Pfizer and Moderna Vaccines Are 94% Effective Against COVID-19 Hospitalization In Older Adults, Says CDC (thehill.com) 60
According to a new study from the CDC, Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were 94 percent effective in preventing hospitalization for COVID-19 among people age 65 and older. The Hill reports: The study provides new evidence on the benefits of vaccination, and builds on results from the clinical trials by adding real-world evidence from 417 hospitalized adults in 14 states from January to March. "This multisite U.S. evaluation under real-world conditions suggests that vaccination provided protection against COVID-19-associated hospitalization among adults aged [65 and older]," the study states.
The 94 percent efficacy rate was for people who were fully vaccinated, meaning they were at least two weeks past their second dose. For people who were only partially vaccinated, meaning they were more than two weeks past the first dose but less than two weeks past the second dose, effectiveness was 64 percent. Notably, no significant effectiveness was found for people who were less than 14 days past their first dose, highlighting that it takes some time for protection to kick in and that people should not disregard precautions right away. The results show that as vaccinations spread, hospitalizations and deaths are set to decline, the CDC said.
The 94 percent efficacy rate was for people who were fully vaccinated, meaning they were at least two weeks past their second dose. For people who were only partially vaccinated, meaning they were more than two weeks past the first dose but less than two weeks past the second dose, effectiveness was 64 percent. Notably, no significant effectiveness was found for people who were less than 14 days past their first dose, highlighting that it takes some time for protection to kick in and that people should not disregard precautions right away. The results show that as vaccinations spread, hospitalizations and deaths are set to decline, the CDC said.
Almost there. (Score:2)
For people who were only partially vaccinated, meaning they were more than two weeks past the first dose but less than two weeks past the second dose, effectiveness was 64 percent.
Ties into the hesitancy story with at least a half-full glass response.
Factor of 3 vs. factor of 25 isn't half-full IMHO. (Score:3)
A full two-shot sequence cuts the hospitalization rate by a factor of 25. Taking just the first shot cuts it by a factor of three. That says to me the glass is only a few drops over 1/9th full.
Re: (Score:2)
A full two-shot sequence cuts the hospitalization rate by a factor of 25. Taking just the first shot cuts it by a factor of three. That says to me the glass is only a few drops over 1/9th full.
Half-credit because you didn't show your work.
Re: Seems low. (Score:3)
9 percent death rate if infected above age 65
https://www.cdc.gov/coronaviru... [cdc.gov]
I remember hearing reliable anecdotes last year from doctors that 1 in 4 hospitalized died in the first wave. Now down to about 1 in 5 in that age range.
So somewhere between 36% and 45% probably on the high end and at least 9% on the low end.
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
Re: Seems low. (Score:5, Insightful)
None of this makes any sense. If the death and hospitalization rates were that high, at least some of the dozens of people I know over 65 should have been hospitalized or died. Yet I don't know anybody who has been hospitalized or died at any age, even those with severe preexisting conditions. Something is wrong with the numbers somewhere.
It seems to me that you may not be as familiar with statistics, sample sizes, variations and so on as you think you are.
Of my closest relatives, zero have contracted (tested positive, impossible to tell if anyone was just asymptomatic if also not tested) Covid-19.
Among their friends, though, things look different in some cases.
These things cluster. They do not spread and apply strictly evenly. Your situation may simply be similar to mine.
In my case, we have been very careful to follow all recommendations and restrictions, staying away from each other, being strict about hygiene, not using public transport, socially distancing at all times. Unsurprisingly, to good effect. We consider ourselves lucky, but we like to believe we at least did what we could to improve our luck.
For those faring worse, in almost all cases you will find that they violated (knowingly or not, voluntarily or not) one or more of the measures we should all be taking.
Re: (Score:2)
OTOH, I know 4 people who caught it. 65 yr old, dead, 80 yr old, surprisingly alive and now Covid free after weeks in ICU, she's still in hospital, 58 yr old cancer survivor on chemotherapy, 2 days in hospital due to fever, 62 yr old, just felt really tired for a week plus. That was one household where it entered about 5 weeks ago.
Re:Seems low. (Score:5, Informative)
So, by comparison, what is the hospitalization rate for un-vaccinated older adults?
You misunderstand - the 94% number is already a comparison. TFA does not make that clear.
Whatever your risk was without the vaccine (depends on age, health), your risk is 94% lower once fully vaccinated.
So if your risk of hospitalisation once infected was 30% (late 60s?), after vaccination your risk is only 2%. This is very good!
Of course 2% is still a lot of people, and you risk lifelong after-effects even if you survive, so we want herd immunity to protect us further.
(2% of over-65s in the US alone is still 1 million very sick people. )
Re: (Score:2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
That's what I'd like to know about regardless of hospital admissions, there are now over 1 million people in the UK with long-covid - does the vaccination stop long-covid?
Re: (Score:3)
In some cases the vaccination seems to cure long covid.
https://www.npr.org/sections/h... [npr.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting, my assumption was that damage had been done when the immune system reacted poorly to the virus causing 'scarring' or other damage to various organs, I didn't realise some people's immune systems hadn't eradicated covid after several months, I still think this needs confirmation via testing. I'll pass that info on either way.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Seems low. (Score:5, Interesting)
All because they just HAD to go to a birthday party with a bunch of unvaccinated people 3 weeks before the baby is due. For the record, most people in that family fell into the 1C group and were eligible since February. The rest have been eligible for group 2 (16 and up) since the first of April.
The point I want to make is that given the new strains running around, I think the hospitalization rate is much higher than before, given the number of people under 45 winding up in the ER. If the idea that the 2nd dose makes you feel like shit for a day or two, you are thinking about it all wrong. You feel like shit because your body identified the hell out of it and kicked into overdrive to kick the vaccines ass. That sort of immune response should be celebrated.
Re: Seems low. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
A trial for that treatment plan was just completed by Mayo Clinic in Rochester. Good news, the crusty red "covid penis and sac" you'll get will only last 3 weeks at most, after which they will fall off.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Pffth. You’re not serious about being vaccinated unless you collect the whole set. Did you know Taylor Swift has 9 different color variants of Folklore on vinyl? The same way you prove you’re a dedicated Swiftie by buying 9 copies of the same record, you’ve gotta world tour that shit, and get all of ‘em, otherwise you’re just not a hardcore Covid-19 vaccine fan.
Pfizer
Moderna
BBIBP-CorV
CoronaVac
Covaxin
WIBP-CorV
CoviVac
Sputnik V
AstraZeneca
Convidecia
Johnson & Johnson
EpiVacCor
Re: (Score:2)
Actually the UK is doing trials with two shots of different vaccines. There is reason to believe that it would give you better protection. I think mixes of AZ/Sputnik V and AZ/Pfizer are the ones being tested.
Re: I think I'm good (Score:2)
:)
Actually I am thinking of getting covaxin for my 2nd shot while 1st was covishield
(covaxin wasnt in stock at that time. It's a traditional, non-mRNA, vax so has some advantages. mRNA ones have different advantages but mainly in manufacturing, not for the patient)
Though the vax center doc says they will then treat it as 1st shot of covaxin & give 2nd shot of the same after a month.
In case of too many variants evolving like we have now, combination vax work better in terms of higher efficacy against mo
Re: (Score:1, Troll)
It's funny how I actually hate the progressive wing of the Democrat party but I do agree with them that you can easily tell a gerbil, a pet, a common piece of the rabble who has been given his talking points by his handlers and chatters inanely with his fellow gerbils if they constantly use a few phrases.
I would include "virtue signaling", SJW (though I do occasionally use that one since it quickly conveys a point), soy boy, cuck, face diaper, cancel culture in anything but a sarcastic manner, alpha vs beta
Curious (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm curious how well they'll work when the Indian variants return to the US . . . . .
That will be rather interesting data to watch methinks.
Hopefully, the vaccines work as advertised but, time will tell.
Re:Curious (Score:5, Funny)
You can call it the H1B variant...
Thanks I'll be here all week.
You forgot the line (Score:2)
"Try the veal" before saying "I'll be here all week."
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Does that mean the American COVID variants are going to have to train the Indian COVID variants before the Indian COVID variants can take their jobs?
Re:Curious (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm curious how effective they are at preventing Long COIVD and in protecting people with auto-immune conditions. Just because you didn't need to go to hospital doesn't mean you can't suffer some vary nasty long term effects.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not the Indian variants that are the most scary, at least not yet. One of the Brazilian variants has flipped the age range, the ICU's in Brazil are now fully of 20 and 30 year olds, not the 50+ they were with the original virus. And this variant IS already in the US and EU, and there are reports of a variant that has merged the higher infectivity of the British variant with the lower age death rate of the Brazilian variant that's already been found.
Each mutation is a risk the virus will evolve out of p
Re:With a 2% CFR, that's still awful (Score:5, Insightful)
> I can remember when a vaccine was just that - it would actually prevent you from getting sick in the first place,
This is never how the flu vaccine ever worked. It's a minor miracle that we even had vaccines for other things that made you totally immune.
Only a boomer would complain about this.
The MRNA vaccine is literally a wonder of modern science. Be grateful. Your risk of hospitalization just got cut by 94%.
Re: (Score:2)
Without MRNA vaccines we wouldn't have had a conventional vaccine until the J&J vaccine shipped (almost 6 months later) and it's production ramp rate is about 70% slower than the MRNA vaccines. Basically everyone in the US wouldn't be vaccinated using the J&J vaccine until late 2022. Conventional vaccines can take more than a year to ramp production and that's after spending a year finding a way to grow the virus.
In this case the J&J vaccine uses the human stem cell lines for growing the virus t
Re: (Score:3)
Obviously, the vaccines are also effective in reducing the CFR. And the results don’t mean 6% of people still go to hospital, it means the hospitalised patients are distributed 94:6 unvaccinated:vaccinated. It’s 6% of the hospitalisation rate for the unvaccinated population, which translates to 6% of maybe 20% of infections, ie 1.2% of infections, and infection rates are way below 100% too.
Re:With a 2% CFR, that's still awful (Score:5, Insightful)
I can remember when a vaccine was just that - it would actually prevent you from getting sick in the first place, not just prevent hospitalization. The fact that a disease with a 2% fatality rate can put 6% of fully vaccinated people in the hospital (of the high-risk group) is not reassuring. This is more like bringing the risk of older adults down into the range of young adults, not providing the protection one would typically associate with a vaccine.
I hate it when people can't read.
It's not 6% of fully vaccinated people going to hospital. It's "the number of fully vaccinated people going to hospital is 6% of the number of unvaccinated people going to hospital". Most people without vaccination don't go to hospital because either they are lucky and don't catch the virus, or they catch it but it isn't too bad, so they don't go to hospital. If those that would have the bad luck of having to go to hospital, only 6% need to go.
Assuming that the 550,000 in the USA who died would all have gone to hospital, if they had been fully vaccinated only 33,000 of them would have gone to hospital.
Re:With a 2% CFR, that's still awful (Score:5, Informative)
Here's information about the MMR vaccine:
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/v... [cdc.gov].
1 dose: Measles 93%, Mumps 78%, Rubella 97%
2 dose: Measles 97%, Mumps 88%, Rubella unlisted but likely near 100%.
Smallpox vaccine: 95% effective
https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/v... [cdc.gov]
2 doses of inactivated polio is only 90% effective.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/v... [cdc.gov]
The HPV vaccine that came out wasn't designed to target every strain, they prioritized the ones that caused the most cancers instead and that involved 3 shots.
You get tinnitus boosters every decade and flu shots every year.
Vaccines have never been 100% effective and that's with symptomatic cases. We're also holding these vaccines to higher standards than before, PCR is now our gold standard for detection of this disease and that technology is literally only a few years old for cheap mass producible tests and was still an academic field just in the 1990's and 2000's. When the CDC reports stats like the polio vaccines as being only 90% effective, that study was almost certainly done with methods that required much higher viral loads like symptomatic infections or a sufficient population to react with reagents as opposed to a process that amplifies the signal.
Re: (Score:2)
You get tinnitus boosters every decade and flu shots every year.
You mean Tetanus?
Re:With a 2% CFR, that's still awful (Score:5, Funny)
Huh?
Sorry...I couldn't hear you over this ringing in my ears.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, got those names swapped, 'autocorrect found a name, that looks about right'.
Re: (Score:2)
May as well ask here (Score:2)
Something I've been curious about lately is what happens to the muscle cells the mrna vaccines alter. Specifically, does the immune system attack them if they're presenting all these spike proteins?
I have found it difficult to search this kind of thing. Google seems to have their thumb really heavily on all covid search results. I ask any question about covid and I get a presorted list of 15 approved websites making sure that I know Covid is very bad for me. I've manually looked through a few message boards
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The reasons [sciencemag.org] it's muscle [abc.net.au] cells.
So it's not only the muscle cells that become infected but a couple other types as well.
Ass pull theory time.
Once the immune system is trained to recognise the spike. All those previously infected cells will be waving the spikes and so the immune system will take care of them. Either telling them to die, or destroying them if they refuse.
Deep pull. Once the cells stop making the spike. (the rna will degrade naturally anyway) not sure what happens to the spikes that get waved
Re: (Score:2)
Like how the mRNA eventually breaks down, proteins do to. Even if you never developed an immune response to the spike protein, it would eventually be reabsorbed by the cells after breaking into amino acids from other reactions. Molecules like free radicals are famous for this although others do exist like the components with the lysosome's. The immune response trigger accelerates the process because now the body is creating it's own proteins to bind to the spike proteins and it can't distinguish a protein f
Re: (Score:3)
mRNA breaks down real fast in the body. Hell it breaks down fast enough outside the body, that's why they where storing Pfizer at -80 Celsius.
One of the issues with getting mRNA vaccines to work was to find ways to make it last long enough in the body to actually do something. This is why they technically are not mRNA as the uracil nucleotide's have been replaced with a synthetic match, which works on the ribosomes but trick the immune system into thinking they are not mRNA, which of course technically they
Re: (Score:2)
Once the immune system is trained to recognise the spike. All those previously infected cells will be waving the spikes and so the immune system will take care of them. Either telling them to die, or destroying them if they refuse.
Wait wait wait, I worked hard and paid a lot of money for these muscle cells, now I'm supposed to sacrifice them so that I or someone's stupid grandma I breathe on won't die?! Fuck you, science!
Re: (Score:2)
AFAIK, the spike proteins embed into the muscle cells' membranes, so your immune system should attack it. After the cells break apart, a lot of spike proteins that never made their way into the cell membrane (because they were in the cell) are recognized by your immune system.
mRNA just asks your cells to "make me some" (Score:2)
The mrna vaccines do not alter cells, muscle or otherwise. mrna just asks a cell, "Hey bro, can you synthesize some protein for me from these plans?"
The virus vector vaccines (J&J, AZ, Sputnik V), as far as they have been explained, do alter your cell DNA to be transcribed to RNA to synthesize protein antigens.
The Novavax vaccine nearing US approval is unique in just giving you the spike protein without enlisting participation from anything except from your immune cells. I would have held out for
Re: (Score:2)
According to the CDC [cdc.gov], the viral vector vaccines 'do not affect or interact with our DNA in any way'.
Re: (Score:2)
So they make this claim in for-the-layperson language.
https://www.medicalnewstoday.c... [medicalnewstoday.com]
The viral vectors are DNA viruses, yes? And once they enter some of your cells, they transcribe to RNA that in turns makes the Spike, that appears on the surface of those of your cells? And this takes place without the vector inserting a section of DNA into that of your cell?
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.frontiersin.org/ar... [frontiersin.org]
Original trials (Score:5, Informative)
Even so, two weeks should gives your immune system a head start even if you have to go to hospital, so it would be interesting to know if cases were different and more people recovered or people recovered more quickly.
94% based on 1 case (Score:1)
So why continue to wear masks after vaccination? (Score:1, Interesting)
Governments still insist you wear a mask, or better yet, two or three masks, even after these "highly effective" vaccinations. Why?
Since this is slashdot... (Score:2)
Yes, the slashdot comment section is a reliable source lol.