It says the posters name and that the reply is hidden. I’m not sure what happens if they mention you.
But really it’s so nice not to hear the noise or the petty fights.
2 Likes
On behalf our dad, my sister and I found a wonderful woman to arrange an estate sale for our dad. Other companies wouldn’t take on the task because it is so daunting, but this lady had an unexpected opening. We are thrilled with her efforts so far, but she just told my sister that she isn’t vaccinated. She doesn’t wear masks, either. Ugh. I guess I will wimp out and let Sis figure out what to do, if anything. I hate the thought of lots of people walking through the house with the woman there.
Surprisingly, my nephew who is studying mechanical engineering says he won’t get vaccinated. He had COVID months ago and says he doesn’t need a shot. Sis and her husband have decided that he will get the shot if he wants to continue staying at their house the rest of the summer. And have his tuition paid for.
3 Likes
I am wondering when vaccines specific to the newer more contagious variants like B.1.617.2 / Delta will be made. Fortunately, SARS-CoV-2 does not mutate as quickly like the flu viruses, so vaccines targeting the ancestral strain still work against the new variants, but it would be better if vaccines targeted specifically to the new variants were available, since the ancestral strain is probably extinct, having been outcompeted by the more contagious variants.
7 Likes
Interesting question, seems that a new French vaccine being studied in UK will finish trials in autumn.
“ VLA2001 was given as a low, medium or high dose in these trials with all participants in the high-dose group generating antibodies to the virus spike protein.
One measure of immune response in the high-dose group after completing the two doses indicated antibody levels were, after two weeks, at least as high as those seen in patients naturally infected with SARS-CoV-2.
Interestingly, VLA2001 induced immune responses against a number of virus proteins (including the spike protein) across all participants, an encouraging sign the vaccine can provide broad protection against COVID-19.”
3 Likes
VLA2001 is an inactivated whole virus vaccine with an adjuvant. Other inactivated whole virus vaccines have been made by Sinopharm, Sinovac, and Bharat Biotech.
There was an earlier discussion here when someone brought up antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE), where antibodies to (some parts of) a virus could actually make infection worse. The spike protein is targeted by mRNA, viral vector, and subunit vaccines because antibodies against it were highly neutralizing and did not pose a risk of ADE, which was a concern about antibodies to other parts of the virus. Of course, if some other part of the virus is highly conserved and antibodies to it are effective at neutralization without risking ADE, that may be a target for vaccines.
The linked page notes that “One measure of immune response in the high-dose group after completing the two doses indicated antibody levels were, after two weeks, at least as high as those seen in patients naturally infected with SARS-CoV-2.” Note that other studies have found that natural infection tends to produce varying antibody response, similar to that of one dose of a two-dose mRNA vaccine.
1 Like
Ty, so this may not be as promising ad currently FDA approved vaccines.
But did you see that clinical trials for a third dose may begin in August
“Pfizer and BioNTech expect to begin clinical trials to study a third dose in August.“
1 Like
Are the mRNA boosters going to require clinical trials every time? They don’t run clinical trials on the flu vaccines every year.
I would like to see mucosal Covid booster that trains the immune cells in the mucous membranes. That will add another level of protection.
1 Like
Baylor has a trial for booster
This network keeps list of volunteers
“The purpose of this screening registry is to create a list of potential volunteers who want to take part in current or future COVID-19 prevention clinical trials. “
https://covpn.oracle.com/register/f?p=610000:1:5857679674680:::::
HHS on july 8 said”
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. This process takes into account laboratory data, clinical trial data, and cohort data – which can include data from specific pharmaceutical companies, but does not rely on those data exclusively. We continue to review any new data as it becomes available and will keep the public informed. We are prepared for booster doses if and when the science demonstrates that they are needed.”
https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2021/07/08/joint-cdc-and-fda-statement-vaccine-boosters.html
I see a lot of calls for not being political and showing empathy for others, almost in the same breath as bashing Trump, Fox News, etc. LOL
For that particular anti-vax group, why would they feel empathy toward others after being the target of years worth of insults and mockery?
I am heavily pro-vax and pro-mask. And pro-mandates for both. I share the ire toward a lot of anti-vaxers. But I also despise the culture that promotes the lack of consideration of what is best for the community when making a vax decision.
In addition, the powers that be haven’t done a great job of communication. Honesty, specifically.
The expectation of normalcy this soon was unrealistic all along. The 95% efficacy from the trials was never going to hold in the real world. And with no option to vaccinate kids, the vaccine coverage was never going to work toward eradication.
Plus, of course, we have Delta now. Since Pfizer has less than 50% efficacy against Delta, it fails to meet the approval standard the government set forth last fall. They need to address this if/when they approve it. For example, “Yes, less than our 50% threshold for preventing infection, but we must approve based on strong record of safety and preventing serious disease.”
The vaccine is imperfect. But it is our best tool. “It wouldn’t surprise me in the least if you’re dead in 2 months. I really don’t want that.” That line, and hopefully my honesty and credibility, has worked for a few on the fence.
4 Likes
This appears only to be true after time, not when vaccinated recently, and it still holds up well over time against severe Covid.
That said, I hope they approve a booster soon.
ETA: Here’s a link to the Israel data that @MACmiracle posted earlier. Look on page 5 for easy to see breakthrough rate by age group and date of last vax. (Other graphs are on other pages too.) Those vaxed in Jan, Feb, and possibly March have the biggest worries.
Then look on Page 6 to see that Pfizer is holding up well for serious cases. It’s not perfect, but it sure beats being unvaxed.
While Pfizer and BioNTech believe a third dose of BNT162b2 has the potential to preserve the highest levels of protective efficacy against all currently known variants including Delta, the companies are remaining vigilant and are developing an updated version of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine that targets the full spike protein of the Delta variant. The first batch of the mRNA for the trial has already been manufactured. The Companies anticipate the clinical studies to begin in August, subject to regulatory approvals.
Blockquote
1 Like
But if health care workers (high exposure) tended to be in the earliest groups, that may account for the higher rate of breakthroughs in the earliest groups.
Agreed. A bit is still unknown and being studied. It bears watching IMO.
I’m sure hoping this announcement comes true and holds up. It would cause some I know to have to get vaxed, or go through a bit of testing, or retire I suppose. Either way it would be helpful.
6 Likes
This will ease my S’s mind as he’s a fed employee and took a leave of absence rather than work with a building with significant #s of unvaxed folks. He’s at high risk and fully vaxed.
4 Likes
I have a SIL who is in the New Age-y/alternative part of the spectrum on health. She’s convinced of certain things (e.g., there is a huge difference between organic food and non-organic food, drugs created by synthesizing are generally bad but drugs refined from plants are good, even if they have the identical chemical composition, vaccines are bad for you, …). Some of her beliefs may turn out to have support, some not. But, she has crafted pseudo-science-y arguments in favorable of all of them. With respect to vaccines generally, she sent her kids to school without vaccinations and the other parents shunned them. I think eventually the school required that their kids be vaccinated. She was very surprised and hurt that the parents shunned her kids. I was pretty surprised that she was surprised. But, the main point is that she dredged up anecdotes and selective quotes from articles to justify her feelings about the standard vaccinations that are required of kids.
I’m a coffee afficionado (fancy Italian superautomatic espresso/capuccino machine) and have found great joy in the myriad studies that show the positive effects of coffee on reducing death from any cause, [reducing the chances of getting COVID](Coffee and veggies may protect against COVID-19 - Northwestern Now and is associated with a lowered risk of some types of cancer, including prostate cancer, liver cancer, endometrial cancer, and some cancers of the mouth and throat. My SIL believes coffee is evil. When she was tsk-tsking my wife about drinking coffee, I brought up some of these studies. She angrily responded that, even if there were such health benefits from drinking coffee, my wife shouldn’t drink coffee because of adrenal fatigue. Indeed, you can find all sorts of natural food and natural medicine sites stating her view (diving into discussions of cortisol and the like). But, guess what: Adrenal fatigue is a myth. The science notwithstanding, I am happy if she wants to eschew coffee. But her use of pseudo-science in an attempt to dissuade others from drinking coffee, if successful, might actually increase their risk of getting COVID or cancer. I’m not OK with statistical harm to others. The article says that, “One or more cups of coffee per day was associated with about a 10% decrease in risk of COVID-19 compared to less than one cup per day.” So, if she has an audience of ten million followers (she wishes) and 10% of them stop drinking coffee, then she has increased by 10% the risk that one million of her followers would be infected by COVID because they didn’t get the prophylactic protect.
I personally believe that her choice not to vaccinate her kids was immoral. Fortunately it was short-lived. I don’t see it as any different than choosing to drive drunk. As I said earlier, I wouldn’t have a problem with people choosing to drive drunk or not getting vaccinated if they only ones harmed by their choices were themselves. But, this is not true in either case. I think it would be entirely appropriate to equip cars with a breathalyzer or a puzzle to solve that would be easy sober but difficult while drunk to prevent drunk driving. A car with a breathalyzer is equivalent to a vaccine mandate. What if my SIL didn’t want to believe that drunk driving was harmful or that you shouldn’t take away people’s right to choose whether or not they could drive after consuming substantial quantities of alcohol. She’d find examples of people who can drive fine drunk or athletes performing at very high levels when drunk (I think Lawrence Taylor did). She would make political arguments. But at the end of the day, if she persuaded people to drive drunk who would otherwise have not done so, some fraction of them would have accidents that would injure themselves or others.
Many people who are reluctant for emotional reasons to be vaccinated seek information that confirms their beliefs (and tend to ignore or not see non-confirming information). More importantly for this discussion, they want others to share their opinions. So, they will seek to cast doubt on the efficacy of the vaccines or exaggerate the possible side effects. Yet, if a person casting doubt makes others more reluctant and increases the number of people to choose not to get vaccinated, they are contributing to the expected deaths and/or severe illnesses of others (note: expected deaths are in the statistical sense). As I view the world, knowingly sowing doubt to make oneself feel more comfortable is morally questionable at best.
12 Likes
/\ This. /\
3 Likes
It is also self-harmful to the person convincing others to avoid COVID-19 vaccination, in that some other person who was convinced to avoid COVID-19 vaccination may get COVID-19 and bring it to the person doing the convincing.
1 Like
If most doctors and scientists get vaccinated, I will. And I did:)
6 Likes