https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/310845
A preliminary report on the Pfizer vaccine indicates that its effectiveness at preventing infections -96% at its highest, some two months after the second dose - can fall by more than ten percent by the six-month mark. The study found a decline of roughly six percent per month, meaning that it could be less than 50% effective within two years.
The report emphasizes that these findings are strictly regarding the levels of infection; serious symptoms and hospitalization are still reduced by over 90% even well after the vaccine.
According to MSN, the manufacturers claim that a third "booster" shot of the vaccine would provide significantly increased protection, including against the new and more virulent Delta strain; antibody levels in those 18 to 55 after a booster shot were found to be five times higher than those in a patient who had received only two vaccinations.
Here's the ultimate end game - 90-95% get vaccinated. Everything opens up. CoVID circulates. The immunized catch it and it acts as a natural booster on a repeated basis. The occasional immunized gets sick, just like with EVERY SINGLE VACCINE OUT THERE. Menawhile the unvaccinated get wiped out. A win-win for everyone
ReplyDeleteOr it turns out the vaccinations have serious side effects.
ReplyDeleteThis is extremely misleading. The vaccine reduced severe Covid by 97% compared to placebo. By the time of the 4th month into the trial, the results were already announced publicly and the patients were allowed to unblind themselves. They knew whether they had vaccine or placebo and they changed behavior accordingly knowing how well it worked based on the press releases etc. So of course more infections over those later intervals. You cannot trust a trial after it is unblinded. But guess what, the case attack rate in the 2 month -4 month period post vaccination for vaccinated people? 0.22%. The 4month - 6 month period? 0.19%. That's rather consistent, while the placebo rate was all over the place in the 3 intervals. No, you cannot look at the 6 month number and say that since it's X, therefore some % decrease per month and you will reach 50% in x amount of time. That's not how it works. Btw here is the link to the paper. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261159v1.full.pdf
ReplyDeleteAnd maybe they have cheese growing on Mars too. These weird fantasies people come up with have nothing to do with reality.
ReplyDeleteTo clarify why this speculation is inane, the immune system is designed to respond to individual pathogens all the time, and (in a normally functioning system) creating memory for a future attack on 1 pathogen has nothing to do with the reaction to another. (Otherwise benign things would be constantly attacked unnecessarily). If the vaccine induced immunity to covid-19 caused serious side effects "in a vaccinated body" when exposed to a *Different virus* then you'd have to explain why covid-induced immunity wouldn't cause the same fantastical problem considering it *Also* induces a high degree of memory b and t cell activity against the spike protein. Joseph Orlow, why don't you try reading an immunology textbook instead of listening to antivaxer fearmongers creating their morbid death fantasies in youtube videos?
ReplyDeleteHere is my question -
ReplyDeleteIf fully vaxxed people catch the new variant, eg delta, and have mild or moderate symptoms, do they get an immunological boost - on top of the benefits accrued from the vaccine?
If that is the case, we should gradually become more and more immune to this virus and it's variants.
Vaccines have been around for a couple of centuries. There is no record case of any vaccine causing harm out of nowhere months or years after the innoculation. If the vaccine is harmful, that shows up within a month or two, never longer.
ReplyDeletethanks, i was thinking on the same lines, but hadn't read this post
ReplyDeleteYes, the base case assumption would be that a breakthrough case is further boosting immunity. And perhaps in a way in which the vaccine was limited (production of IGA and better mucosal immunity, for example). This may in fact lead to stronger protection against an attempted breakthrough in the future, where the defenses failed in this case. At very least it should push circulating nAbs higher and result in higher levels of memory B and T cells, as the base case assumption.
ReplyDeleteIt would be very odd and somewhat of a mystery if a breakthrough infection didn't provide a strong boost to the existing vaccine-induced immunity.
Patience. Still going through my Lobotomy as a Cure-All textbooks.
ReplyDelete