4 ms·

If you want to a deeper dive on some of these recent studies showing the waning effect of the vaccines, Chris Martenson did a video on a couple yesterday: https

If you want to a deeper dive on some of these recent studies showing the waning effect of the vaccines, Chris Martenson did a video on a couple yesterday: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnB8Tep92Us https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gnB8Tep92Us The main conclusions from these recent studies * Vaccines don't lower transmission rate in households * Vaccines drop below 50% effectiveness at reducing severe infection after 6 months (with a sharper drop for just reducing infection) We may end up with mandates for boosters every six months. Unfortunately this will increase the side effects from vaccination: it would have been nice to pay that cost only once every several years instead of every 6 months. There is also the issue that vaccine immunity is not as effective as nature immunity. It's not clear how much of a problem this is if one can keep getting boosters, but it's something that needs more research. Once someone is on vaccines their immune response is going to be focused on the spike protein whereas a natural response will include antibodies to other parts of the virus.

jacquesm 5y ago
> Unfortunately this will greatly increase the side effects from vaccination. That's speculative, unless you have info that is not yet widely disseminated.
ufo 5y ago
IIRC, the evidence points towards the vaccine immunity being superior to immunity from infection.
- gregwebs 5y ago
  This is a political narrative pushed by the drug companies and the CDC among others but is contrary to the science. Here’s an article with greater detail: https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/blog/2021/11/01/the-new-cdc-study-on-natural-immunity https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/blog/2021/11/01/the-new-cdc-s...
- disambiguation 5y ago
  like everything else this pandemic, the science is continually updating, especially w.r.t natural immunity we've gone from "diminishes in 3 months" to "may last over 10 months" https://www.goodrx.com/blog/how-long-does-covid-19-immunity-last/ https://www.goodrx.com/blog/how-long-does-covid-19-immunity-... https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2021/06/04/past-covid-infection-slashes-risk-of-being-infected-again-for-at-least-10-months-study-finds/?sh=2ea23b031909 https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2021/06/04/past-covi... notwithstanding the flaws of measuring only antibodies as a true measure of effective immunity
chipgap98 5y ago
> We may end up with mandates for boosters every six months. Unfortunately this will increase the side effects from vaccination: it would have been nice to pay that cost only once every several years instead of every 6 months. Doesn't this assume that we won't make any improvements to the COVID vaccine? A year ago we didn't have any approved vaccines. It seems reasonable to assume that we could improve vaccines over time that may increase efficacy or duration of prevention.
dangoor 5y ago
The real-world data here in the US has supported continued efficacy against hospitalization and death. The CDC's current numbers[1] say that unvaccinated people are at 11.3x greater risk of dying than vaccinated people. The current guidance for boosters is specifically for those groups where efficacy has waned more over time (elderly, immunocompromised) and there's some evidence that Moderna's higher initial dosage has caused its efficacy to wane less (and the booster is only half the original dose). My point is that frequency of boosters and necessity of new boosters is not at all a clear picture. It has now been 6 months since I got my second shot and I'm not even eligible for a booster, let alone having someone mandate it. [1]: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effectiveness/index.html?CDC_AA_refVal=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cdc.gov%2Fcoronavirus%2F2019-ncov%2Fvaccines%2Feffectiveness.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effective...
tzs 5y ago
> Vaccines don't lower transmission rate in households This is neither interesting nor unexpected. Getting infected is a probabilistic thing. The more exposure events you endure and the longer those events last the higher the chances you will become infected. Prior immunity whether from vaccination or prior infection lowers your chances that any given exposure event will infect you, but with enough exposure events you will eventually get infected. In a household with an infected person you will be getting many long lasting exposure events, especially during the first few days when the initially infected person is infectious but does not yet know they are. The important question in regards to lowering transmission rates is not what happens when I'm living with infected people. It is what happens when I briefly encounter infected strangers during my normal daily activites. > Vaccines drop below 50% effectiveness at reducing severe infection after 6 months Everything I've seen that claims a large reduction in effectiveness at reducing severe infection has been incorrect due to Simpson's paradox or similar.

jacquesm 5y ago

> Unfortunately this will greatly increase the side effects from vaccination. That's speculative, unless you have info that is not yet widely disseminated.

ufo 5y ago

IIRC, the evidence points towards the vaccine immunity being superior to immunity from infection.

gregwebs 5y ago
This is a political narrative pushed by the drug companies and the CDC among others but is contrary to the science. Here’s an article with greater detail: https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/blog/2021/11/01/the-new-cdc-study-on-natural-immunity https://chrismasterjohnphd.com/blog/2021/11/01/the-new-cdc-s...
disambiguation 5y ago
like everything else this pandemic, the science is continually updating, especially w.r.t natural immunity we've gone from "diminishes in 3 months" to "may last over 10 months" https://www.goodrx.com/blog/how-long-does-covid-19-immunity-last/ https://www.goodrx.com/blog/how-long-does-covid-19-immunity-... https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2021/06/04/past-covid-infection-slashes-risk-of-being-infected-again-for-at-least-10-months-study-finds/?sh=2ea23b031909 https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2021/06/04/past-covi... notwithstanding the flaws of measuring only antibodies as a true measure of effective immunity

chipgap98 5y ago

> We may end up with mandates for boosters every six months. Unfortunately this will increase the side effects from vaccination: it would have been nice to pay that cost only once every several years instead of every 6 months. Doesn't this assume that we won't make any improvements to the COVID vaccine? A year ago we didn't have any approved vaccines. It seems reasonable to assume that we could improve vaccines over time that may increase efficacy or duration of prevention.

dangoor 5y ago

The real-world data here in the US has supported continued efficacy against hospitalization and death. The CDC's current numbers[1] say that unvaccinated people are at 11.3x greater risk of dying than vaccinated people. The current guidance for boosters is specifically for those groups where efficacy has waned more over time (elderly, immunocompromised) and there's some evidence that Moderna's higher initial dosage has caused its efficacy to wane less (and the booster is only half the original dose). My point is that frequency of boosters and necessity of new boosters is not at all a clear picture. It has now been 6 months since I got my second shot and I'm not even eligible for a booster, let alone having someone mandate it. [1]: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effectiveness/index.html?CDC_AA_refVal=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cdc.gov%2Fcoronavirus%2F2019-ncov%2Fvaccines%2Feffectiveness.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effective...

tzs 5y ago

> Vaccines don't lower transmission rate in households This is neither interesting nor unexpected. Getting infected is a probabilistic thing. The more exposure events you endure and the longer those events last the higher the chances you will become infected. Prior immunity whether from vaccination or prior infection lowers your chances that any given exposure event will infect you, but with enough exposure events you will eventually get infected. In a household with an infected person you will be getting many long lasting exposure events, especially during the first few days when the initially infected person is infectious but does not yet know they are. The important question in regards to lowering transmission rates is not what happens when I'm living with infected people. It is what happens when I briefly encounter infected strangers during my normal daily activites. > Vaccines drop below 50% effectiveness at reducing severe infection after 6 months Everything I've seen that claims a large reduction in effectiveness at reducing severe infection has been incorrect due to Simpson's paradox or similar.