Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Medicine

US Plans COVID-19 Booster Shots At Six Months Instead of Eight (reuters.com) 231

Posted by BeauHD from the slight-change-of-plans dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: U.S. health regulators could approve a third COVID-19 shot for adults beginning at least six months after full vaccination, instead of the previously announced eight-month gap, the Wall Street Journal reported on Wednesday. Approval of boosters for three COVID-19 shots being administered in the United States -- those manufactured by Pfizer and partner BioNTech, Moderna and Johnson & Johnson -- is expected in mid-September, the report said, citing a person familiar with the plans.

Pfizer and BioNTech have already started the application process for the approval of its booster shot in people 16 and older, saying it spurs a more than three-fold increase in antibodies against the coronavirus. Earlier this week, U.S. regulators granted full approval to Pfizer's two-dose vaccine. Moderna said on Wednesday it has completed the real-time review needed for a full approval for its jab in people 18 and above. Earlier today, Johnson & Johnson announced that booster doses of its one-shot coronavirus vaccine generated a big spike in antibodies. "People who received a booster six to eight months after their initial J&J shots saw antibodies increase nine-fold higher than 28 days after the first shot," reports CNN, citing Johnson & Johnson.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

US Plans COVID-19 Booster Shots At Six Months Instead of Eight More

US Plans COVID-19 Booster Shots At Six Months Instead of Eight

Comments Filter:

  • side effects? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Kaenneth ( 82978 )

    How are the side effects from the third shot?

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by RJMonkeyboy ( 8404903 )
      Mom just got her third (Moderna) and it was about the same as the second -- lots of fatigue, some arm pain. Gone within a day or so.

      • Re:side effects? (Score:5, Funny)

        by tetapar284 ( 8472529 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @07:27PM (#61730587)
        It is a shame she is gone. My sympathies.

    • Re:side effects? (Score:5, Informative)

      by quonset ( 4839537 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @07:19PM (#61730575)

      How are the side effects from the third shot?

      The same as the first. Negligible compared to dying [imgur.com] or being on a ventilator [go.com] to temporarily stop from dying.

    • Re:side effects? (Score:4, Informative)

      by ArmoredDragon ( 3450605 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @09:10PM (#61730801)

      Just got my third shot (which is approved for solid organ transplant recipients already) and so far, just a sore arm. Same as the first two shots.

      • Pfizer, BTW.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Kaenneth ( 82978 )

        I'm just wondering since I got my 2nd shot only 4 months ago, if I should wait a lil bit til it's been 6 months; assuming I wouldn't get any more boosters until mid/late 2022. Maybe wait for a Delta optimized booster.

        I am on moderate immune suppressing medication for an autoimmune condition that originally appeared 2 days after getting MMR/Hep/Flu vaccines in one go, so over-aggravating my immune system is a concern.

        Would have to pay $90 to ask my specialist =P

        • I'd ask a rheumatologist and an infectious disease specialist for your specific case. See if they can both create a treatment plan.

          • Or an Immunologist, if you can find one (there are not that many of them). It is possible you may have an undiagnosed immune deficiency (such as CVID).

      • sore on which arm? left, right or mid-new (name still not settled, yet).

    • How are the side effects from the third shot?

      Pretty minor, I've gone out and bought eight copies of Windows, and my 5G reception has improved by 1 bar. So nothing much really.

    • Got mine and had zero effects other than a sore post on the arm for a day.

    • The first two shots turned me into a monkey.

      but it got better.

      At least the third needle doesn't need to be large enough to pass a microchip. That's probably where the arm pain comes from.

  • Booster shot data (Score:3, Insightful)

    by phantomfive ( 622387 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @07:05PM (#61730555) Journal

    Is there data anywhere explaining why we should get a booster shot? I'm willing to do it, but I'd like to see the data that shows it's helpful for my health, and not just for lining the pockets of Moderna executives.

    • Re:Booster shot data (Score:5, Informative)

      by quonset ( 4839537 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @07:24PM (#61730581)

      Is there data anywhere explaining why we should get a booster shot?

      Not that you will care one wit about the data, but getting a covid booster shot is the same reason for booster shots for measles. It helps amp up the body's own immune system more than it already is from the first shot. Here are nine questions and answers [npr.org] about why booster shots may be needed for you to ignore.

      and not just for lining the pockets of Moderna executives.

      Yeah, after Moderna and other drug manufacturers eliminated smallpox and polio through vaccines, they need another cash cow. /s

      • Re:Booster shot data (Score:4, Informative)

        by quenda ( 644621 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @07:46PM (#61730627)

        but getting a covid booster shot is the same reason for booster shots for measles.

        Actually, measles is different. Immunity appears to be for life, whether acquired from vaccine or natural infection. The vaccine is 95% effective from one dose, and 99% from 2 doses. It is easier to give the second dose than to test if the first one worked. No booster needed.

              Coronavirus vaccines are good, but not that good. More like influenza in this way. We may be needing (bi)annual boosters for many years to come.

        • Re: Booster shot data (Score:5, Informative)

          by blahbooboo ( 839709 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @08:00PM (#61730663)
          No. Influenza mutates rapidly and why new vaccine is yearly. So far covid variants have not escaped from vaccine efficacy. This is only so folks have covid antibodies in blood stream ready to go, otherwise memory B Cells will make new antibodies once youâ(TM)re exposed to the virus. This is only to prevent symptomatic infections but the thing is the current vaccine is for alpha and not fit any of the variants anyway.

          • Re: Booster shot data (Score:5, Informative)

            by quenda ( 644621 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @08:38PM (#61730745)

            No. Influenza mutates rapidly and why new vaccine is yearly.

            That's a whole other topic. You are missing the point and adding confusion.
              Yes the flu vaccine is changed each year, but protection also wanes over months even against the same strain.
            This is why we are advised not to get our flu vaccine too early in the season, but to wait closer to the peak risk time.

            the current vaccine is for alpha

            Alpha? That is the B.1.1.7 variant first identified in the UK, and became dominant in the US earlier this year. I think you may be confused.

            • I think you’re splitting hairs. Protection wanes because the antibodies are not actively in your bloodstream, but the memory cells are still there. They’re trying to prevent symptomatic infections but you still won’t likely die from the flu after vaccination (provided the vaccine is a good match for the flu variant then circulating)
          • might what to check that. like 70% of those sick are supposedly vaccinated.
          • also the vaccine gives you no covid antibody's. its a spike protein thats toxic fyi that infects all you're origins until you're immune system has no choice but to respond to get rid of them. so yes you're anti bodys are ramped up but sense we have no natural immunity to covid its going to walk rite by them. hence why so many vaccinated are still getting it.

      • Thanks. A quote from your link:

        "Until you see hard outcomes — like a true increase in severe disease, hospitalization and death — it's unclear that what people are measuring with breakthrough infections is really predictive of waning immunity in the lungs when and where you need it"

      • Yeah, after Moderna and other drug manufacturers eliminated smallpox and polio through vaccines, they need another cash cow. /s

        Manufacturers made money from the smallpox vaccine - no monopolies through patents. As for polio [ipeg.com]:

        Why did Salk not patent his invention?

        One question often asked is why did he, as an inventor of the vaccine, not patent his invention? In a famous 1955 interview of Jonas Salk, Edward Murrow asked him who owned the patent. Jonas Salk’s reply: “Well, the people, I would say. There is no patent. Could you patent the sun?

        The profit motives are very different with the current vaccines.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by poptix ( 78287 )

        Your tone made me wish for mod points to mod you down. It was a valid question.

        I appreciate the response though, it was informative.

      • the difference is we dont treat the flu shot like the world is going to burn if you dont bother to take it.

      • It's funny how people always label Moderna as part of the Big Pharma. Their COVID-19 vaccine is their first approved vaccine, ever.
        So how exactly were they making money from smallpox and polio vaccines?

        And anyways with reported cost between $15-30 per dose, I say it's well worth it. Thank you Moderna, thank you BioNTech, for developing these safe and effective vaccines.

      • Not that you will care one wit about the data, but getting a covid booster shot is the same reason for booster shots for measles. It helps amp up the body's own immune system more than it already is from the first shot. Here are nine questions and answers about why booster shots may be needed for you to ignore.

        I stopped reading at "may be needed" when people have actual specific evidence and not general concepts that "may" apply let me know. You can justify boosters for any and all vaccines with the same arguments regardless of whether or not the resulting "amped up immune system" actually translates to better or worse real world health outcomes.

        I particularly find the arguments relying on efficacy specious given we have fairly substantial data showing wildly different efficacy numbers across vaccines and across

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by quenda ( 644621 )

      Is there data anywhere explaining why we should get a booster shot?

      There is clear data that antibody levels wane over time.
      If you are waiting for large-scale real-world data on effect of infection and hospitalisation rates of a third dose, that will come.
      If you've had 2 shots already, and are not high-risk, there is no reason to rush.

      • Re:Booster shot data (Score:5, Informative)

        by quonset ( 4839537 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @07:57PM (#61730651)

        If you are waiting for large-scale real-world data on effect of infection and hospitalisation rates of a third dose, that will come

        So long as Republican governors do everything they can to prevent common sense procedures such as wearing masks or encouraging people to get vaccinated, hospitalization rates will continue to rise until enough people have died. In the meantime, nurses are quitting in droves [cnn.com] because they're burnt out which means more people dying.

        But who cares when you can score political points by trying to make the other guy look bad. Which is what this is really about. Not anti-science, not real anti-vaccine, but an attempt to maek Biden look bad by cranking up the daily death rates before the next election.

        • In the meantime, nurses are quitting in droves [cnn.com] because they're burnt out which means more people dying.

          It's ok, they're coming back as traveling nurses, making 3x their old salary.

        • Re:Booster shot data (Score:4, Insightful)

          by quonset ( 4839537 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @08:11PM (#61730685)

          As a follow up to my point above, 36% of all new covid cases [marketwatch.com] in Tennessee are children. The last paragraph:

          The spike in cases among school-age children has brought calls from some health officials for more forceful protective measures such as mask mandates at schools. Gov. Bill Lee has resisted such suggestions.

          And let us not forget Florida, where Governor DeathSentence has not only threatened to remove funding from schools who mandate children and staff wear masks, but is now threatening to remove elected school board members [politico.com] who implement mask policies.

          After all, when you're so concerned about the "life" of an unborn child, who cares what happens to that child once it's born?

          • yep becouse these states even blue one what that school money do they pushed to open them and it didnt last a week,

          • After all, when you're so concerned about the "life" of an unborn child, who cares what happens to that child once it's born?

            This is a myth. Republicans and bible thumpers aren't "pro life". They are "pro birth".

            • Neither are abortion supporters "pro-choice" (especially now considering many of them are pushing for mandatory vaccination). They are "pro-abortion". Both movements deliberately chose over-generalized names ("pro-life" and "pro-choice") to create the false impression that you were a terrible person (against life, or against choice) if you opposed their position. The winners are marketers, the loser being the preciseness of our language.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dryeo ( 100693 )

          There's other countries where the pandemic hasn't been politicized for studies. Though I think the nurses quitting is likely to be universal, I know we have the same problem in BC and so far we've handled things not too badly.

        • nothing with covid has been common sense. common sense tells you mask made for blood born virus do nothing with air born. common sense tell you a vaccine is supposed to shield those that take it. common sense tells you if you do a locckdown you dont leave every big box retailer open to keep spreading the virus. commion sense tells you you dont treat something with a 0.2% death rate like small pox. common sense tells you something where 80% of those infected never show a symptom is going to be unstoppable un

        • Yeh, its got to the point that at his rally the crowd booed Trump when he advised them get get vaccinated. Talk about irony, why would a political party encourage their supporters to take a risk of dying, I just cant understand it.

      • There is clear data that antibody levels wane over time.

        This is true for literally every vaccine.

        Immune system != antibody levels.

    • You're at low risk from ICU/death without the booster it won't make too much difference, but if you're high risk, the booster will increase your circulating antibodies so you'll be better protected. Otherwise the virus might do a bit more damage than you'd like before your B-cells wake up. It's a bigger deal for immunocompromised people but will also help vaccinated people not spread the virus in the interim between replication and when their immune system wakes up and kicks the virus's ass.

      • but will also help vaccinated people not spread the virus in the interim between replication and when their immune system wakes up and kicks the virus's ass.

        Citation needed.

        So far all they're measuring is positive tests in vaxxed individuals.

        I am aware of exactly one study from Singapore that quantified vaxxed vs unvaxxed viral load vs time (shorter duration of proxy measure for contagiousness in vaccinated people) but no similar studies for 3 dose vaccine courses.

        • I am aware of exactly one study from Singapore that quantified vaxxed vs unvaxxed viral load vs time

          Which one is that?

      • increasing antibodies on something you have no immunity to isn't going to do anything.

    • Re:Booster shot data (Score:4, Insightful)

      by pjt33 ( 739471 ) on Thursday August 26, 2021 @03:29AM (#61731225)

      The datum that only 1/3 of the world's population (just under 33% at time of writing according to ourworldindata, although it's not entirely clear how many countries have reported data so some caution required) has received one or more doses of vaccine suggests that booster shots for first world countries might not be the best use of a limited resource.

    • Well, the CEO of Pfizer has his eye on a new Lambo...

    • Yes, there is.

    • Generally vaccines don't produce much profit, although Pfizer and Moderna are making money on their vaccines, since you only get a few doses in your life. In comparison, hypertension medication is a huge money-maker since you take it regularly for a long time.

  • I'm curious to know, having previously received the Moderna shot, if I would be more protected by getting Pfizer or less protected.

    Picturing a Venn Diagram of the protection offered by the two vaccines, they likely have a significant intersection where it doesn't matter which vaccine you've received.

    But I'd also expect that each has some amount of area that represents an aspect that is unique to each.

    Logic would then suggest that maximizing protection would happen by taking the other vaccine, not the one th

    • Logic would then suggest that maximizing protection would happen by taking the other vaccine

      Agreed and I hope that's what they are going to do. However, the problem is that Pfizer only has interest in testing with its own.
      Also, the best strategy was to delay the second dose to 12 weeks. It's been proven to offer higher antibodies, compared to the standard 3 weeks interval. https://www.cbc.ca/news/health... [www.cbc.ca]
      But again, Pfizer is not going to investigate that route. Fortunately some public health agencies (UK? Canada?) will, hopefuly.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by erice ( 13380 )

        Also, the best strategy was to delay the second dose to 12 weeks. It's been proven to offer higher antibodies, compared to the standard 3 weeks interval. https://www.cbc.ca/news/health... [www.cbc.ca]
        But again, Pfizer is not going to investigate that route. Fortunately some public health agencies (UK? Canada?) will, hopefuly.

        The problem with that approach is that one shot of Pfizer has been shown to be ineffective against the Delta variant. Thus, stretching out the second dose from 3 weeks to 12 weeks means an addition 9 weeks of high vulnerability. After this wave recedes, that may be a good plan.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by dryeo ( 100693 )

          I had a 12 week period between my shots, luckily before delta. Canada also decided that mixing the shots was OK, with Astra Zenaca followed by Pfizer or Moderna being particularly good.

        • The UK's NHS has implemented an 8 week gap between first and second dose of all vaccines (but in practice, really only Moderna and Pfizer because that's what was being administered to the eligible age groups when the 8 week policy went into effect). That'll generate some good data on the risk/reward of waiting longer than the minimum 3 weeks.
    • There is already a lot of testing going on with mixed schedules, and the results so far are promising, though most have looked at a combination of a viral vector and an mRNA vaccine rather than two brands of one type.

      https://www.nature.com/article... [nature.com]

      We have done some mixing here in Canada (mostly due to supply issues), and follow up results will be released at some point. Personally I would feel just as protected taking a mixed schedule, The bigger reason for pause it that for purposes of internation

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by shess ( 31691 )

      An additional dose of a vaccine you have previously received may cause a greater immune response. So you may be trading off a stronger but focussed response against a weaker but broader response. Only testing can really tell which direction provides greater overall protection.

      That said, the existing data seems to indicate that the two-shot course of either has very good effects, so matching your booster seems like the prudent path. It's possible that either option (match or mix-n-match) would be in the "

    • Logic would then suggest that maximizing protection would happen by taking the other vaccine

      For an mRNA vaccine? Logic would suggest there's essentially no difference whatsoever, unless you think that the table salt in one and not the other is somehow providing you immunity. There are "subtle differences" in the mRNA sequences, but not ones that result in different amino acids being expressed. Maybe you think a UUC codon is more likely to be expressed than a UUG codon? Holy crap, talk about crushing evolu
    • if they admitted more often the insane amount of vaccinated getting stick it kills the narrative.

  • I wanted to predict that 29% would get the booster shot. Instead I predict 28. It's just not going to be that high.

    With not even 70% of the US (or has it reached that now?) having gotten the shot at all, I doubt even 50% of those who did will get a booster. I mean, come on.

    "Everyone! Go out and get your yearly flu shot! The pharmaceutical companies need their rent payment!!"

    • Well first, we don't pay for either covid or flu vaccines...

      I don't understand why you are so down on it. Sure in the US there is 33% of alt-right republicans that won't take it, but there is well over 33% who want to live, want to avoid being on a ventilator and want to avoid infecting the rest of their family with Delta or any other strain.

      I for one would do the 6mo regular booster to avoid something that could kill me if I don't.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Opyros ( 1153335 )
      Personally, I have ethical qualms about getting the booster. There are still billions of people in the world who haven't even been able to get their first shot yet.

      • There are millions of people without adequate food to eat or clean water to drink or have access to electricity, electronics, motorized vehicles or even simple things like desks in classrooms and textbooks to learn from.

        Are you going to deny yourself or your family any of those things until everyone else has equal access to resources too?

        Don't get me wrong, I think we absolutely should help get vaccines to everyone in the world that wants it, but that doesn't mean that I have to risk my own health to do so.

      • Your personal qualms will change nothing. As we said in the beginning, when it's your turn, get the shot.

        Personally, I thought the first round of vaccines was micromanaged by too many demographic categories applied irregularly. Too many phases, classifications, age groups, work groups. Sketchy definitions for important terms like "essential worker" -- all that stuff. Shots in arms -- any arms -- is progress in achieving the end goal.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by MobyDisk ( 75490 )

        I had this same though too, but here's the thing: not getting the booster won't help those people because the problem isn't a lack of shots. It is similar to the food crisis: Not eating your dinner won't help a starving person because the problem isn't that the planet doesn't produce enough food, it is that we cannot distribute it to those who need it. Those who have not gotten their first shot yet either they don't want to get the shot or there are logistical issues in getting it to them. In some countr

    • With not even 70% of the US (or has it reached that now?) having gotten the shot at all...

      I had my shots at two different places. Therefore I count as two people who are not fully vaccinated. I also pre-registered my kids on day 1 not knowing that it was going to be for 12 and up only. With no way to cancel their registration, that's three more for the unvaccinated count.

      That's reason enough to believe the percent vaccinated is not accurate. I don't personally know one single person who has refused it.

  • Something a bit strange (Score:3)

    by jenningsthecat ( 1525947 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2021 @09:56PM (#61730885)

    From TFS: "People who received a booster six to eight months after their initial J&J shots saw antibodies increase nine-fold higher than 28 days after the first shot,".

    The wording of this seems odd and kind of weaselly. Why should I care how well the booster compares with the effectiveness of the first shot? I want to know if the protection offered by the booster is significantly greater than the effectiveness of the second shot, or if it simply extends the protection. Also, does the protection offered by the booster shot last longer than that offered by the second shot?

    I'll take a third shot anyway, but I'd like to know what to expect. I'm fine with "we don't really know the details yet but we think it's a good idea". I'm NOT fine with supposedly scientific reporting that reads like inept ad copy.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by dryeo ( 100693 )

      The booster was the 2nd shot. J&J is a single shot vaccine. I saw similar numbers for the 2 shot vaccines, especially astrazeneca with a 3rd shot. Really it is going to take more time to learn and it seems to me the important numbers involve hospitalizations.

  • Wait, we're to believe that Johnson & Johnson is only finding this out now? They had no idea about this from before it was released for use with the public? What an incurious bunch of scientists, if true, or at least what a bunch of unaware executives. More realistically, they knew, or at least suspected, this all along, but now the government will mandate its use. Dollars to donuts the families of those who died after getting just one shot will have questions to ask. Just how encompassing is the immuni

    • I can't even figure out what you're complaining about.

      Remember back in 2020 when there was this SARs variant going around, NY was losing a thousand people a day and nobody actually knew how fatal it was since there was almost no testing. Oddly nobody was really interested in doing a study of the most effective dosage, delivery schedule, or storage conditions. Those types of studies are done after you've proven safety and effectiveness because it's optimizations.

      This has been seen in many areas:

      * Both mRNA v

Slashdot Top Deals

"The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts." -- Bertrand Russell

Close