Coronavirus

[AlanSubie4Life]

Denise was told she received the new vaccine last week.

I’d double check and be sure that “new” means “new.”

For example, Moderna’s 1273.815 vaccine hasn’t had VRBPAC approval and CDC approval and I think it will need both before it can be administered, won’t it?

Moderna (MRNA) Updated COVID Jab Effective Against Eris Variant

Moderna's (MRNA) updated monovalent COVID-19 vaccine generates a robust immune response against the dominating Eris variant and another rapidly spreading virus strain in a clinical study.

finance.yahoo.com

Not sure getting the “old” vaccine matters that much - it’s actually very hard to say, since they do not appear to attempt to check the vaccines for efficacy any more (pretty annoying), nor have any of the bivalent (soon to be monovalent) boosters showed efficacy against infection in any tests that have been done. (Personally I think the reason for this is that it is hard to show efficacy for a booster in the current immune landscape (most have robust protection against infection), but hard to say...) That being said, I am waiting for .815.

Moderna Clinical Trial Data Confirm Its Updated COVID-19 Vaccine Generates Robust Immune Response in Humans Against Widely Circulating Variants

Updated COVID-19 vaccine effectively targets EG.5, a dominant variant of concern, as well as the rapidly spreading FL 1.5.1 variant Updated vaccine expected to be available, pending approval, in coming weeks for fall vaccination season CAMBRIDGE, MA / ACCESSWIRE / August 17, 2023 / Moderna, Inc...

investors.modernatx.com

 

[scottf200]

Denise was told she received the new vaccine last week.

Which one supposedly?

"CDC expects new Covid vaccines from Pfizer, Moderna and Novavax to be available in mid-September "

 

[DrGriz]

I’d double check and be sure that “new” means “new.”

For example, Moderna’s 1273.815 vaccine hasn’t had VRBPAC approval and CDC approval and I think it will need both before it can be administered, won’t it?

Moderna (MRNA) Updated COVID Jab Effective Against Eris Variant

Moderna's (MRNA) updated monovalent COVID-19 vaccine generates a robust immune response against the dominating Eris variant and another rapidly spreading virus strain in a clinical study.

finance.yahoo.com

Not sure getting the “old” vaccine matters that much - it’s actually very hard to say, since they do not appear to attempt to check the vaccines for efficacy any more (pretty annoying), nor have any of the bivalent (soon to be monovalent) boosters showed efficacy against infection in any tests that have been done. (Personally I think the reason for this is that it is hard to show efficacy for a booster in the current immune landscape (most have robust protection against infection), but hard to say...) That being said, I am waiting for .815.

Moderna Clinical Trial Data Confirm Its Updated COVID-19 Vaccine Generates Robust Immune Response in Humans Against Widely Circulating Variants

Updated COVID-19 vaccine effectively targets EG.5, a dominant variant of concern, as well as the rapidly spreading FL 1.5.1 variant Updated vaccine expected to be available, pending approval, in coming weeks for fall vaccination season CAMBRIDGE, MA / ACCESSWIRE / August 17, 2023 / Moderna, Inc...

investors.modernatx.com

It's hard to show efficacy against the current viruses, because you can't ethically intentionally expose someone. There's a long enough lag between vaccinations and exposure and analysis that your data is necessarily historical, and the next variant is out.

 

[jerry33]

Which one supposedly?

"CDC expects new Covid vaccines from Pfizer, Moderna and Novavax to be available in mid-September "

Don't actually know. Looks as if the pharmacy misled her.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Don't actually know. Looks as if the pharmacy misled her.

All is not lost. In about 3-4 months she can get the updated booster and likely will be quite well protected in the meantime, even though the match may not be optimal.

 

[scottf200]

BA.2.86 update -- KATELYN JETELINA -- SEP 5, 2023
Since the last BA.2.86 update, lab and epidemiological data have trickled in. Many of us took a big sigh of relief after seeing specific results over the weekend.
Here is your update.

BA.2.86 update

Since the last BA.2.86 update, lab and epidemiological data have trickled in. Many of us took a big sigh of relief after seeing specific results over the weekend. Here is your update. Lab data Three labs have already tested BA.2.86 in a petri dish. (The speed of scientific discovery for...

yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com

 

[Tiger]

Understood. We are same age and have kids who are exposed all the time (kindergarten) so as soon as the "flu like" covid variants came out, we try to get as exposed as possible, to keep up immunity (we parents had first two vaccine shots, but omicron came before we got the third).

Do these research results seem credible? "they found ... natural infection working 13 times better than vaccine induced immunity":

 

[jerry33]

Do these research results seem credible? "they found ... natural infection working 13 times better than vaccine induced immunity":

A few thoughts. How large was the study group? Who paid for the study? What doesn't kill you makes you stronger. My understanding is natural immunity covers more receptors (?) than vaccines, but that isn't a good reason to skip vaccination because long COVID is still a thing. 13X is open to question.

 

[DrGriz]

Do these research results seem credible? "they found ... natural infection working 13 times better than vaccine induced immunity":

Given the source, I didn't watch the whole thing, but he seems to be referring to this:

Instagram Post Missing Context About Israeli Study on COVID-19 Natural Immunity - FactCheck.org

An Instagram post highlighted a headline about a non-peer-reviewed study from Israel that found that unvaccinated people previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 had greater immunity against the delta variant than never-infected people fully vaccinated with Pfizer/BioNTech’s COVID-19 vaccine. But the...

www.factcheck.org

Some social media users are highlighting that finding — which is far from conclusive — while ignoring that the study also said that previously infected individuals can still benefit from vaccination.

 

[Tiger]

Some social media users are highlighting that finding — which is far from conclusive — while ignoring that the study also said that previously infected individuals can still benefit from vaccination.

Would be interesting to see conclusive numbers per each combination (vax ! strain and also strain ! strain now different strain infections prevent each other). But I doubt there is any money in researching that in a clear and concise way.

 

[Tiger]

A few thoughts. How large was the study group? Who paid for the study? What doesn't kill you makes you stronger. My understanding is natural immunity covers more receptors (?) than vaccines, but that isn't a good reason to skip vaccination because long COVID is still a thing. 13X is open to question.

How much can vaccination add to it if "natural immunity covers more receptors (?) than vaccines". If vaccination had zero risks then yes, I would do it for any nonzero gain, but as long as there are some risks I'd just choose the bigger cannon/wider protection spectrum for the same amount of mental gymnastics.

 

[jerry33]

How much can vaccination add to it if "natural immunity covers more receptors (?) than vaccines". If vaccination had zero risks then yes, I would do it for any nonzero gain, but as long as there are some risks I'd just choose the bigger cannon/wider protection spectrum for the same amount of mental gymnastics.

Compared to getting COVID and long COVID, the risks are very small, although they've been blown way out of proportion by the anti-vax crowd.

 

[Dave EV]

Compared to getting COVID and long COVID, the risks are very small, although they've been blown way out of proportion by the anti-vax crowd.

Always interesting to see the mental gymnastics that go through people's minds when these "studies" come out claiming that catching COVID provides better defense against catching COVID again compared to the vaccine - never mind that these so called studies usually have many issues with them.

They always seem to ignore the risk of actual COVID (relatively high) vs the risk of side effects from the vaccine (relatively low).

The real studies show that the risk reduction from taking the vaccine significantly outweighs the risk of contracting COVID and having adverse effects. Which is why the CDC makes various recommendations for the vaccine based on your age, health profile and risk profile.

Am I surprised that catching COVID provides you with better immunity against catching COVID again vs being vaccinated? No, not really. But 13x better seems drastically overstated based on other studies. And does this also factor in the risk of severe COVID or long COVID in either circumstance as well?

The article in response that DrGriz linked to above highlights these nuances well.

 

[bkp_duke]

New study indicates and association between SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in infants and development of anti-islet antibodies (a precursor for Type 1 diabetes).

Not proven causality, but concerning data.

SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Islet Autoimmunity in Early Childhood

This longitudinal study of young children in 5 European countries investigates whether there is a temporal association between SARS-CoV-2 infection and islet autoimmunity when children are most susceptible.

jamanetwork.com

 

[DrGriz]

Would be interesting to see conclusive numbers per each combination (vax ! strain and also strain ! strain now different strain infections prevent each other). But I doubt there is any money in researching that in a clear and concise way.

How much can vaccination add to it if "natural immunity covers more receptors (?) than vaccines". If vaccination had zero risks then yes, I would do it for any nonzero gain, but as long as there are some risks I'd just choose the bigger cannon/wider protection spectrum for the same amount of mental gymnastics.

You are stuck on that 13x number from a single study done years ago in a tiny country before there were a large number of varients, never confirmed by other studies.

Here is something to chew on. More recent large study done in the US:

Large study finds vaccination more effective than natural immunity

One of the first real-world studies COVID-19 vaccines more effective than natural immunity to protect against death, hospitalizations and ED visits.

www.regenstrief.org

It's also interesting to note that autoantibodies are less common in vaccinated individuals than those who have been vaccinated by nature. That goes back to the study @bkp_duke is referring to.

 

[bkp_duke]

It's also interesting to note that autoantibodies are less common in vaccinated individuals than those who have been vaccinated by nature. That goes back to the study @bkp_duke is referring to.

That study terrifies me, as an endocrinologist. Type 1 DM is something we haven't made much "curative" progress on in the past 40 years. Plenty of perpetual treatment progress, but not much curative. Anything that increases the incidence is disturbing.

 

[DrGriz]

That study terrifies me, as an endocrinologist. Type 1 DM is something we haven't made much "curative" progress on in the past 40 years. Plenty of perpetual treatment progress, but not much curative. Anything that increases the incidence is disturbing.

"Like" in the sense of vigorously agree. And when we're seeing it apparently in babies. It's a life long problem.

 

[Tiger]

Here is something to chew on. More recent large study done in the US:

Large study finds vaccination more effective than natural immunity

One of the first real-world studies COVID-19 vaccines more effective than natural immunity to protect against death, hospitalizations and ED visits.

www.regenstrief.org

The likelihood of the omicron style covid strains to end up into death or hospital or ED is so low that I don't quite understand the added benefit of "vaccines more effective than natural immunity to protect against death, hospitalizations and ED visits". Is it possible that the benefit is gained primarily from risk groups which were not elaborated in the study?

 

[Tiger]

That study terrifies me, as an endocrinologist. Type 1 DM is something we haven't made much "curative" progress on in the past 40 years. Plenty of perpetual treatment progress, but not much curative. Anything that increases the incidence is disturbing.

Is the effect similar to Enteroviruses (Coxsackievirus B (CVB), rotavirus, mumps virus, and cytomegalovirus), Rubella, Lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), etc.?

 

[bkp_duke]

Is the effect similar to Enteroviruses (Coxsackievirus B (CVB), rotavirus, mumps virus, and cytomegalovirus), Rubella, Lymphocytic choriomeningitis virus (LCMV), etc.?

Multiples higher.