5 ms·

> I’m wondering what the odds are that people will pivot from “it’s experimental” to “it was rushed due to politics/greed”. Or maybe just stick with the fact t

> I’m wondering what the odds are that people will pivot from “it’s experimental” to “it was rushed due to politics/greed”. Or maybe just stick with the fact that it isn't very effective. [1] [1] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.06.21261707v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.06.21261707v...

endisneigh 5y ago
That’s not really what your link says tho. > Both vaccines were highly effective during this study period against SARS-CoV-2 infection (mRNA-1273: 86%, 95%CI: 81-90.6%; BNT162b2: 76%, 95%CI: 69-81%) and COVID-19 associated hospitalization (mRNA-1273: 91.6%, 95% CI: 81-97%; BNT162b2: 85%, 95% CI: 73-93%). However, in July, the effectiveness against infection was considerably lower for mRNA-1273 (76%, 95% CI: 58-87%) with an even more pronounced reduction in effectiveness for BNT162b2 (42%, 95% CI: 13-62%). Notably, the Delta variant prevalence in Minnesota increased from 0.7% in May to over 70% in July whereas the Alpha variant prevalence decreased from 85% to 13% over the same time period.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- miked85 5y ago
  You literally posted the part describing how much effectiveness has dropped with variants.
  - endisneigh 5y ago
    Two doses of Moderna is still highly effective. What are you going to do? Stay unvaccinated? Given that both Pfizer and Moderna have virtually no side effects why wouldn’t you get it at these efficacy rates, even if lower?
    - miked85 5y ago
      I've got the vaccine, I am not saying don't get it. I am saying those who choose not to get it have very valid reasons for it.
      - endisneigh 5y ago
        Not really. Basically you get 45-75% efficacy or you roll the dice on getting Covid and potentially dying depending on age. Not to mention your article was about infection not hospitalization. If you do that it makes even less sense.
        hajile 5y ago
        The real question is about future strains. COVID was pretty much completely stable for over a year (minor variants without anything super significant changing). Once the vaccine was introduced, a bunch of variants started popping up. It makes perfect evolutionary sense. Loads of variations appear in every infected individual. The most effective version takes over and is most likely to be passed on to others. Most vaccines are so effective that the virus never gains a foothold. With the mRNA vaccines, people still get sick. You get tons of mutations and the original strain is no longer the most efficient because of the vaccine. so now there's tons of room for variants to form which work around the vaccine. Once an effective bypass happens, it takes off and you instantly get a new strain, but more resistant. At the current rate, we're only a few short jumps away from a completely ineffective vaccine.
        lots2learn 5y ago
        There were already 7 known variations when the vaccines were introduced. Furthermore, none of the vaccines currently approved for use (at least in the US) have the live virus. So vaccines are not "causing mutations". Mutations happen during replication within infected cells. The vaccines will greatly reduce the number of cells that will get infected. So vaccines reduce mutations and chances of strains to take hold. Unvaccinated people who become infected are what will fuel strains.
nojito 5y ago
Did they ever make their data available?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Saint_Genet 5y ago
1. That article isn't peer reviewd. 2. You linked to an old version that says "However, in July, the effectiveness against infection was considerably lower", in the current version the same sentence reads "In July, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization has remained high"
- hypocritepledge 5y ago
  You say it "isn't peer reviewed". I say it's a "preprint paper". That's generally how the media describes the papers that respectively go against, or with the narrative they're trying to push.

endisneigh 5y ago

That’s not really what your link says tho. > Both vaccines were highly effective during this study period against SARS-CoV-2 infection (mRNA-1273: 86%, 95%CI: 81-90.6%; BNT162b2: 76%, 95%CI: 69-81%) and COVID-19 associated hospitalization (mRNA-1273: 91.6%, 95% CI: 81-97%; BNT162b2: 85%, 95% CI: 73-93%). However, in July, the effectiveness against infection was considerably lower for mRNA-1273 (76%, 95% CI: 58-87%) with an even more pronounced reduction in effectiveness for BNT162b2 (42%, 95% CI: 13-62%). Notably, the Delta variant prevalence in Minnesota increased from 0.7% in May to over 70% in July whereas the Alpha variant prevalence decreased from 85% to 13% over the same time period.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
miked85 5y ago
You literally posted the part describing how much effectiveness has dropped with variants.
- endisneigh 5y ago
  Two doses of Moderna is still highly effective. What are you going to do? Stay unvaccinated? Given that both Pfizer and Moderna have virtually no side effects why wouldn’t you get it at these efficacy rates, even if lower?
  - miked85 5y ago
    I've got the vaccine, I am not saying don't get it. I am saying those who choose not to get it have very valid reasons for it.
    - endisneigh 5y ago
      Not really. Basically you get 45-75% efficacy or you roll the dice on getting Covid and potentially dying depending on age. Not to mention your article was about infection not hospitalization. If you do that it makes even less sense.
      - hajile 5y ago
        The real question is about future strains. COVID was pretty much completely stable for over a year (minor variants without anything super significant changing). Once the vaccine was introduced, a bunch of variants started popping up. It makes perfect evolutionary sense. Loads of variations appear in every infected individual. The most effective version takes over and is most likely to be passed on to others. Most vaccines are so effective that the virus never gains a foothold. With the mRNA vaccines, people still get sick. You get tons of mutations and the original strain is no longer the most efficient because of the vaccine. so now there's tons of room for variants to form which work around the vaccine. Once an effective bypass happens, it takes off and you instantly get a new strain, but more resistant. At the current rate, we're only a few short jumps away from a completely ineffective vaccine.
        lots2learn 5y ago
        There were already 7 known variations when the vaccines were introduced. Furthermore, none of the vaccines currently approved for use (at least in the US) have the live virus. So vaccines are not "causing mutations". Mutations happen during replication within infected cells. The vaccines will greatly reduce the number of cells that will get infected. So vaccines reduce mutations and chances of strains to take hold. Unvaccinated people who become infected are what will fuel strains.

nojito 5y ago

Did they ever make their data available?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

Saint_Genet 5y ago

1. That article isn't peer reviewd. 2. You linked to an old version that says "However, in July, the effectiveness against infection was considerably lower", in the current version the same sentence reads "In July, vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization has remained high"

hypocritepledge 5y ago
You say it "isn't peer reviewed". I say it's a "preprint paper". That's generally how the media describes the papers that respectively go against, or with the narrative they're trying to push.