just get one dose or two?

I have a relative who was in the vaccine group of the JnJ trial and has since gotten a mRNA vaccine.  He is planning to get the second one as well.  One dose probably would have been (more than) enough, but he had previously gotten two different antibody tests, neither of which showed him having any antibodies, so he had long been ever-so-slightly worried that perhaps there had been a mistake in the trial and he had actually been in the placebo group after all.

I believe he just walked into CVS and got the vaccine.  I don't know what happened with his insurance.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been following the news out of Israel and that 64% efficacy number seems pretty iffy.  The Ministry of Health was responding to a leak and a number of scientists have since criticized the way the MOH calculated the number.  Here one thread  with some (somewhat disorganized) discussion in English.

Cases are definitely going up, though.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, whitestavern said:

I can't read this. Is this EUA or full approval? How does it work for boosters? 

EUA. I think you can probably read this article without a subscription. Excerpt:

"Pfizer Inc. plans to request U.S. emergency authorization in August for a third booster dose of its COVID-19 vaccine, based on early data showing that it can sharply increase immune protection against the coronavirus.

The company has received initial data from an early human study showing that a third dose of its existing coronavirus vaccine is safe and can raise neutralizing antibody levels by 5 to 10 fold compared with the original vaccine, Pfizer research head Mikael Dolsten said in an interview.

Once more data is in hand, Pfizer plans to ask the FDA to authorize a booster shot that could be given six to eight months after the original two doses, Dolsten said. The drugmaker is also talking with regulators in other countries and the European Union about the new results, he said. Pfizer produces the vaccine in partnership with BioNTech SE.

Dolsten said the company is going public with its plans because the early data looks convincing and because of increasing concern about mutations of the virus, including the ultra-transmissible Delta variant that is spreading in numerous countries.

“There is a lot of fear and concern” about variants, Dolsten said. “We are confident that such a boost will be highly effective against the Delta variant.”

While the antibody results are based on a small initial cohort of roughly 10 to 20 people who received the booster, Dolsten said that the “the data set is so clear we have complete confidence that the full study will reproduce this.”

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to take a wild guess that the real reason Pfizer dropped this press release a month before they actually plan to apply for the EUA is concern over their stock price in light of the Israeli report of lower efficacy against Delta.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

EUA. I think you can probably read this article without a subscription. Excerpt:

"Pfizer Inc. plans to request U.S. emergency authorization in August for a third booster dose of its COVID-19 vaccine, based on early data showing that it can sharply increase immune protection against the coronavirus.

The company has received initial data from an early human study showing that a third dose of its existing coronavirus vaccine is safe and can raise neutralizing antibody levels by 5 to 10 fold compared with the original vaccine, Pfizer research head Mikael Dolsten said in an interview.

Once more data is in hand, Pfizer plans to ask the FDA to authorize a booster shot that could be given six to eight months after the original two doses, Dolsten said. The drugmaker is also talking with regulators in other countries and the European Union about the new results, he said. Pfizer produces the vaccine in partnership with BioNTech SE.

Dolsten said the company is going public with its plans because the early data looks convincing and because of increasing concern about mutations of the virus, including the ultra-transmissible Delta variant that is spreading in numerous countries.

“There is a lot of fear and concern” about variants, Dolsten said. “We are confident that such a boost will be highly effective against the Delta variant.”

While the antibody results are based on a small initial cohort of roughly 10 to 20 people who received the booster, Dolsten said that the “the data set is so clear we have complete confidence that the full study will reproduce this.”

Gah. I'm glad they are finding that a booster is helpful, but I'm really not looking forward to more vaccine side effects 😕. I had that stupid headache for something like 2 weeks, and I swear I now occasionally get mild headaches that are weirdly reminiscent of it, which I never did before. (This one I'm not sure about, though -- it could totally be trying to fit unrelated phenomena together. But the 2 weeks I'm absolutely sure about.) 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone know, has the FDA decided if they are going to consider anymore EUA’s related to covid? I know they were discussing last month whether to start requiring full approvals, but I haven’t been able to find any outcomes from their discussions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Corraleno said:

I'm going to take a wild guess that the real reason Pfizer dropped this press release a month before they actually plan to apply for the EUA is concern over their stock price in light of the Israeli report of lower efficacy against Delta.

I’m with you. While I think the Pfizer vaccine itself is amazing, I haven’t felt a lot of trust in announcements from the business side about the need for boosters. The timing of these announcements has been fishy both times. I’d like to see some independent studies showing that first. It’s interesting that Pfizer’s own studies are much more pessimistic on how long immunity from their shot is lasting then most of the rest of the scientific community.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the actual statement:

“Americans who have been fully vaccinated do not need a booster shot at this time

FDA, CDC and NIH are engaged in a science-based, rigorous process to consider whether or when a booster might be necessary.

"We are prepared for booster doses if and when the science demonstrates that they are needed."

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Of course they mean not right now. How could they say boosters will never be needed? The statement is careful, but clearly  they put it out because the drug companies and the media are jumping the gun and freaking everyone out. 
 

The whole thing is unfortunate, as with so much about Covid info. There isn’t any evidence at this time that any of us will need another vaccination in the fall, and people that know do say that, and it is reported somewhat, but the big scare gets a lot of attention. 

Edited by Penelope
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is going to be one of those statements along the lines of "there's no evidence for aerosol transmission, so masks are unnecessary" or "there's no evidence that Delta is actually more transmissible or more likely to affect children." I think the CDC is afraid that if people think boosters may be necessary it will further suppress vaccination rates, because more people will just decide it's not worth it if you need another shot (especially one with unpleasant side effects) every 6-8 months. But I suspect that we're going to see big spikes this fall when schools and colleges reopen, with much higher breakthrough rates with Delta than we're used to with previous variants, and then suddenly boosters will be a thing after all. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

I think this is going to be one of those statements along the lines of "there's no evidence for aerosol transmission, so masks are unnecessary" or "there's no evidence that Delta is actually more transmissible or more likely to affect children." I think the CDC is afraid that if people think boosters may be necessary it will further suppress vaccination rates, because more people will just decide it's not worth it if you need another shot (especially one with unpleasant side effects) every 6-8 months. But I suspect that we're going to see big spikes this fall when schools and colleges reopen, with much higher breakthrough rates with Delta than we're used to with previous variants, and then suddenly boosters will be a thing after all. 

I’m not sure. If we get much more mutation than where we are with Delta, that seems increasingly likely. And in either case, I expect boosters would help. But, I still think there’s a good chance boosters won’t be necessary any time soon for healthy people. The big caveat is the fact that our vaccination rate is so low it may mean that people need them, because it allows so much Covid to still be transmitting that a lot more vaccinated people will have breakthrough cases than if everyone would just get their darn vaccine already. If we had strong vaccine coverage everywhere, I think our case rate would drop so low the boosters wouldn’t be necessary any time soon. Not looking like that’s likely to happen anytime soon 😞. It does look like vaccination is picking up a bit as Delta gets going, and I could see us having a burst of people who suddenly want to get vaccinated in the fall when things start turning bad. Sure would be nice to be able to avoid that in the first place.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think having a booster approved, for those who want it or whose doctor deems it necessary - say immune suppressed people, people at high risk like medical workers, etc, makes sense. I don't think that means everyone will need one.  

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Penelope said:

Of course they mean not right now. How could they say boosters will never be needed? The statement is careful, but clearly  they put it out because the drug companies and the media are jumping the gun and freaking everyone out. 
 

The whole thing is unfortunate, as with so much about Covid info. There isn’t any evidence at this time that any of us will need another vaccination in the fall, and people that know do say that, and it is reported somewhat, but the big scare gets a lot of attention. 

I definitely think we'll need boosters targeted to new variants. I sure hope this is what they mean and not just a 'same old' booster to boost profits rather than immunity because turns out the vaccine is working better/lasting longer than expected.  I just saw an article about how the longer than expected persistent immunity could be 'bad news' for Pfizer/Moderna's future profits... 😒

I find it odd that there is no mention in these booster articles about them being retargeted toward, say, Delta. Especially since I've read a lot earlier about how this kind of pivot/targeting was much easier to do with mRNA vaccines...  you'd think they'd be including that tidbit if that's what they meant...  that's actually news I've been looking out for.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Matryoshka said:

I definitely think we'll need boosters targeted to new variants. I sure hope this is what they mean and not just a 'same old' booster to boost profits rather than immunity because turns out the vaccine is working better/lasting longer than expected.  I just saw an article about how the longer than expected persistent immunity could be 'bad news' for Pfizer/Moderna's future profits... 😒

I find it odd that there is no mention in these booster articles about them being retargeted toward, say, Delta. Especially since I've read a lot earlier about how this kind of pivot/targeting was much easier to do with mRNA vaccines...  you'd think they'd be including that tidbit if that's what they meant...  that's actually news I've been looking out for.

It looks like they are pursuing both routes:  a regular booster and a delta booster.

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/08/pfizer-says-it-is-developing-a-covid-booster-shot-to-target-the-highly-transmissible-delta-variant.html

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BaseballandHockey said:

I have no idea how one would be expected to enforce that.  Are high school teachers with caseloads of 150 kids just supposed to remember who is vaccinated?   What about hall duty?  
 

The idea that (1) schools can require some kids to wear masks while others don't and (2) teachers can (or should) be responsible for enforcing that, is just ridiculously impractical and unenforceable. There will be a few school districts that mandate masks for everyone and the rest will just let everyone drop them. Given how incredibly transmissible Delta is, I think this fall is going to be a huge mess for schools and colleges, and then everyone will wring their hands and say "how can this still be happening???" while doing nothing to actually prevent it from happening. 

  • Like 10
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, KSera said:

I’m not sure. If we get much more mutation than where we are with Delta, that seems increasingly likely. And in either case, I expect boosters would help. But, I still think there’s a good chance boosters won’t be necessary any time soon for healthy people. The big caveat is the fact that our vaccination rate is so low it may mean that people need them, because it allows so much Covid to still be transmitting that a lot more vaccinated people will have breakthrough cases than if everyone would just get their darn vaccine already. If we had strong vaccine coverage everywhere, I think our case rate would drop so low the boosters wouldn’t be necessary any time soon. Not looking like that’s likely to happen anytime soon 😞. It does look like vaccination is picking up a bit as Delta gets going, and I could see us having a burst of people who suddenly want to get vaccinated in the fall when things start turning bad. Sure would be nice to be able to avoid that in the first place.

I think this is right, just from what I hear and read. 

We will probably have other variants. By the fall, we might not be seeing Delta anymore, it could just as well be another one with some combination of these similar mutations. 

I agree with you; I think more people will get vaccinated before the end of the year. I do think a few people were are off by the talk of boosters and when cases were down when they became eligible, they thought they might just as well wait for the first doses. There is a certain logic to that, I guess. 

2 hours ago, Matryoshka said:

I definitely think we'll need boosters targeted to new variants. 

I don’t how any of us here can say that when the scientists aren’t even sure.

I learn so much from this podcast, but this episode was particularly good and pertains to this discussion. https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/twiv-777/ 

The first hour is most of the content.
 

It talks about the concept of viral fitness vs transmissibility as the title says, and how the public conversation about transmissibility of variants is very muddled and inaccurate, but so much more.
There is a lot about vaccination, B and T cells, the differences between Covid and influenza vaccines and what they do, why most people should not need boosters with the current VOC (something said not only here, but many other experts), and an interesting note about flu vaccination and the debate over whether we should vaccinate children for flu only with an inactivated vaccine like FluMist, since other flu vaccines do not produce T cell responses and immune memory. (This is something I have wondered about for a long time). 
 

I plan to listen again, but other interesting points that I’ve heard before, elsewhere:

-assays for neutralization (in all the variant neutralization studies, for example) are not standardized for this virus among labs. So you can’t directly compare all the different studies you see.

-antibody assays are not standardized either. Different countries use different ones with different measurements.

-and this one is huge- we don’t have a correlate of protection for this virus the way we do for influenza. With influenza, when antibodies go below a certain level, you will get infections. We don’t know what this is for this virus, they are learning as they go. But flu vaccines don’t induce good T cell responses the way the Covid vaccines do. T cells protect from severe disease, which changes the whole picture, and they go into this a lot more.

 

Edited by Penelope
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

The idea that (1) schools can require some kids to wear masks while others don't and (2) teachers can (or should) be responsible for enforcing that, is just ridiculously impractical and unenforceable. There will be a few school districts that mandate masks for everyone and the rest will just let everyone drop them. Given how incredibly transmissible Delta is, I think this fall is going to be a huge mess for schools and colleges, and then everyone will wring their hands and say "how can this still be happening???" while doing nothing to actually prevent it from happening. 

I feel like the colleges around me have done a much better job managing it.  From what I hear there are going to either require the vaccine or that you have to test several times a week.  I hope they keep up all the things that they did last year.  One near us had the students test several times a week and then they would have to show on their phones that they were negative every time they stepped into a building on campus.  Obviously they had masks and things too.  But they also have the advantage that everyone on campus is able to get a vaccine based on age that middle and elem. schools don't have.  I had heard of some elementary schools doing random testing of the kids every week, but it wasn't happening around here.  I feel like the colleges are going to do more to control things because they need the college to stay open, kids be on campus, and all the money to keep rolling in.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 7/7/2021 at 2:07 AM, Sdel said:

I have to say….until they work out the myocarditis thing the vaccine is a hard no here for both me and my DD.  I have two male cousins who have had heart transplants due to myocarditis.  One is a second cousin who had a transplant when I was a teen, the other is my direct cousin who received his transplant around the same age as our second cousin was when he had his.

The BBC is reporting that a European Medicines Agency study found a small but statistically significant link between mRNA vaccines and myocarditis (2 per million for Pfizer, 1 per million for Moderna - but spread out over nearly 100 million people, many of whom have no especial predisposition to myocarditis). Young men were the most common group affected

OxfordAstrazeneca and Janssen had no reliably-linked cases, but in your position it would be wise to wait for more information before opting for either over Novovax (which wasn't in the study but as far as I know isn't connected to myocarditis).

Edited by ieta_cassiopeia
Providing the link to go with the explanation might be an idea...
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, ieta_cassiopeia said:

The BBC is reporting that a European Medicines Agency study found a small but statistically significant link between mRNA vaccines and myocarditis (2 per million for Pfizer, 1 per million for Moderna - but spread out over nearly 100 million people, many of whom have no especial predisposition to myocarditis). Young men were the most common group affected

OxfordAstrazeneca and Janssen had no reliably-linked cases, but in your position it would be wise to wait for more information before opting for either over Novovax (which wasn't in the study but as far as I know isn't connected to myocarditis).

This makes sense, in that it is happening in the "better" vaccines. Anything that invokes a strong immune response (including illness - the usual cause) can cause myocarditis. The mRNA vaccines invoke a very strong immune response, which is why they work so gosh darn well..but also why they are more likely to trigger autoimmune reactions than a less immunogenic vaccine. So...yeah. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I was very concerned about cardiac issues with the vaccines when my 20 year old son got vaccinated as someone who had a father die of cardiomyopathy caused by a virus.  These issues weren't super well known when the rest of us here were vaccinated.  My father was a potential candidate for heart transplant for a while.  Anyway, I hope people delaying because of this side affect are doing everything they can to avoid contracting covid in other ways because my 14 year old nephew spent 6 days in the hospital and has been following up with a cardiologist for months since developing MIS after covid and is still not able to be active and play sports.  I hope people are working with their doctors who know their medical history for recommendations.  

My 20 year old son  was fully vaccinated with Pfizer and did just fine with it.  He is 2 weeks post 2nd vax TODAY! HOORAY we are all fully vaxed here.  He had very similar post 2nd shot 2nd day ickiness like the rest of us, nothing else to report.  He took something twice day 2, the rest of us only took something once.  But was good to go morning of day 3 and no other complaints.  

 

Edited by FuzzyCatz
  • Like 2
  • Sad 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 minute ago, FuzzyCatz said:

I was very concerned about cardiac issues with the vaccines when my 20 year old son got vaccinated as someone who had a father die of cardiomyopathy caused by a virus.  This issues weren't super well known when the rest of us here were vaccinated.  My father was a potential candidate for heart transplant for a while.  Anyway, I hope people delaying because of this side affect are doing everything they can to avoid contracting covid in other ways because my 14 year old nephew spent 6 days in the hospital and has been following up with a cardiologist for months since developing MIS after covid and is still not able to be active and play sports.  I hope people should work with their doctors who know their medical history for recommendations.  

My 20 year old son  was fully vaccinated with Pfizer and did just fine with it.  He is 2 weeks post 2nd vax TODAY! HOORAY we are all fully vaxed here.  He had very similar post 2nd shot 2nd day ickiness like the rest of us, nothing else to report.  He took something twice day 2, the rest of us only took something once.  But was good to go morning of day 3 and no other complaints.  

I would also bet that knowing about vaccine cardiac issues can also help make good decisions making bad outcomes less likely. Like, I bet things go better if you don't do strenuous cardiac activity after the vaccine... not that this completely eliminates the risk, but I bet it reduces it by a lot. 

Edited by Not_a_Number
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Not_a_Number said:

I would also bet that knowing about vaccine cardiac issues can also help make good decisions making bad outcomes less likely. Like, I bet things go better if you don't do strenuous cardiac activity after the vaccine... not that this completely eliminates the risk, but I bet it reduces it by a lot. 

Treating a vaccine appointment like a blood donation (where the advice is typically to eat and drink decent amounts of food, avoid anything strenous and generally be kind to yourself) is starting to sound more and more like good advice.

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I would also bet that knowing about vaccine cardiac issues can also help make good decisions making bad outcomes less likely. Like, I bet things go better if you don't do strenuous cardiac activity after the vaccine... not that this completely eliminates the risk, but I bet it reduces it by a lot. 

I did see some other country was recommending young men lay low the week of their vaccine, so there may be some merit to some recommendations on self care is a good idea, monitoring for certain populations, etc?  I wonder if using anti inflammatories might help after vaccination too?

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm in a low vax (and generally low case) state that is starting to see a rise in cases again. I am so very thankful that we took our vax-resistant ds to get vaccinated anyway, because he was not and will not be careful. I know some would disagree with our doing that, but he makes decisions that are not in his own best interests, health-wise, and we decided that while he was still a minor, we needed to do that for him.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am glad they filed for a booster. Keep in mind most of the world is eagerly waiting mRNA vaccines to arrive in their corners and many countries basically consider FDA approvals as a go for their countries as well. So I am glad at least the new vaccines shipping will be more adapted for a new variant. I think the ear vaccines need to evolve along with a virus. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The apparent contradiction between "boosters may be needed as antibodies wane/variants evolve" and "boosters are unnecessary because the vaccines produce good memory cell response" is an artificial one. It's true that antibodies wane over time, it's true that Delta has characteristics that help it evade antibodies, and it's true that good memory cell response will enable the majority of fully vaccinated people to avoid severe illness and death (at least with the variants we have so far).

But none of those statements address the question of whether "avoiding severe illness or death" is really the only goal worth pursuing. If people (including those who run the CDC) think the potential for long covid is NBD, and we're not concerned with reducing infection and transmission rates as long as hospitalization and death rates are manageable, then boosters are not strictly necessary, at least for those who aren't elderly or immunocompromised.

But if a booster, especially one tweaked to better match Delta, could also reduce asymptomatic and mild infections and reduce transmission, why wouldn't we want to do that? I think the answers to that question are largely political rather than scientific and they don't address the question of whether boosters could potentially reduce infection and transmission, and whether that would be a worthy goal in itself.

 

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ieta_cassiopeia said:

The BBC is reporting that a European Medicines Agency study found a small but statistically significant link between mRNA vaccines and myocarditis (2 per million for Pfizer, 1 per million for Moderna - but spread out over nearly 100 million people, many of whom have no especial predisposition to myocarditis). Young men were the most common group affected

OxfordAstrazeneca and Janssen had no reliably-linked cases, but in your position it would be wise to wait for more information before opting for either over Novovax (which wasn't in the study but as far as I know isn't connected to myocarditis).

One person in the trial did get viral myocarditis. I am not familiar at all with the difference, if any, between that and regular myocarditis. 

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210705/Novavax-COVID-19-vaccine-demonstrates-7e9025-efficacy-against-SARS-CoV-2.aspx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I don’t understand the assumption that Delta is the primary variant from here on out. The latest from PHE is that Delta now has spread numbers similar to Alpha. Is there any reason to think we won’t have another variant predominant a few months from now? 
 

There is not yet any clear and substantial evidence that symptoms following Covid are more significant or more common than after other common infections, so I think we are a long way from any premise that we will get regular shots to prevent asymptomatic infection or long Covid, even if maybe eventually that is true. Not that long Covid isn’t real, but you can’t study whether something is currently happening or being prevented if you don’t have a good definition or good epidemiology.
Preventing symptomatic infections, sure, no one wants to get sick from this if they don’t have to. But right now the rest of the world is still on fire. 

Edited by Penelope
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Corraleno said:

The apparent contradiction between "boosters may be needed as antibodies wane/variants evolve" and "boosters are unnecessary because the vaccines produce good memory cell response" is an artificial one. It's true that antibodies wane over time, it's true that Delta has characteristics that help it evade antibodies, and it's true that good memory cell response will enable the majority of fully vaccinated people to avoid severe illness and death (at least with the variants we have so far).

But none of those statements address the question of whether "avoiding severe illness or death" is really the only goal worth pursuing. If people (including those who run the CDC) think the potential for long covid is NBD, and we're not concerned with reducing infection and transmission rates as long as hospitalization and death rates are manageable, then boosters are not strictly necessary, at least for those who aren't elderly or immunocompromised.

But if a booster, especially one tweaked to better match Delta, could also reduce asymptomatic and mild infections and reduce transmission, why wouldn't we want to do that? I think the answers to that question are largely political rather than scientific and they don't address the question of whether boosters could potentially reduce infection and transmission, and whether that would be a worthy goal in itself.

 

AGREED!   I want the booster.  Assuming someone who got Moderna could get it.  Honestly I am not following CDC or WHO's advice on a lot of things with Covid anymore.  I am making my own decisions.  I think they messed up a lot during this telling people we don't need masks and so on.  I never believed that and have worn a mask since March 2020.  I still am.  The more and more I find out about Delta the more and more I am masking indoors.  Ok sue me, I never stopped.    To me it isn't a big deal and I want that extra layer of protection.  I know the CDC is telling me I don't need to do that based on my vaccination status and that the rates are low in my area currently.  And maybe I don't.  Maybe my chances are so small.   But I really don't want covid.  Sure I might get a mild case because I am vaccinated, but lots of people who had mild cases still get long Covid.  I wish this wasn't all so political because I would love to have real information that would help me live my life during this time.   And maybe I am not someone that needs the booster, but I want it.  I want to have an extra layer especially if it is performing better against Delta. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FuzzyCatz said:

I did see some other country was recommending young men lay low the week of their vaccine, so there may be some merit to some recommendations on self care is a good idea, monitoring for certain populations, etc?  I wonder if using anti inflammatories might help after vaccination too?

Singapore. I think that it is precautionary.

They don’t know that the myocarditis following the vaccine is autoimmune, or any kind of immune reaction. They don’t know why the vaccine leads to myocarditis. 
 

Usually, light exercise helps the immune response, but it does make sense to limit activity to prevent any stress on the heart. Don’t know if that will prevent anything, since they don’t know why it happens. 
 

I would think you would not want to take anything that could mask the symptoms, so I wouldn’t do that until cardiologists come up with something official. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Penelope said:

I don’t understand the assumption that Delta is the primary variant from here on out. The latest from PHE is that Delta now has spread numbers similar to Alpha. Is there any reason to think we won’t have another variant predominant a few months from now? 

 

 

🤷‍♀️
Lambda rolling out ...   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, mommyoffive said:

AGREED!   I want the booster.  Assuming someone who got Moderna could get it.  Honestly I am not following CDC or WHO's advice on a lot of things with Covid anymore.  I am making my own decisions.  I think they messed up a lot during this telling people we don't need masks and so on.  I never believed that and have worn a mask since March 2020.  I still am.  The more and more I find out about Delta the more and more I am masking indoors.  Ok sue me, I never stopped.    To me it isn't a big deal and I want that extra layer of protection.  I know the CDC is telling me I don't need to do that based on my vaccination status and that the rates are low in my area currently.  And maybe I don't.  Maybe my chances are so small.   But I really don't want covid.  Sure I might get a mild case because I am vaccinated, but lots of people who had mild cases still get long Covid.  I wish this wasn't all so political because I would love to have real information that would help me live my life during this time.   And maybe I am not someone that needs the booster, but I want it.  I want to have an extra layer especially if it is performing better against Delta. 

I think this is basically what CDC wants - for vaccinated to decide their own level of comfort.

I am very grateful that I don’t have to wear a mask. I live in a rural area and my community has a 70% vaccination rate right now. I am not around large crowds, and I don’t see a point of putting a mask on at a restaurant just to take it off while I am eating. I fully support those who don’t feel comfortable without a mask to put one on. If I were in a low vaccinated and high density area, I probably would mask indoors as well. 
 

Adding that I also want an option of the booster. I probably won’t give it to my kids, but as a high risk individual, I will be all for one. 

Edited by Roadrunner
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Roadrunner said:

I think this is basically what CDC wants - for vaccinated to decide their own level of comfort.

I am very grateful that I don’t have to wear a mask. I live in a rural area and my community has a 70% vaccination rate right now. I am not around large crowds, and I don’t see a point of putting a mask on at a restaurant just to take it off while I am eating. I fully support those who don’t feel comfortable without a mask to put one on. If I were in a low vaccinated and high density area, I probably would mask indoors as well. 

Oh I wish we were 70% in my county.  I would feel so much more comfortable if we were.  My county is at 48% of adults fully vaccinated and and 39% of all residents fully vaccinated.  

The county where my kids do their activities in is a much higher rate.  77% of adults fully vaccinated and 66% of all residents fully vaccinated.  I will feel much better doing things there vs. here.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Penelope said:

I don’t understand the assumption that Delta is the primary variant from here on out. The latest from PHE is that Delta now has spread numbers similar to Alpha. Is there any reason to think we won’t have another variant predominant a few months from now? 

Undoubtedly there will be more variants, but what we've seen so far is that variants are mutating in ways that make them more infectious, faster replicating, and more able to evade antibodies, not less infectious, slower replicating, and more easily destroyed by antibodies. And the more Delta spreads, the more likely there will be new mutations developing within Delta (e.g. Delta Plus).

Pfizer, Moderna, J&J, and Novavax all use the same specially-tweaked spike protein in their vaccines, and as the virus accrues mutations in the areas of the spike protein that are specifically targeted by the vaccines, the less effective the vaccines will be. The issue isn't that Delta is uniquely dangerous and will be around forever, the issue is that the virus will continue to mutate in ways that make the vaccine less effective, and at some point we are going to need boosters. The question is do we wait until new variants evolve that may increase the hospitalization and death rates to "unacceptable" levels again, or do we try to be more proactive? Based on what's happened in the last year and a half, I'd say the answer to that is probably "Why be proactive when we can wait until the shit hits the fan and then flail around?" 

 

33 minutes ago, Penelope said:

There is not yet any clear and substantial evidence that symptoms following Covid are more significant or more common than after other common infections, so I think we are a long way from any premise that we will get regular shots to prevent asymptomatic infection or long Covid, even if maybe eventually that is true. Not that long Covid isn’t real, but you can’t study whether something is currently happening or being prevented if you don’t have a good definition or good epidemiology.

I'm not clear what you're saying here — long covid is real, but there's no evidence that it's worse than the after-effects of other common viruses? Have you read any of the studies on long covid? Are there any studies suggesting 1/3 to 2/3 of people who had the flu report continued, and even worsening, symptoms and "reduced quality of life" weeks or months afterwards? Because that is what studies are showing with covid. I'm going to put some of the studies in a separate post.

 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...