US Plans Shift To Annual COVID Vaccines Akin To Flu Shots 171
The United States is likely to start recommending COVID-19 vaccines annually, health officials said on Tuesday, as new boosters designed to fight currently circulating variants of the coronavirus roll out. Reuters reports: By the end of this week, 90% of Americans will live within five miles (8 km) of sites carrying updated vaccines, U.S. health secretary Xavier Becerra said at a White House briefing. Officials said people could get the new boosters this fall or winter alongside their regular annual flu shots, and said it was likely this would become a yearly ritual.
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Rochelle Walensky said even with the seven-day average of COVID hospitalizations down 14% to 4,500 per day, annual shots could save thousands of lives. "Modeling projections show that an uptake of updated COVID-19 vaccine doses similar to an annual flu vaccine coverage early this fall could prevent as many as 100,000 hospitalizations and 9,000 deaths, and save billions of dollars in direct medical costs," she said. The redesigned boosters, green-lighted by U.S. health regulators last week, aim to tackle the BA.5 and BA.4 Omicron subvariants, which account for over 88% and 11% of circulating viruses, respectively, Walensky said. The so-called bivalent vaccines also still target the original version of the virus.
Top U.S. infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci said unless a dramatically different variant emerges, annual vaccines should offer enough protection for most people, but that some vulnerable groups might need more frequent vaccinations. "We likely are moving towards a path with a vaccination cadence similar to that of the annual influenza vaccine, with annual, updated COVID-19 shots matched to the currently circulating strains for most of the population," he said.
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Rochelle Walensky said even with the seven-day average of COVID hospitalizations down 14% to 4,500 per day, annual shots could save thousands of lives. "Modeling projections show that an uptake of updated COVID-19 vaccine doses similar to an annual flu vaccine coverage early this fall could prevent as many as 100,000 hospitalizations and 9,000 deaths, and save billions of dollars in direct medical costs," she said. The redesigned boosters, green-lighted by U.S. health regulators last week, aim to tackle the BA.5 and BA.4 Omicron subvariants, which account for over 88% and 11% of circulating viruses, respectively, Walensky said. The so-called bivalent vaccines also still target the original version of the virus.
Top U.S. infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci said unless a dramatically different variant emerges, annual vaccines should offer enough protection for most people, but that some vulnerable groups might need more frequent vaccinations. "We likely are moving towards a path with a vaccination cadence similar to that of the annual influenza vaccine, with annual, updated COVID-19 shots matched to the currently circulating strains for most of the population," he said.
Only once a year! (Score:4, Funny)
That's pretty amazing battery technology.
Re:Only once a year! (Score:4, Interesting)
By the end of this week, 90% of Americans will live within five miles (8 km) of sites carrying updated vaccines,
... and fully 50% of those will then refuse to get it in order to make a political statement.
While the rest of the world looks on, shaking their heads.
Re: (Score:3)
Time to face some facts about this “vaccine”: while it worked largely as expected (successfully) and did not cause any widespread major problems in the short term, we also saw some things we did not expect (eg length of protection, protection against transmission), and thus do no
Re: (Score:2)
I get a flu shot every year since it was included with insurance for free around the time of Swine Flu. A bunch of my friends caught the flu and were feeling like crap for a week while I was fine which is reason enough for me to get it. Heck one time I even got a $20 gift card for getting it at the grocery store (though often I just get it during my physical).
Is it still going to be free? (Score:4, Informative)
Without insurance, the flu shot runs about $40 [goodrx.com] (except for Costco at $20, but if you can afford a Costco membership, chances are you probably have health insurance).
Meanwhile, for citizens north of the border, the flu shot is free [immunizebc.ca], and I'd bet my butt their annual Covid shots will be covered under their national healthcare too.
Re: (Score:2)
but if you can afford a Costco membership, chances are you probably have health insurance).
Er...
Re: (Score:2)
* Annual price of a Costco subscription: $60
* Annual average single health insurance premium: $7,739
The implication was less about the membership fee and more about having a budget for things like 55 gallon drums of peanuts, $209.99 packs of filet mignon [costco.com], etc.
Gallons of peanuts or gallons of peanut butter? Big difference.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, if you shop it right...you can eat quite cheap with Costco.
It often helps to buy in bulk (not being ridiculous)...
But you can get great deals on meat there...I often buy large and break down into freezer bags and freeze.
Their fresh pro
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile, for citizens north of the border, the flu shot is free [immunizebc.ca], and I'd bet my butt their annual Covid shots will be covered under their national healthcare too.
Yes, flu shots and COVID shots are free here. Myself and most people I know expected all along that COVID shots would eventually evolve into a yearly tailored dose just like flu shots. Ideally I will get them both at the same time, maybe even combined into a single formulation. I get a flu shot every year anyway, so combining them makes it simple.
Re: (Score:2)
Without insurance, the flu shot runs about $40 [goodrx.com] (except for Costco at $20, but if you can afford a Costco membership, chances are you probably have health insurance).
Meanwhile, for citizens north of the border, the flu shot is free [immunizebc.ca], and I'd bet my butt their annual Covid shots will be covered under their national healthcare too.
Most of the US discussion I hear about private vs. socialized medicine boils down to selfish desires for either wanting others to pay for my healthcare, or not wanting to pay for other's healthcare. It makes a great zero-sum wedge issue.
A more productive debate would center around "what level of healthcare would be in the public's interest to make freely available?" Things that don't cost that much and would have big quality of life impacts that ripple out. This would probably include preventative car
Re: Is it still going to be free? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not "free". The expense is paid by everyone, whether they like it or not.
Which is really no different than an employer offering health benefits rather than just giving all their employees a higher salary. Well, there is one difference: with socialized healthcare you aren't forced to take a crummy job just to have health coverage.
Re: Is it still going to be free? (Score:5, Insightful)
Which is really no different than an employer offering health benefits rather than just giving all their employees a higher salary. Well, there is one difference: with socialized healthcare you aren't forced to take a crummy job just to have health coverage.
When I got my cancer diagnosis at age 50 (and I happened to be at work when the call came), my first thought was "Life is too short to work at this fucking shitty-ass company!" where I'd been working unhappily for years. My second thought was "...but I need the insurance."
The U.S. healthcare system is a travesty. High prices for "meh" outcomes, and even with insurance, medical care can bankrupt you. "Socialized medicine" can't come soon enough for me! Imagine being able to quit a job you hate without worrying about having to find a new doctor or getting screwed by the healthcare industry. Hey, you could start your own business! How many people would have become entrepreneurs but for not being able to afford health care?
Re: (Score:3)
You need the insurance from your employer because govt run Medicare sucks ass. With no out of pocket max, that's what bankrupts people. My insurance through my employer has an $8000 max. I'll hold on to it as long as I can....as I was given a stage four cancer diagnosis myself this year. I can't afford to give up my job and go on Medicare. If it comes to that I will just stop treatment to avoid bankrupting my family.
FYI, stage four is an automatic qualifier for social security disability and Medicare....bu
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention that general care through medicare sucks ass.
Re: Is it still going to be free? (Score:2)
I went in for a routine colonoscopy. Later that week I had CT scans and the next week I was in front of a surgeon to discuss my case. Week after that I was in front of a second surgeon. A week after that I was in front of an oncologist. I started chemotherapy the following week.
I don't think that events would have been so timely in Canada, the U.K. or most other places.
Re: Is it still going to be free? (Score:5, Insightful)
Meanwhile here in my state I can't even see a doctor unless I'm physically dying. Sure I scheduled for the doctor, but the nurse practitioner is on staff today and the doctor is busy. Never mind I booked it 3 weeks out.
Of course that nurse can't actually help for the reason I'm there so I'll need to reschedule or if it's too bad go to urgent care. Don't worry though, my insurance will still get the full bill!
I haven't seen my doctor in almost 3 years. I can't change doctors because a health system bought all the practices and won't allow you to change doctors in the practice. My medical system now is basically seeing a nurse, driving to another city an hour away, or going to a urgent care center.
I'd kill for the healthcare my friends outside the US get.
Re: Is it still going to be free? (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't think that events would have been so timely in Canada, the U.K. or most other places. ...
Probably because you never have been with a similar condition at those places
Re: Is it still going to be free? (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, it would be roughly as quick here in BC (health care is Provincial), or at least was pre-endemic, at that a friend with ovary cancer at the beginning of the pandemic was in surgery about 3 weeks after diagnoses and currently my brother with lung cancer is moving at about the same speed, 2 surgeries over about 6 weeks.
My sister went into the hospital with heart problems, 2nd day (it was the weekend) she was in surgery.
Now if you need a new knee, hip or such, you might wait a year or 2 unless you pay as cancer and such get triaged to the head of the line.
Currently we are suffering staffing shortages due to burnout from the pandemic, at that it seems most industries are suffering staffing shortages.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that events would have been so timely in Canada, the U.K. or most other places.
For things like cancer the treatment here in Canada is pretty timely. Where there are long waits are for things like hip and knee replacements, cataracts, etc. Things that are uncomfortable but not going to kill you.
Re: (Score:2)
Health insurances in Europe do not have a "max" ... that is why it is called an _insurrance_
Re: (Score:2)
What does an employed person under 65 needing insurance from their job have to do with Medicare, which is only available to those over 65?
Re: (Score:2)
How many people would have become entrepreneurs but for not being able to afford health care?
This is one thing that I believe is crucial. If we want to increase the amount of entrepreneurs, affordable health care is a very good public policy! Besides all the other societal benefits, countries would have more entrepreneurs...
This article [hbr.org] shows that if you get free healthcare for your kids, you are more likely to start a company. The full report here [hbs.edu].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, if you are good enough at what you do, you can do contracting.
I've been into it well over a decade and I just calculate good health insurance into my bill rate...I'm a S-Corp, of one person, and I manage my own health care insurance needs, and retirement.
Yes, it's a bit extra work, but I get exactly what I need and want.
It's not rocket surgery.
Re: Is it still going to be free? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Is it still going to be free? (Score:2)
George Bush made this exact same argument during his town hall meetings when he was campaigning for re-election. In this case he wanted to allow small businesses to group together to get better medical deals. Itâ(TM)s some weird ideology or a lot of interest groups that stops people admitting that itâ(TM)s a good idea to scale this up nationally.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, no.
The state-run services are almost never cheaper than the commercial equivalent even when they have much greater buying power.
Because the people who control the state-run system are not the ones who pay for things, so they can be convinced (bribed) to do things that are not in the best financial interests of the people who use the services.
You can't easily bribe the CEO of Blue Cross to make an obviously bad deal because he will be thrown out of the company and the deal will be legally challenged.
Re: (Score:2)
Here in Canada, first bribery is illegal, political donations are limited to flesh and blood citizens, about $2000 each, it's indexed and going up, and 2nd, a government that did that would be thrown out. People, especially the older people who vote love their healthcare and to attack it is political suicide, whereas most American States seem to be single party so don't have to worry about the people.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
. People, especially the older people who vote love their healthcare and to attack it is political suicide, whereas most American States seem to be single party so don't have to worry about the people.
Yup. That is not to say there are not things that definitely need to be improved in our health care system, but approximately nobody looks at the US as an example we want to emulate in any way. Health care in the US is a cautionary tale for the rest of the civilized world.
Re: (Score:2)
In my experience, it's easier to corrupt an agent of a private corporation than an agent of government.
Of course, the CEO of Blue Cross can't make laws, so it's possible that a legislator may corrupt things. But legislators are not the ones making the day-to-day decisions, and any law favorin
Re: Is it still going to be free? (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, no. I'll give some specifics about one medication that I take.
Before I hit my deductible, Eliquis is about $500/month. No that's not a typo. When I hit the deductible, do you think the insurance company is paying 90% of $500? No, of course, not: they have a negotiated rate that is far cheaper. They don't tell me how much this is, of course, because people would get upset.
Now, in the UK, Eliquis doesn't cost the government anything like $500, because they have negotiated a favorable rate.
So, in the US, you can get ripped off by big pharma and the insurance company, while in a country with socialized healthcare, the cost to the government is far less than the total of what I pay plus what the insurance pays.
Re: Is it still going to be free? (Score:5, Interesting)
The Inflation Reduction Act, signed just three weeks ago, addresses some of your concerns. Hopefully the price for outrageous drugs like yours will be negotiated back to reasonable rates. Also, the yearly ceiling of $2,000 for all medications should help millions of Medicare enrollees not have to decide between food, gas, or meds. [fingers crossed]
But guess what? We’re giving Medicare the power to negotiate those prices now, on some drugs. This means seniors are going to pay less for their prescription drugs while we’re changing circumstances for people on Medicare by putting a cap -- a cap of a maximum of $2,000 a year on their prescription drug costs, no matter what the reason for those prescriptions are. Speech while signing of the IRA, 16 August 2022 [whitehouse.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
My wife has a medicine she takes monthly that is about $1200 for the shot. It literally keeps her able to be in society. Seriously, one shot and she is a normal human for a month. Without it she would be bed ridden or as she has admitted, killed her self by now.
Every year when insurance renews at work we have to 'justify' this medicine to the same insurance company. They ask why she hasn't tried all the medicines she tried in the past that didn't work. They make the doctors fill out justification documents
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, exactly. You never really know. I caught a serious heart condition from what I presume was the flu (and I even know who gave it to me). It was bad that I was sent home from work after visiting a doctor who gave me some medication to alleviate the s
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Like all those free loaders using public roads. I’ll pay for my own thank you.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, the research that went into it was already paid for by everyone.
Re: Is it still going to be free? (Score:2)
They justification for providing it at tax payerâ(TM)s expense is that it costs society less, whether itâ(TM)s the hit go businesses or the medical bills for people who get really sick.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Which means exactly what the word implies: it is _free_ for everyone taking the shot.
Or what exactly do you not grasp in: you have to pay nothing?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Where I live, in Michigan, the cost of a trip to the emergency room is $1000 for setting foot in the door, without getting any actual work done (that all costs extra).
Original series required two doses (Score:2)
The original Pfizer and Moderna vaccines required two doses to get to high immunity. Immunity after one shot, even against the original Wuhan strain is *bad*.
In the bivalent booster, the raw dose is the same but half is the original Wuhan strain. So you only get a half dose for BA4/BA5 and you don't get a second chaser to impress on the immune system that this is important. How is that going to work? And that even assumes that the virus does not mutate significantly within the year.
I suspect (maybe hope
Re:Original series required two doses (Score:4, Informative)
We kind of already know how that will work. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are very similar but not the same. It's become pretty clear that people who were initially received one vaccine then boosted with the other ended up with stronger immunity than people who stuck to the same brand. The current COVID strains aren't that different from the original in the grand scheme of things, so it seems quite likely that your immune system will react similarly to getting Pfizer+Moderna.
I'll also note that the primary reason we didn't get Omicron specific boosters is because it didn't perform significantly better than the original vaccine in trials. It just wasn't worth the extra complications to bother with it, especially when you factored in the speed it spread and the production time.
The big lesson from the Omicron vaccine trials was that tuning the vaccine to the variant wasn't the key factor in keeping people protected, but rather their antibody levels was. While tuning the vaccines to the latest variants will certainly help, the key seems to be boosting regularly. My feeling so far is that 3 a year would be the sweet spot for me, but I think one before the summer surge and one before the winter surge will be where we end up long term.
Re: (Score:2)
The big lesson from the Omicron vaccine trials was that tuning the vaccine to the variant wasn't the key factor in keeping people protected, but rather their antibody levels was.
When you say protected do you mean protected from infection or hospitalization?
As far as I understand there is still no established correlation between measured antibody levels and health outcomes beyond infection.
Re:Original series required two doses (Score:4, Interesting)
The big lesson from the Omicron vaccine trials was that tuning the vaccine to the variant wasn't the key factor in keeping people protected, but rather their antibody levels was.
When you say protected do you mean protected from infection or hospitalization?
As far as I understand there is still no established correlation between measured antibody levels and health outcomes beyond infection.
Infected. I'm far more concerned about the long term health issues after infection than I am about the initial infection. The odds of hospitalization or death are low, but if you do the math on long covid odds assuming that getting infected with covid is a regular occurance, you get a terrifying long term picture.
Re: (Score:2)
Infected. I'm far more concerned about the long term health issues after infection than I am about the initial infection. The odds of hospitalization or death are low, but if you do the math on long covid odds assuming that getting infected with covid is a regular occurance, you get a terrifying long term picture.
I should also note people are getting long covid without symptomatic infection.
Given the notion vaccines prevent long covid at all is shaky at best hard to imagine what kind of signal one realistically expect to see in terms of vaccinated vs. vaccinated + boosted + yearly boosted.
For vast majority of the population the "initial infection" ship has already sailed whether they realize it or not.
Re: (Score:2)
Infected. I'm far more concerned about the long term health issues after infection than I am about the initial infection. The odds of hospitalization or death are low, but if you do the math on long covid odds assuming that getting infected with covid is a regular occurance, you get a terrifying long term picture.
I should also note people are getting long covid without symptomatic infection.
Given the notion vaccines prevent long covid at all is shaky at best hard to imagine what kind of signal one realistically expect to see in terms of vaccinated vs. vaccinated + boosted + yearly boosted.
For vast majority of the population the "initial infection" ship has already sailed whether they realize it or not.
Vaccines don't seem to completely prevent long covid, but your odds of long covid do seem to be much higher the worse your infection is.
We're also starting to see a lot of data now suggesting there were way more asymptomatic cases of Omicron than we realized. That hasn't been worked into the long covid studies yet. The optimistic side of me is hoping that this means that vaccination is more effective against long covid than we realized, but there's way more studies to be done before we know that.
Re:Original series required two doses (Score:5, Informative)
I'm happy to examine the evidence they present in favor of vaccinating every year.
If they don't present their evidence, I'm not getting an annual shot.
There is already heaps of published data showing declining immunity both from mutated strains and for the original strain. I smell an anti-vaxer making excuses.
Re: (Score:2)
There is already heaps of published data showing declining immunity both from mutated strains and for the original strain. I smell an anti-vaxer making excuses.
Declining immunity in terms of measured antibody levels? Infection? Health outcomes?
I'm not aware of studies that establish meaningful differences in terms of health outcomes that would justify yearly boosters however if you know of such a study I would love to see it.
Interesting article even though it is from Nov...
https://jamanetwork.com/journa... [jamanetwork.com]
It makes some important but perhaps subtle points.
"To prevent serious illness, all you really need is immunological memory. If you look at COVID vaccines, that
Why shots? (Score:2)
Whatever. (Score:2)
Sweet (Score:2)
So, we're going back to people that don't get them for arbitrary reasons too? OOOOH, can we have the people back that come into work sick so they don't use a vacation day too??????
Tonight we're gonna party like it's 2019!
FYI, new batch is starting to become available (Score:3)
Re:Is it enough? (Score:5, Interesting)
Oh, it's an rsilvergun typo trying to frame rsilvergun again with a bad strawman making pro socialized medicine people seem dumb. Grow up.
For any curious, while COVID does get falsey compared to the flu in a lot of ways, one thing they do have in common is their chances of mutating.
I'm looking forward to having a vaccine that isn't 4 major mutations behind.
Re:Is it enough? (Score:5, Insightful)
a bad strawman making pro socialized medicine people seem dumb
Socialized medicine is a great idea.
The USA being able to implement it without sending the entire workforce of the for-profit healthcare industry to the unemployment line, and convincing the Republicans to not press the "undo" button on national healthcare every time they're in power, is not quite so easy. As they say: good idea, poor implementation.
Re: (Score:2)
No thank you, I do not want the Federal Govt. involved with my healthcare.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Never mind the fact that any socialized effort in the US always results (and is caused by) corporate interests in getting involved on the gravy train. The result is a nepotistic nightmare of graft and incompetence.
Not that those things are really inseparable from socialized programs elsewhere, but it's much more overt and immediate here. Thanks to the efficiencies of capitalism.
Re:Is it enough? (Score:5, Insightful)
Socialized medicine SEEMS like a great idea.
But that's only for idiots who think of medical professionals as slaves.
Oh. And when the budget runs tight, expect long, flowery praise sessions for assisted suicide.
It does seem impossible. I wonder how everyone else in the developed world has managed to make it work? It seems like there have been a pretty large number of pretty successful different working examples that we might be able to learn from.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, because by and large when the Americans look to implement large social programs they certainly take stock of existing options and try to learn from them rather than design a system from the ground up to funnel money and power to their friends and families.
Re: (Score:2)
We could do both!
Re:Is it enough? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Falsely compared to the flu in a lot of ways? In which way is it a false comparison? Given the CDC and everyone else from your grandmother on up has described covid as "like the flu" since day 1, and it's sublimated all flu testing statistics in the past 2 years, I beg to differ.
You don't find it in the least bit curious that flu has all but disappeared, statistically, over the past couple years?
"Well, the masks obviously worked."
Yes, of course - despite decades of studies indicating that medical masks are
Re:Is it enough? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Is it enough? (Score:5, Informative)
I'm in that situation now. Nobody wears masks anymore, nobody bothers to clean their hands, and COVID is everywhere ripping through the population with near zero control. What am I supposed to do, just accept the risk that I could be permanently disabled or even killed by it?
Even for people in good health there is still a risk of getting Long COVID. Around 2 million people in the UK have it. It's going to become a huge drain on healthcare, and on the economy as millions drop out of full time work.
Re: Is it enough? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You might as well carry this to its logical conclusion and withdraw all emergency health care, and indeed all emergency services in total. You pay for your fire protection, I'll pay for mine.
Re: Is it enough? (Score:2)
Re: Is it enough? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: Is it enough? (Score:5, Informative)
Are you aware that there are places in the US that still do it the old way and it isn't socialized? They're all rural, as far as I've seen, but they exist.
https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2010/10/08/130436382/they-didn-t-pay-the-fee-firefighters-watch-tennessee-family-s-house-burn [npr.org]
Re: (Score:2)
No I was not, it's a shame that this is still happening in some places :(
Re: (Score:2)
But what happens if you Pay for your medicine, but still get sick because someone else didn't pay for theirs?
Also, those who are unable to pay for their medicine, become unable to work, thus will need to go on welfare, becoming a burden to their family or just suffer in the streets begging to just survive.
Private Insurance model that we have now, is actually a type of socialized medicine. You are paying the insurance company as a healthy individual to cover the costs of the unhealthy ones, who may need more
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Combine them. (Score:4, Informative)
They did. Novavax has a combined quadrivalent flu and Covid vaccine called COVID-NanoFlu. It's had good results in early trials, but hasn't been approved yet.
Until then, there's nothing stopping you from just getting two jabs simultaneously. You can schedule an appointment at any Walgreens right now to get both a flu vaccine and the updated bivalent Pfizer COVID vaccine, with better efficacy against Omicron-related variants, all in one go.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Novavax has a combined quadrivalent flu and Covid vaccine called COVID-NanoFlu.
Can I get a COVID-Flu version without the nanobots please?
Re: (Score:3)
There's several of them in trials now. Both older style vaccines and mRNA based ones. There's no rush on them because the only advantage is convenience, and we're still trying to figure out the long term strategy for COVID vaccines. I think they're talking 2023 at the earliest.
Re: Where are the SARS and MERS annual vaccines? (Score:3)
Re:Where are the SARS and MERS annual vaccines? (Score:4, Informative)
There is a vaccine for SARS-CoV-1, but since that virus was not nearly as contagious, and was eliminated through social distancing, there's no need to give it to people. As far as we know, that virus has been eliminated.
There are several vaccine candidates in the works for MERS, but since MERS has only killed ~2500 people over the past ten years, there's no emergency effort to bring it to market.
Re: (Score:3)
COVID is closely related to SARS. The COVID vaccine is based off all the research done for SARS. We were able to make the COVID vaccine so quickly because we figured out how to deal with that virus. We haven't made a vaccine for it because there hasn't been a case of SARS since 2004.
Research on MERS has been low priority because there have been less than 3,000 cases in the 10 years the virus has been known. There have been less than 70 cases from 2021-2022. It doesn't spread from person to person, only from
Re: These again? Good grief. (Score:2)
Re:These again? Good grief. (Score:5, Insightful)
> What number of booster are we on at this point, since they're only somewhat effective as a therapeutic for the *original strain* for a few months
Not true. The updated Pfizer bivalent vaccine optimized for Omicron-related strains is available all over now, you can book with Walgreens tomorrow.
Everyone has already had the flu, too. Natural immunity provides great protection against the strain of flu you had. But it wains over time, and you get the flu again. Flu is a hard target, and the vaccines are not perfect, but there's very, very close to no downside to getting it. It's all upside.
You're extremely confused, and you think everyone else is. Always an amusing combination.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:These again? Good grief. (Score:4, Informative)
The vaccines were amazing against the original strain. They still work pretty well against the new strains.
The root issue here is Omicron replicates way faster than the original strain. Your body cannot defeat it before an infection sets in unless you have extremely high antibody levels.
If you get a vaccine shot or if you get infected, your antibody levels will shoot up very high and you'll probably be safe for a while, but the levels will gradually drop over time. If you get a vaccine shot, the antibody level peak is much higher than it is if you get infected - your immune system isn't going to have as strong a response if it's fighting illness at the same time than it will if it's just reacting to a benign protein.
You can do what you want, but as far as I'm concerned, the higher peak, the longer decline phase, and no illness required to get that immune response is a pretty massive win.
Re: (Score:2)
The vaccines were amazing against the original strain. They still work pretty well against the new strains.
The root issue here is Omicron replicates way faster than the original strain. Your body cannot defeat it before an infection sets in unless you have extremely high antibody levels.
Reduced antibody fitness is responsible for drop in efficacy.
If you get a vaccine shot or if you get infected, your antibody levels will shoot up very high and you'll probably be safe for a while, but the levels will gradually drop over time. If you get a vaccine shot, the antibody level peak is much higher than it is if you get infected - your immune system isn't going to have as strong a response if it's fighting illness at the same time than it will if it's just reacting to a benign protein.
The point of the covid vaccines is avoiding severe health outcomes not never getting sick.
There is a reason antibody levels don't always stay jacked up to 11 forever. It is supposed to be a short term response. What matters is that polyclonal immunity is maintained. This is what keeps people out of hospitals and morgues.
You can do what you want, but as far as I'm concerned, the higher peak, the longer decline phase, and no illness required to get that immune response is a pretty massive win.
Constantly challenging the immune system like this is not a risk free activity especially when there is no useful benefit from
Re:These again? Good grief. (Score:4, Interesting)
Reduced antibody fitness is responsible for drop in efficacy.
Omicron specific vaccines were tested by both Pfizer and Moderna. They weren't mass produced because the increase in efficacy was tiny and boosting with the original vaccine was almost as effective. Getting the existing boosters out faster was a far more effective use of resources.
The change from the original Omnicron to the current variants is tiny compared to the change from the original strain to Omicron, so I see no reason to expect a significant increase in efficacy from the latest boosters. However, if regular boosters is going to be a necessity, we might as well update them regularly to get whatever boost we can from it.
The point of the covid vaccines is avoiding severe health outcomes not never getting sick.
There is a reason antibody levels don't always stay jacked up to 11 forever. It is supposed to be a short term response. What matters is that polyclonal immunity is maintained. This is what keeps people out of hospitals and morgues.
That is one possible view - one that became more common after Omicron came into existence and changed things and everything had become so political. That was absolutely not what anyone expected when the vaccines were first available, and there was no reason to settle for that with the original strain.
Constantly challenging the immune system like this is not a risk free activity especially when there is no useful benefit from it beyond simply having a higher chance of avoiding infection.
Challenging your immune system with a benign protein is far, far less risky than regularly catching COVID and having to fight it off. The risk of Long COVID is way too high for me to want to regularly have to fight off a COVID infection. I'll gladly take every boost I can get and the fraction of a percent risk of complications that comes with it.
Re: (Score:2)
That is one possible view - one that became more common after Omicron came into existence and changed things and everything had become so political.
Vaccines stopped meaningfully preventing infection with Delta. With Omicron at least one study in Europe actually measured 0% efficacy after several months.
That was absolutely not what anyone expected when the vaccines were first available, and there was no reason to settle for that with the original strain.
Repeated public messaging emphasizing things that didn't matter caused a HUGE amount of damage that persists to this day. I still routinely hear from people saying vaccines are worthless on this basis.
Challenging your immune system with a benign protein is far, far less risky than regularly catching COVID and having to fight it off.
The more likely case is being exposed not even know it and have infection resolved without the unnecessarily excessive immune response. The vast majori
Re: (Score:2)
Vaccines stopped meaningfully preventing infection with Delta. With Omicron at least one study in Europe actually measured 0% efficacy after several months.
All the evidence I've seen suggested the vaccines were equally effective against the original and Delta and that any decline was due to antibody levels dropping over time. This was fully expected, as when I was first vaccinated, we were explicitly told not to laminate our vaccination card because we'll probably need boosters.
The data on the original and Delta was so similar that no one even bothered making a Delta specific vaccine a lab, even tho it only takes about a day to do. Omicron was the first time a
Re: (Score:2)
Health is unlikely to be served by continuously soliciting immune responses several orders of magnitude higher than necessary.
Do you have any evidence for this? Because you could make the same argument against yearly flu shots if you did, but I'm doubtful.
Re: (Score:2)
That was absolutely not what anyone expected when the vaccines were first available, and there was no reason to settle for that with the original strain.
No, when the vaccines first came out, there was considerable debate on whether they would prevent people from catching it at all or just prevent them from getting seriously sick. The word from the infectious disease experts was that the vaccines seemed to be good at stopping infection, but we'll have to wait and see how long that might last.
Re: (Score:2)
It totally makes sense to get boosters less often if your body reacts badly to it, but for the vast majority of people, that won't be the case.
I had a sore arm for about 24 hours after each of my first two shots, but just moving my arm regularly would ease the soreness. I don't think I even had any arm soreness from the booster, or if I did, it was significantly less. That's the most common reaction I've heard from other people.
Re: (Score:2)
Without peer reviewed evidence clearly demonstrating substantive real world benefits I have no interest in wasting my time with the musings of Walensky.
Just to be clear this is referring to "yearly boosters" not vaccines generally.
Re: (Score:2)
all .com sites. Have you any well-vetted sites or are you really dumb enough to buy their bullshit?
Re: (Score:2)
At this point in time, it would have been easy enough to develop a NON-mRNA vaccine.
Astra-Zeneca was one of the first vaccines out and it is not mRNA based. There is also Janssen, Novavax, and Medicago, among others, but what is approved varies by country. Regardless of where you live you can almost certainly get an non-mRNA based vaccine if you are afraid of modern technology.
Myself, I'll go for the state-of-the-art stuff thanks. mRNA therapies have amazing potential and I expect we will be seeing a lot more of them the future.