I think many people with two doses, myself including, find themselves in no rush to get booster. At this point I think I am going to wait for more data from Israel, the boosters pioneer.
1 Like
Note that there is a difference between relative effectiveness (the usual vaccine effectiveness numbers) and absolute effectiveness. Here is an example with made-up numbers:
- Before Delta, over some time period in some place:
- 0.1% of vaccinated people got COVID-19.
- 1.0% of unvaccinated people got COVID-19.
- After Delta, over the same length time period in the same place:
- 0.8% of vaccinated people got COVID-19.
- 4.0% of unvaccinated people got COVID-19.
With the above made-up numbers, we see that vaccine effectiveness fell from 90% pre-Delta to 80% post-delta. However, we also see that vaccinated people were 8 times more likely to get COVID-19, and unvaccinated people were 4 times more likely to get COVID-19, post-Delta compared to pre-Delta.
In other words, vaccination can still be very effective in a relative sense (meaning that vaccination still greatly lowers the risk of getting COVID-19), but the risk of getting COVID-19 is much higher in post-Delta than it was in pre-Delta, even for vaccinated people.
5 Likes
A) This is not at all the same thing, but even if it were;
B) Many people all over the world eat the same thing for breakfast every day (whatever breakfast it is) and it works just fine.
If youāre not immunocompromised, you donāt have to worry about it nearly as much as others do. Many people are dealing with cancer and similar things that put them into the immunocompromised situation, and for them, knowing they can get boosters regularly is probably a relief at this point.
Or maybe itās time to let people choose what they want to get more data in quickly since itās impossible to know the differences ahead of time. Choosing not to get a booster is an option if itās preferable to you.
3 Likes
The messaging around boosting/third dose (we canāt even agree on what it is) has been very bad. I donāt believe thereās any data that says that itās harmful, beyond the rare SEs we know can happen. The question is are they necessary for most people? The answer is probably no, at least not yet. Iāve been eligible for quite some time now, but delayed simply hoping to get closer to winter for the circulating antibody bump.
1 Like
I find it bothersome that the science isnāt pushing for valid and widespread anti-body testing. I find it bothersome that the CDC says ādonāt do antibody testing because you might not show any as a response to a vaccine although you are still protectedā while at the same time the science says āantibodies are waning so get a booster.ā
I find it bothersome that when H and I DID take an antibody test (Quantitative Serology testing for AB IgG) there is no real cohesive explanation of what these antibodies actually ARE. Are they from a native infection, are they as a result of a vaccine. What is the upper range?
I find it bothersome that science is basically saying - take another does of last years flu shot because the one you just took is wearing off. Yes, we know there is a different flu (Delta) but we want you to take another does of the stuff which clearly proved effective against the previous bad boy - because - well - because it seems that your antibodies rise again but we donāt know if that really matters when it comes to Delta.
I GET that we donāt know the answers. I am however reluctant to chase the next jab without somewhat of an overview of the goal.
3 Likes
Were they spike protein antibodies? If so, then you do not know if they were from vaccination or previous infection if you were vaccinated before the test.
But if they were nucleocapsid antibodies, then they would indicate previous infection, since vaccination does not induce them.
2 Likes
@ucbalumnus already covered point 1. There are multiple antigenic proteins in SARS-CoV-2. The vaccine developers, for reasons I donāt yet understand, chose the spike protein. There are multiple tests for the nucleocapsid antigen. Itās the way to determine if a vaccinated person has been infected if they still have circulating antibodies.
IgG is the most common circulating immunoglobulin. Itās a generic term in the sense that there are many of them specific to the antigen that caused them in the first place. In order to know what it means for you, you can look up the specific test to see what antigen it was targeting.
We donāt know ranges yet. This disease hasnāt even been around for 2 years. Plus, itās more complicated than that. Circulating antibodies wain, but memory cells can recognize pathogens and rekindle the antibody response.
Your last point is valid. I think the data is clear that people who are immune compromised due to age (over 70), disease or medication, who didnāt mount a robust response in the first place can be helped with a third, or even a 4th dose. Itās not like thatās novel. There are multiple 4 dose, and even 5 dose vaccines already. People constantly under barrage of high viral load probably should be boosted too.
What isnāt clear is whether or not the rest of us benefit greatly. I personally donāt feel very vulnerable as a 58 year old who is healthy, lightweight and immunocompetent. I am getting a third dose in November though because Iāll be visiting my elderly parents.
The bottom line is that science takes time.
4 Likes
Probably because antibodies stuck on the spike protein do better at neutralizing the virus and avoiding antibody-dependent enhancement.
Anyway, antibody count may not be the full story of antibody response: 'Waning' Immunity: What Falling Antibody Counts Really Mean - The Atlantic
1 Like
I think the data regarding severe disease certainly supports that notion. Thatās why antibody chasing seems like a bit of a red herring. For many reasons, including cost to the system and exposure to side effects, we need to define a āgood enoughā point. The message is really muddy on that right now.
2 Likes
@eyemgh what booster shot are you contemplating? (I am also waiting)
@eyemgh - Where I volunteer vaccinate, there is clear agreement on what are boosters vs. third (actually called additional)doses.
Additional doses are for those significantly immunocompromised persons who may not have generated a full robust immune response, due to disease process or medications. They are offered to assist the initial dosing to generate a better response; they are given at least 28 days after the initial series (or dose if J&J).
Booster doses are given at least 6 moths after completion of the initial series to boost - assist with potential waning effects over time.
My PCP recommended that I boost with Moderna after two Pfizer doses.
1 Like
Okay that is a dense read. What did stand out to me - a non-medical person - that use of anti-parasitic, anti-malarial, anti-anthrax, anti-lyme etc drugs might be a useful in treatment strategies.
This does beg a certain question about a certain drug whose name may not be mentionedā¦
You got that from the paper I linked? 
The take home message about all those drugs (none discussed in that article), including hydroxychloroquine and he who shall not be named, Ivermectin, and others, is that theyāve shown anti-viral activity in vitro in the past. Thatās the first thing done when novel diseases arise, throw all known drugs at them in a cell culture. The problem is that in a living, human organism (in vivo), itās much more complicated. Removing confirmation bias and anecdote, none of those have shown to be functional in RCTs. Remember, the most common outcome of this disease is survival, even for octogenarians, by a long margin, regardless of treatment.
8 Likes
Where did you get that from that article? Can you cite a section or explain?
Lyme and anthrax are bacterial, malaria is parasitic, and COVID is viral so it would seem you might be referring to apples and oranges?
In my experience with Lyme, hydroxychloroquine (Plaquenil) was used to increase the effectiveness of Biaxin or Zithromax by changing the pH of cells. I have lupus and took it as a relatively mild immune suppressant. I was interested in the early idea that it could help with COVID and wondered what the mechanism could possibly be.
I have taken Ivermectin for a parasite. Not pleasant medication. Again, wondered why it would be antiviral.
At the concentrations the original in vitro studies were done at, probably nothing would grow. From what I understand, having not read the original work, the dose extrapolated to humans would have been very lethal.
2 Likes
Yikes. Sorry, I had several articles open. No. your linked article did not lead me to that statementā¦this one did
Antigenic sites in SARS-CoV-2 spike RBD show molecular similarity with pathogenic antigenic determinants and harbors peptides for vaccine development - PMCā¦āThese antigenic variations not only explain the complex immunological aspects, etiology and pathophysiology of the disease but also suggest different therapeutics (anti-malarial, anti-TB, anti-leprosy, anti-plague, anti-lyme, anti-anthrax, anti-cholera etc.), including drugs, medicines, antibodies and vaccines, for their promising role in inactivating SARS-CoV-2, which is thought to mutate quickly.ā
3 Likes
Well that explains it! Wrong link! I did read early on that a TB vaccine might help with resistance to COVID, It would be great if my previous Lyme disease helped protect me against coronavirus but not that hopeful. Still, any exploration of new approaches can only be good.
2 Likes