I am sure that in our state (HI), the databases for vaccines do NOT communicate well with one another. I had a hard time getting the data from the in network pharmacy (CVS), to give it to my in network healthcare provider. That’s one of the reasons I wanted an internist who is in the same medical system and records as my lung doc.
It would be nice and better if there were a good statewide database, imho. So far as I and my primary care md can tell, there is none.
Insurance – Medicare or otherwise – was never needed as the feds were paying for the vax 100% for everyone within the US borders: legal residents, undocumented, and tourists just visiting. That being said, some providers did ask if one had insurance so they could bill the feds an extra Admin fee. But again, insurance was not necessary. (Everyone I know skipped those pages while registering to get thru to the appt page.)
And of course, if you went to your local CVS/Walgreens where you had previously purchased prescription, or a health care Center where you had been a patient, they could easily connect your records (if they chose to).
At 39% efficacy, the vaccine would not have been authorized. Therefore not administered and useless. It looks to me the first thing we need to establish is which is correct, 39% or 84%, instead of theorizing what is what. I tend to believe 84% since that is what Pfizer put out after their study. I am assuming the study is done in a controlled group much like how they determined 95% efficacy initially.
Do you have a comparison to the antibody levels measured at various times after other vaccinations, particularly those which are recommended periodically like influenza and Tdap?
I was in NYC today. In Grand Central, there is a vaccine spot…get a shot and get free transportation vouchers. I am not from NY, and it was actually closed when I was there. But I do wonder if it had been open, if I could have just gotten a shot…no questions asked.
I was in NYC last week adn they had a street tent set up in the UWS on Broadway: get a jab and a bottle of water. Since I was OOS, I could have easily just rolled up my sleeve.
What I am wondering is why the vaccine companies seem to be slow with vaccines specifically targeted against the variants. It did not take long for the vaccine companies to make a vaccine for the ancestral version of SARS-CoV-2 (most the waiting time was time for three phases of trials and government approvals), so making a version with the changes needed to target B.1.617.2 / Delta and other variants of concern (or even potential variants) does not seem to be all that difficult for them (much the way flu vaccine companies make new versions each year).
A booster dose of vaccine against the ancestral virus may help if there is waning immunity, but not as much as a vaccine that is a closer match to the current circulating variant of the virus.
Here’s a link for an EUA T-cell test. The information on the website explains a bit about T cell immunity and when the test could be helpful.
I have heard that some vaccines have more of a T cell response than others. And in the paper that looked the longer interval between shots in the UK, there was some discussion about the T cell response varying with the change in interval.