28 ms·

Pfizer and Biontech provide update on Omicron variant

342 points by amichail 5y ago

nsxwolf 5y ago
Why haven’t they updated the vaccine? I thought one of the major benefits of this technology was the ease with which you can modify them.
- lordlimecat 5y ago
  In the case of the mRNA vaccines (e.g. Pfizer) it is the spike protein targeted, and that has a hard time effectively mutating because most changes to it make it less infectious. Other aspects of the virus may change but the spike so far has been relatively stable.
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
  Pfizer are on it (1). They estimate that it takes around 3 months. Which actually is really easy. And the others are following suit in similar timeframes (2) The hard part is deciding if this variant is the one that you're going to vaccinate against for a year or more. That takes data, which also takes time. 1) https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/nov/26/biontech-says-it-could-tweak-covid-vaccine-in-100-days-if-needed https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/nov/26/biontech-say... 2) https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/moderna-exec-says-company-could-have-omicron-booster-ready-march-2021-12-01/ https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/... https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/omicron-oxford-covid-astrazeneca-cnbc-b1966749.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/omicron-oxford-covid-a...
  - londons_explore 5y ago
    Each successful varient tends to be the ancestor of the next successful varient. That means if you develop a vaccine against any successful varient today, it will be a closer match than one made last year.
    - makomk 5y ago
      As I understand it, none of the existing major variants is an ancestor of Omicron - their closest common ancestor is quite a way back in the pandemic. Alpha and Delta weren't particularly closely related either.
  - hammock 5y ago
    Is there a good reason that they haven't updated their vaccine for Delta, which has been out for much longer than 3 months? Over 99% of cases in the US are Delta now, which the original jab wasn't designed for.
    - pseudalopex 5y ago
      Boosting with the original vaccine was effective for delta.
      - hammock 5y ago
        We do have a Delta-specific jab though that has gone through trials. Why not release it for sale? Just to save the government money on all the older jobs they already bought and haven't used?
        ViViDboarder 5y ago
        Not just that, but distribution and whether or not you are ready to push for every person to get the updated one or not. People will fatigue from having to keep up, especially if only a month after their last shot there is a “new” one for a new variant, and then omicron comes out and a “new” one for that. You could end up with far more boosters than actually needed at which point people will get confused or mentally burnt out on it. I think there are some sound reasons for not jumping on updated vaccines for every variant and only ones that the original doesn’t appear sufficient for.
    - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
      > Delta now, which the original jab wasn't designed for. Current vaccines have still been "highly effective" against Delta, so I think that's why this hasn't been done: there's no point in using the big guns now when the existing weapon works well, and you might really need the big gun soon (and you can't know when). So it's better to keep it in reserve. The question now is, is Omicron "it" ?
      - 5y ago
  - fullstop 5y ago
    How long does it take to ramp up production? I'm at 6 months and a few days since my 2nd shot. Do I get a booster now or wait a few months in hope of an updated one?
    - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
      Get a booster when you can, it is worth it. I had mine last week. We don't know if and when there will be an omicron-specific jab, and a mRNA 3rd dose cuts your chances of bad outcome (severe illness, hospitalisation) from omicron or previous variants to a lot lower than 2 doses ever did. https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1458020957457731585 https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1458020957457731585 https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1460191035531878405 https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1460191035531878405
      - fullstop 5y ago
        I'll likely do that. For what it's worth I was not eligible for a booster where I live until very recently.
      - timr 5y ago
        > Get a booster when you can, it is worth it. If you are under 65 and not immune compromised, there's essentially no evidence for this claim. If you are either of those things, there's some evidence that it takes your risk of severe illness (already low after vaccination), and divides it by another factor of ~20 [0]. That's great, but it's a tiny absolute effect, and we shouldn't over-sell it. If you're under 65, there's essentially no evidence supporting widespread use of boosters, and the CDC ACIP was against recommending it for all people [1] (but was ignored by politicians). The WHO continues to ask rich countries not to give boosters to healthy young people, given lack of evidence and supply constraints. [2] Not incidentally: your two tweets discuss infection, not severe illness. All current evidence is that you're well-protected against severe disease after two shots. Paper in the lancet as of last week found that boosters had a marginal impact on cellular immunity, with the primary benefit being antibody response. [3] Again, fine, but we know that antibody response wanes over time. It's completely unsurprising that you'd have more antibodies two weeks after vaccination. You'll have far lower antibodies 9 months from your third dose, too. [0] https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2114255 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2114255 [1] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7044e2.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7044e2.htm [2] https://www.who.int/news/item/04-10-2021-interim-statement-on-booster-doses-for-covid-19-vaccination https://www.who.int/news/item/04-10-2021-interim-statement-o... [3]https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02717-3/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... > a mRNA 3rd dose cuts your chances of bad outcome (severe illness, hospitalisation) from omicron or previous variants to a lot lower than 2 doses ever did. Literally no evidence for this statement. We simply don't know anything about Omicron and boosters. This is why this press release from Pfizer is on the front page of HN right now.
- detaro 5y ago
  Previously it wasn't deemed necessary (i.e. the original design was good and universal enough), for Omicron as far as I know tests are running, depending on how that goes and how countries decide to treat the regulatory part of updating it we might see an adjusted one now. (EDIT: "universal enough": we don't want a vaccine extremely optimized for a variant, but one that has a good chance to work well against other/new variants too, so there's a balance if a improvement against one variant makes it worse overall) EDIT 2: apparently some small trials for modified variants are also running for Delta, so I guess this statement needs to be modified and it wasn't considered justified to rush out a new anti-delta variant, but testing is done so the findings can be used for upgrades.
- CountDrewku 5y ago
  They already have a Delta variant vaccine. You can probably guess why they haven't released it. Feel free to unflag me now- https://www.businessinsider.com/omicron-specific-booster-shot-planned-by-moderna-for-new-coronavirus-variant-2021-11?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/omicron-specific-booster-sho...
- christrowe 5y ago
  They can definitely update the vaccine but it's not easy as 1 2 3 then good to go.
- bellyfullofbac 5y ago
  I thin an appropriate analogy to your question is the question "Why haven't you written your masterpiece novel? I thought one of the major benefits of a computer is the ease with which you can write and publish anything."
- tootie 5y ago
  Not an expert, but I think the problem is in the testing and distribution. Just from a public health POV, it's hard enough tracking who is getting doses of what and all the public communication about what to do that it really needs and deal with hate tweets from Rand Paul. Synthesizing the vaccine could possibly be done in a week.
- lobocinza 5y ago
  That page says they are working on it and expect to have it ready for use in 100 days including the design and manufacturing but not approval.
jptech 5y ago
I bet they had leaked this article to Wall st. yesterday and that's why we saw the markets rise sharply.
- AlanSE 5y ago
  Really? This doesn't look like good news to me. It's fairly positive on the effectiveness of boosters, but negative on the original doses. That would still suggest a COVID spread through the vaccinated population (the bulk of the population) with vastly less social distancing that the first year of the pandemic. The US and Europe will not get boosters to even 40% of the population before the new wave's peak.
  - jptech 5y ago
    It's an assurance that the current vaccines work + less severe cases/fatality compared to other variants. Good enough for the bulls to stay bullish.
- podgaj 5y ago
  The intense antagonism towards any criticism of the reality of corporate collusion with the news media and Wall Street on HN leaves me confused and depressed. The moment to have any critique against capitalism there is an invisible vocieless army of downvoters to suppress any chance for reality to invade the bubble of libertarianism on here. I get it, this is hosted on a capitalist funding platform, just do not pretend this is a refuge for inquiring thought. You really think this does not happen, that people on Wall Street do not get inside information before the rest of you suckers get it?
  - seoaeu 5y ago
    It isn’t criticism. The comment is unsourced speculation. The stock market moves up and down all the time, so there are tons of other explanations for what happened yesterday and there was no effort to rule them out
roody15 5y ago
Interesting. So far the Omicron variant has shown itself to be mild with minimal hospitalizations and 0 reported deaths worldwide. Is there even a need to vaccinate at all? It would seem this is the variant we would want to spread worldwide and let it take over the more dangerous strains.
- dlo_123 5y ago
  From what I've learned about the previous variants, hospitalizations are usually delayed by as much as two weeks following the increase in cases. The increase in deaths would likely follow a couple of weeks after that. I'd still remain careful but agree the data we have now look promising. I also agree that if the Omicron variant is less dangerous it would be advantageous if it took over the delta variant
- darkwizard42 5y ago
  I think you mean a need to vaccinate against it specifically, but to be clear, we DO need to vaccinate to prevent serious hospitalization.
- TurkishPoptart 5y ago
  There isn't a need to vaccinate. But there are many, many leftover doses to sell. Scare the people, and sell them the "solution". Rinse and repeat every 6 months.
- selcuka 5y ago
  > It would seem this is the variant we would want to spread worldwide and let it take over the more dangerous strains. We don't want any variant to spread worldwide because with each infection it has the potential to mutate and turn into another (sometimes more dangerous) variant. That's how Covid-19 came to existence in the first place, mutating from a relatively harmless Coronavirus.
- tim333 5y ago
  Some provisos - it can be non mild in the unvaccinated so it's still worth having a jab even if it doesn't stop you catching it. Also there's a bit of uncertainty - there probably have been some deaths. However I'm optimistic it may spread and replace delta.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
1cvmask 5y ago
This is the scientific meat of the press release where it claims a 25 times neutralizing antibody titers against the Omicron strain with a third dose of Pfizer-BionTech: The sera were collected from subjects 3 weeks after receiving the second dose or one month after receiving the third dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Each serum was tested simultaneously for its neutralizing antibody titer against the wild-type SARS-Cov-2 spike protein, and the Omicron spike variant. The third dose significantly increased the neutralizing antibody titers against the Omicron strain spike by 25-fold. Neutralization against the Omicron variant after three doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was comparable to the neutralization against the wild-type strain observed in sera from individuals who received two doses of the companies’ COVID-19 vaccine: The geometric mean titer (GMT) of neutralizing antibody against the Omicron variant measured in the samples was 154 (after three doses), compared to 398 against the Delta variant (after three doses) and 155 against the ancestral strain (after two doses). Data on the persistence of neutralizing titers over time after a booster dose of BNT162b2 against the Omicron variant will be collected. --- At the bottom of the press release it mentions that Pfizer is the marketing distribution partner for BionTech in many countries. Does anyone have a list where BionTech distributes directly? "BioNTech is the Marketing Authorization Holder in the United States, the European Union, the United Kingdom, Canada and other countries and the holder of emergency use authorizations or equivalents in the United States (jointly with Pfizer) and other countries."
- Arnt 5y ago
  IIRC Biontech distributes directly in some part of Europe that includes Turkey but I wouldn't bet on Kazakhstan and its neighbours. (Also, Pfizer does more than distribute, it also produces the stuff somewhere in the US, and contract manufacturers including Rentschler Biopharma produce for both of them.)
  - ls15 5y ago
    Mongolia got doses from Covax that are labeled with Pfizer. On the certificate it is labeled with both names.
- logicchains 5y ago
tazjin 5y ago
Product manufacturer recommends use of its product. Surprise!
- IAmGraydon 5y ago
  Exactly this.
  - herendin2 5y ago
    Please just upvote in that case. Because if we all commented "exactly this", or the opposite, this forum would become unreadable. Thank you.
  - dmead 5y ago
    And what? so we shouldn't be protected because capitalism? There is a deafening lack of coherence here.
    - pcbro141 5y ago
      I think their point is just be mindful Pfizer is heavily incentivized to push for more and more boosters, if there's even a marginal benefit then they will advocate for more boosters (more $$$).
      - dmead 5y ago
        the benefit is not marginal. it's uhh, whats the opposite of marginal? substantial? bringing it up in this context is just low key anti vax bullshit.
- drewcon 5y ago
  Unclear why the cynicism is warranted here. They’re not just making a guess, they performed an experiment that is inline with a comparable experiment from non affiliated SA scientists to yield these results. Should they not run this type of experiment and make a useful and true recommendation to the public? Would that be a better more pure scenario for you?
zanethomas 5y ago
ridiculous
fractal618 5y ago
Is "First Shot" "Second Shot" and "Booster" the same as 3 "doses"?
- IgorPartola 5y ago
  Yes.
- bmitc 5y ago
  According to the CVS person who did my booster, the booster for Pfizer is a full dose while the Moderna booster is a half dose (relative to each manufacturer's original first and second shot doses).
  - jsiepkes 5y ago
    Worth noting that Moderna uses a larger dosis then Pfizer for the first and second shot.
    - syntaxing 5y ago
      And at half dose of Moderna is still larger than a full dose of Pfizer
  - prox 5y ago
    Probably because Moderna’s original shot was already a higher dosage than Pfizers.
  - cure 5y ago
    According to this source https://www.statnews.com/2021/02/02/comparing-the-covid-19-vaccines-developed-by-pfizer-moderna-and-johnson-johnson/ https://www.statnews.com/2021/02/02/comparing-the-covid-19-v... the original Pfizer dose was 30 micrograms of vaccine, while Moderna's was 100 micrograms. If that is correct, then Moderna's booster would still be more vaccine (50 micrograms) than Pfizer's original dose. Of course more is not necessarily better!
    - 5y ago
neither_color 5y ago
It's not deadly enough for me to consider a booster, I'll pass on this supplementary shot https://www.marketwatch.com/story/who-has-not-seen-any-reports-of-deaths-caused-by-omicron-variant-urges-people-not-to-panic-as-delta-still-dominant-11638546502 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/who-has-not-seen-any-repor...
- Jenk 5y ago
  Not deadly enough _to you_. I'm sure those who are vulnerable will thank you immensely for your compassion.
  - johnisgood 5y ago
    Do they actually prevent transmission significantly? Is there a study on this? I am curious.
    - bufferoverflow 5y ago
      I saw one study, the transmission rate of the vaccinated was around 10% lower than of the non-vaccinated. It's good, but won't stop the virus from spreading even if everyone is vaccinated.
      - johnisgood 5y ago
        Hmm, what about "everyone" catching the variant that causes mostly fatigue only? I heard it is related to common cold as well. If everyone (or the majority) caught it and went through it, we would have pretty good immunity against the more harmful variants, right?
        bigodbiel 5y ago
        Well, lately even the CDC finally bend their knees to the alter of Immunology updating their internal guidance on natural immunity that "overall SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG remain detectable in approximately 90% of persons who seroconvert up to 10 months to one year post-infection" [1] [1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/vaccine-induced-immunity.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-br... I always joke that we should have placed all the elders, high risk, plus whoever else wanted, in stasis for a year, and let Rona rip!
_Understated_ 5y ago
Not to hijack the thread: why is my post being flagged? I'm asking a genuine question! I was linking to UK Government data here [0] and asking about the numbers. They're not adding up. I want to know if my interpretation is correct [0] - https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsbyvaccinationstatusengland https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsde...
- hugozap 5y ago
  I think you should see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVRfBhy5vGI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVRfBhy5vGI
- stuartloxton 5y ago
  If you want to seriously discuss you should put which data points your comparing so others can also compare. When I look at that sheet and look at the rates comparing unvaccinated vs fully faccinated the death rate is lower for every age group when vaccinated. * Comparing week ending 24th September 2021
  - fer 5y ago
    They're comparing different/dates/vaccination rates, classic Simpson's paradox. No adjusted data shows otherwise.
    - _Understated_ 5y ago
      I'm not. Taking the last available data point which is 24 Sep 21: Unvax 80+ - 28 deaths Double-vax 80+ - 243 deaths What does that mean? It lools like more die with a double-dose. Is that not correct?
      - mminer237 5y ago
        You are not. Slightly more vaccinated people died than unvaccinated. However, not from COVID-19. The elderly are more likely to be vaccinated and also more likely to die of heart disease or cancer. You'll note in Table 8 that 34k unvaccinated died of COVID, compared to 14k vaccinated. Also, 83% of people are vaccinated, meaning the unvaccinated would have had to have died at even greater rates, at over 900% the rate of vaccinated. However, to further account for the elderly being at greater risk of COVID, you'll further note that Table 8 has an "age-standardised mortality rate", showing that on an individual basis, choosing to remain unvaccinated made someone 3230% more likely to die of COVID.
marban 5y ago
Biontech founder Livestream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nojokAK2vgU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nojokAK2vgU
- freemint 5y ago
  Damn thanks. I like the German accent.
silent_cal 5y ago
Lately I have been feeling like I'm in a dystopian fiction. This is corporatist propaganda, plain as day. How do you all not see it?
disambiguation 5y ago
I have a few relatives in the medical field (all vaxxed and boosted) that have explained the booster shot is just more of the same stuff - they haven't had time to make a new recipe.. so isn't this just the same study all over again? i.e 2 shots had high protection in the beginning and waned over time. Can we expect the same from the booster shot?
- base698 5y ago
  Omicron the Pfizer marketing press release. Easy way to sell another 160 million doses.
- glial 5y ago
  My assumption at this point is: probably, but the immune system is complicated so nobody's really sure.
- tgtweak 5y ago
  They are comparing 3 weeks after second dose and 4 weeks after 3rd dose. Presumably efficacy drop over time after vaccination is not in scope. Not enough time has passed under observation to actually determine if it will wane similarly.
- dom96 5y ago
  The important bit is Omicron. Since as you say the recipe is the same it is an open question whether these vaccines can offer the same protection as for delta (and for how many doses)
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- gonehome 5y ago
  I think immune response doesn’t necessarily work that way. It’s possible the third shot could improve immunity for a longer time frame of 1-3yrs. I think I read there is also a new omicron specific mRNA vaccine in the works too.
- rich_sasha 5y ago
tppiotrowski 5y ago
From reading this article I understood that they drew serum (blood plasma?) from 2 or 3 shot recipients and introduced a similar virus to COVID (pseudo virus?) into the serum because a pseudo virus acts similar but is less dangerous (contagious?) and then I’m not sure if they looked at amount of white blood cells produced. Would love for someone more familiar with the topic to give a layman’s interpretation.
- mafuy 5y ago
  A virus is introduced just to see if/how much it gets attacked. This correlates with the efficiency against the real virus, inside a human. It has nothing to do with the introduced virus being more or less contagious.
swayvil 5y ago
Pfizer and Biontech provide update on their big fat bank accounts, more like. Taking the opiates-vs-weed situation as a model, keep a lookout for somebody trying to acquire a piece of that sweet vax pie. (Flagged? Seriously? You can stick that flag where the sun doesn't shine)
stolenmerch 5y ago
If I'm reading this correctly, this is "protection against severe disease" and has little to do with transmission. The National Airport Data from Israel seems to suggest "the absolute number of infected individuals in the Vaccinated (boosted) group is likely to be at least as high as in the Unvaccinated" [0] So it seems to me that as long as we all remain obsessed with case numbers and not actual hospitalizations and death, this isn't going away, at least not anytime soon. I personally find this beyond depressing. [0] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3963606 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3963606
- detaro 5y ago
  > all remain obsessed with case numbers and not actual hospitalizations and death It's a balance. E.g. Germanys current trouble is a direct consequence of official policy that had a core of "we only care about hospitalizations now", but ignored "... and based on case numbers and other statistics, what will future hospitalizations look like if we don't change anything about our approach" - not helped by election campaigns and politicians publicly admitting they haven't understood this whole "exponential" malarky yet. You really need to consider more than just one number.
  - formerly_proven 5y ago
    The superseded government (by way of Jens Spahn) admitted that it held back on acting w.r.t. COVID in 2021 to avoid negative impact on their campaign. General inaction or adverse action in other areas (e.g. ICU staffing, leerdenker) did not help, either.
  - hef19898 5y ago
    As someone who has quite some experience in running operations based on data, numbers and metrics the German approach to COVID on that front alone really puzzled me from the beginning. First the incidence of 50 that they pulled out of their ass for contact tracing, which was ignored basically the next day. Then the fact that resources weren't really increased to improve contract traceability. Then the decision to use a backward looking KPI, ICU occupation, to tackle a highly dynamic situation. Which also meant to ignore the incidence, the only real predictive metric we have. And it is good at predicting ICU occupation and severe cases when combined with vaccination levels. That's simply amateurish, and means all measures, not all of which are bad, are usually a couple of weeks late. Even better, the 7-day average incidence is based on the daily numbers. Those numbers are, what a surprise, limited to the testing capacities of laboratories, so the incidence is reported based on the day the test was analyzed, not when the sample was taken. This flattens the 7-day average curve. Well, until the new numbers are reported once labs git through their backlog. Thing is, the 7-day average is not changed once published. Again just amateurish.
ekianjo 5y ago
Follow the money?
avsteele 5y ago
If there is an expert in immunology here I'd really like to ask a question: Aren't antibody titers just one measure of immunity? Since ~everyone with just two shots get them a while ago, and people receiving the boosters are receiving them now, wouldn't we expect must higher levels of neutralizing antibodies in boosted people? I know the number of antibodies fades over time, (whether from vaccine or infection) but this doesn't mean you don't have lasting protection after this, right? Wouldn't it therefore be a mistake/misleading to conclude something specific about a level of protection from this titer data alone?
- lambdaba 5y ago
  Not the expert you were asking but one thing I know is natural immunity isn't just antibodies, which is why traditional inactivated vaccines yield more robust and long-lasting protection.
  - javagram 5y ago
    FYI, vector vaccines and mRNA vaccines also create t-cell immunity , not just antibodies. It’s not just “inactivated vaccines” that do so.
    - lambdaba 5y ago
      I did not know that. Thank you. Possibly in lesser quantities though? It is only related to the spike protein in the case of Covid. As I understand the natural immunity has a different fingerprint even with covid?
      - javagram 5y ago
        "natural" immunity would create antibodies and immunity that may be related to non-spike proteins of COVID-19 (I believe this depends on your own body's response and the severity of infection exactly what is generated). The vector and mRNA vaccines only expose the spike protein (in various forms), so they don't generate immunity to other proteins of COVID-19.
bingohbangoh 5y ago
It's amazing what being shielded from prosecution does for a company's ability to innovate!
swayvil 5y ago
Now they want us to take the vax every 9 months forever. The pharmacorps have become our landlords. Which is the whole point of course.
- robotmay 5y ago
  Ignoring that the vaccines are free to the individual and therefore not at all similar to a landlord/tenant relationship, you always have the option of not taking it and dying, which is a cool loophole that gets you out of the implied contract. Life hack.
  - swayvil 5y ago
    Pfizer's reaping 33billion on vax alone this year. Three guesses where that money comes from.
    - Covzire 5y ago
      Saying they're free is certainly misleading.
      - robotmay 5y ago
        I mean, I pay nothing for mine. I already pay tax to fund our health service, which purchases many drugs from many vendors for many diseases. This is just one more, and by all accounts it's comparatively cheap for the overall cost-savings when it keeps the vast majority of people out of the hospitals.
    - plainnoodles 5y ago
      Isn't that supposed to be how capitalism funds and incentivizes R&D though? There is market demand for a Thing, if you can figure out how to make Things then the market will reward that with profit. Honestly, for being the firm to develop a vaccine for a global pandemic, $33B in revenue sounds a little light? Apple made 83B in revenue just in Q3 alone and all they do is make phones that aren't even improving that much year-over-year.
jptech 5y ago
I dont want to sound like pro- conspiracy theory but the way they advertise the third shot after US gov declining it, makes you really wonder if this variant at least is man-made.
phgn 5y ago
Isn't it a little suspicious that they claim more of their existing vaccine will protect that well against the new variant? I don't want to question the rigour of their scientific testing, but it might be good to have independent tests done. Of course in parallel to giving out more booster shots, which can only help (by an unknown amount).
- gandalfgreybeer 5y ago
  If they said they people will need a new vaccine (which with the current mRNA tech will be relatively quick), I can imagine a similar comment pointing out suspicion that they want to sell something new. Doesn’t make sense for them to market the current vaccine as still working if it’s not. Eventually more real world data will be coming in and it’s not something to easily hide from.
- fsh 5y ago
  First neutralization test results posted by the Sigal group in Durban and the Ciesek group in Frankfurt agree with the BioNTech/Pfizer data.
  - peteradio 5y ago
    Sigal did not test triple vaxxed.
hamburglar1 5y ago
Is there a comprehensive white-paper anywhere with sample sizes and error bars? Otherwise this seems like an anecdote. "The sera were collected from subjects 3 weeks after receiving the second dose or one month after receiving the third dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine" How do we know this study isn't just measuring the effect of that additional week? Also how many subjects was this sera pulled from? Are the subjects materially similar between the second and third dose groups? Not exactly surprising the people selling the third dose conclude that it is needed. It's like when the waiter recommends the most expensive option.
- phkahler 5y ago
  >> Is there a comprehensive white-paper anywhere with sample sizes and error bars? Otherwise this seems like an anecdote. It's marketing. When the vaccine effectiveness is waning the solution seems to be more of it If it only took 2 days to create the vaccine, why do they not have an updated one? Is there another in development that targets more than just the spike protein? Why is the entire defense that vaccine?
  - marcosdumay 5y ago
    > If it only took 2 days to create the vaccine, why do they not have an updated one? There's a deafening silence every time somebody asks this. From what I've been able to see, it's because regulatory bodies won't accept an update vaccine without 8 months of testing, and the manufacturers are doing the testing, but at those delays there isn't really any point. Why regulatory bodies won't accept updated vaccines is the more interesting question.
    - tremon 5y ago
      The regulator is only tasked with approving the manufacturer's end results, I don't think they audit the production facilities or the design process. If the production process were fully transparent and the manufacturer could prove it didn't change anything except for "this one input tweak here", the approval process could likely be further streamlined -- but I don't think the authority of the regulator stretches that far, and manufacturers will likely claim trade secrets on their internal processes. Besides, I don't expect the anti-vax crowd to be very forgiving about mistakes or unforeseen consequences of an updated vaccine. I'm perfectly happy with the regulator having very strict controls for what gets approved for rapid rollout to the entire population.
mrkramer 5y ago
Every new virus evolution = More money for Big Pharma It's hell of a business.
yumraj 5y ago
Has anyone seen research around mix and match? As in which is better, stay with the original or get a different booster? Especially mRNA followed by J&J, and J&J followed by mRNA? Additionally, is there any benefit to Pfizer followed by Moderna and vice versa.
- martythemaniak 5y ago
  Most Canadians had a mix of either AZ and mRNA or the two mRNAs mixed. There's some studies you can search for, IIRC, the mRNA ones are basically interchangeable, and the AZ/mRNA mix gave better results.
- detaro 5y ago
  Yes, there's been some research in that direction, of course I can't find the link right now ... If I remember right, core result was that using the other mRNA for booster doesn't hurt and might provide a small benefit.
- bluGill 5y ago
  There hasn't been a complete matrix. Using moderna as the booster when you started with the other two is best. In the case of J&J moderna as a booster is significantly better, pfizer slightly. However if you had moderna to begin with we don't know. There are many other vaccines out there have haven't been studied at all as well.
  - yumraj 5y ago
    In my case I had Moderna, so trying to decide whether to go with J&J or Pfizer. I guess I’ll give J&J a shot.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Covzire 5y ago
I think HN has hit a new low, people are swallowing press releases and acting like they're unquestionable. Go ahead, try to question anything in the PR in this HN thread.
swayvil 5y ago
All the puppets will wisely nod their heads. And repeat whatever their facetwitter tells them. And inject whatever the priest tells them to inject. And wear the holy facecover. And think only good thoughts.
- alexk307 5y ago
  Are you OK?
millettjon 5y ago
This paper from Africa Health Research Institute shows a 41x reduction in effectiveness of pfizer vaccine for omicron. https://www.ahri.org/omicron-incompletely-escapes-immunity-induced-by-the-pfizer-vaccine/ https://www.ahri.org/omicron-incompletely-escapes-immunity-i... https://www.ahri.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/MEDRXIV-2021-267417v1-Sigal.pdf https://www.ahri.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/MEDRXIV-2021...
- Brybry 5y ago
  This preprint also shows reduced antibody neutralization of omicron in comparison to delta (including for double vaccinated + previous infection). Note the sample sizes for all these studies is small. 12 participants for the AHRI paper and 8 to 20 per group for this one. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.07.21267432v1.full.pdf https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.07.21267432v...
  - swader999 5y ago
    Sample size doesn't really matter much in this kind of study.
    - peteradio 5y ago
      Ideally you'd match it to some population of interest. For my own medical affairs, I don't care what grand-pappy's results are here, I want to know how cousin Tim fairs.
    - Stanleyc23 5y ago
      Why not? I’m no statistician, so my basic understanding is you should always prefer bigger sample sizes to ensure statistically significant findings.
- fsh 5y ago
  This paper doesn't even attempt to measure effectiveness. It measures neutralization titers which is a totally different thing.
globular-toast 5y ago
When I see threads like these with all the buried/flagged comments I get strong "dangerous thinking" vibes. I won't be taking any more of these.
- AccountToUse 5y ago
  Any more booster shots? Any more vaccines?
  - globular-toast 5y ago
    Booster shots. Something doesn't smell right. People on all sides are scared and I don't think rational thought is being applied any more.
    - TurkishPoptart 5y ago
      Sounds like your gut is in the right place. I keep my fingers crossed that our governor doesn't issue mandates for boosters for us folks in the public sector. I did my part with shots 1 and 2, but I am _not_ doing this again, for a variant which hasn't even killed anyone.
- somehnacct3757 5y ago
  If all it takes is hacker news comment threads to sway your opinions on medical topics, you were probably looking for an excuse to not take the vaccine already. Barely anyone here is an expert on this topic and if there were experts here, you would find them at the top of the thread - not buried behind moderation at the bottom. This is a website for fans of startups and tech. The closest we get to statistics is some middleware vendor optimized for p-hacking. Applying startup thinking to mature fields is a constant source of egg-on-face for silicon valley, as demonstrated famously by IoT safety devices. [0] The reason for large downvotes and flags in a thread like this is because there are a lot of people who think they know what they're talking about, but don't. The rigor to participate in this conversation is much higher than having a hot take on the latest MacBook. But that doesn't stop people from oversharing anyway. [0] https://gekk.info/articles/iot.html https://gekk.info/articles/iot.html
dougmwne 5y ago
My main concern is that the tests were done several weeks after the dose at the moment of peak immunity. No evidence I’m aware of of how long the neutralizing antibodies last for Omicron after a booster, though it would not have been particularly difficult to test samples at 2 week intervals to get a trend line. Ideally the higher protection would last at least a few month since that’s how long a infection wave usually lasts in the population.
djrogers 5y ago
Very curious as to how this was determined: "Although two doses of the vaccine may still offer protection against severe disease caused by the Omicron strain, it’s clear from these preliminary data that protection is improved with a third dose of our vaccine" Based on the latest data, not a single person has died from Omicron, so what are they using to back this up? It's possible that Omicron is less deadly than previous strains, so what they're claiming may be kinda like saying "our water is wetter"...
- thehappypm 5y ago
  Their specific test was about how the immune system reacts, it says nothing about how dangerous the virus is.
milansm 5y ago
Can someone tell if this would be a good personal/societal strategy: once you had covid, or fully vaxxed, it’s much better to be among other people, to be exposed to the virus and continuously train your immune system.
- macintux 5y ago
  Much of that depends on who else you’re exposing. I have to be careful because I’m helping my elderly mother, and no amount of vaccination can fully protect older individuals in poor health. If I didn’t have to worry about other people, I’d feel much more comfortable with my current vaccination status.
- aserdf 5y ago
  in this layman's view of similar past events that seems to be exactly what happens. look at previous pandemics - Russian, Spanish, Hong Kong. Very similar infection and mortality waves; elderly, predisposed, poor health were the first casualties. as it made its rounds the rest developed immunity over time, along with children being incredibly resilient. as the population turns over those with immunity have low impact encounters. The corresponding viruses from those pandemics continue to circulate today as seasonal flu and cold strains. just my 2 cents.

342 points by amichail 5y ago

Why haven’t they updated the vaccine? I thought one of the major benefits of this technology was the ease with which you can modify them.

lordlimecat 5y ago
In the case of the mRNA vaccines (e.g. Pfizer) it is the spike protein targeted, and that has a hard time effectively mutating because most changes to it make it less infectious. Other aspects of the virus may change but the spike so far has been relatively stable.
SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
Pfizer are on it (1). They estimate that it takes around 3 months. Which actually is really easy. And the others are following suit in similar timeframes (2) The hard part is deciding if this variant is the one that you're going to vaccinate against for a year or more. That takes data, which also takes time. 1) https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/nov/26/biontech-says-it-could-tweak-covid-vaccine-in-100-days-if-needed https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/nov/26/biontech-say... 2) https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/moderna-exec-says-company-could-have-omicron-booster-ready-march-2021-12-01/ https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/... https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/omicron-oxford-covid-astrazeneca-cnbc-b1966749.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/omicron-oxford-covid-a...
- londons_explore 5y ago
  Each successful varient tends to be the ancestor of the next successful varient. That means if you develop a vaccine against any successful varient today, it will be a closer match than one made last year.
  - makomk 5y ago
    As I understand it, none of the existing major variants is an ancestor of Omicron - their closest common ancestor is quite a way back in the pandemic. Alpha and Delta weren't particularly closely related either.
- hammock 5y ago
  Is there a good reason that they haven't updated their vaccine for Delta, which has been out for much longer than 3 months? Over 99% of cases in the US are Delta now, which the original jab wasn't designed for.
  - pseudalopex 5y ago
    Boosting with the original vaccine was effective for delta.
    - hammock 5y ago
      We do have a Delta-specific jab though that has gone through trials. Why not release it for sale? Just to save the government money on all the older jobs they already bought and haven't used?
      - ViViDboarder 5y ago
        Not just that, but distribution and whether or not you are ready to push for every person to get the updated one or not. People will fatigue from having to keep up, especially if only a month after their last shot there is a “new” one for a new variant, and then omicron comes out and a “new” one for that. You could end up with far more boosters than actually needed at which point people will get confused or mentally burnt out on it. I think there are some sound reasons for not jumping on updated vaccines for every variant and only ones that the original doesn’t appear sufficient for.
  - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
    > Delta now, which the original jab wasn't designed for. Current vaccines have still been "highly effective" against Delta, so I think that's why this hasn't been done: there's no point in using the big guns now when the existing weapon works well, and you might really need the big gun soon (and you can't know when). So it's better to keep it in reserve. The question now is, is Omicron "it" ?
    - 5y ago
- fullstop 5y ago
  How long does it take to ramp up production? I'm at 6 months and a few days since my 2nd shot. Do I get a booster now or wait a few months in hope of an updated one?
  - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
    Get a booster when you can, it is worth it. I had mine last week. We don't know if and when there will be an omicron-specific jab, and a mRNA 3rd dose cuts your chances of bad outcome (severe illness, hospitalisation) from omicron or previous variants to a lot lower than 2 doses ever did. https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1458020957457731585 https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1458020957457731585 https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1460191035531878405 https://twitter.com/PaulMainwood/status/1460191035531878405
    - fullstop 5y ago
      I'll likely do that. For what it's worth I was not eligible for a booster where I live until very recently.
    - timr 5y ago
      > Get a booster when you can, it is worth it. If you are under 65 and not immune compromised, there's essentially no evidence for this claim. If you are either of those things, there's some evidence that it takes your risk of severe illness (already low after vaccination), and divides it by another factor of ~20 [0]. That's great, but it's a tiny absolute effect, and we shouldn't over-sell it. If you're under 65, there's essentially no evidence supporting widespread use of boosters, and the CDC ACIP was against recommending it for all people [1] (but was ignored by politicians). The WHO continues to ask rich countries not to give boosters to healthy young people, given lack of evidence and supply constraints. [2] Not incidentally: your two tweets discuss infection, not severe illness. All current evidence is that you're well-protected against severe disease after two shots. Paper in the lancet as of last week found that boosters had a marginal impact on cellular immunity, with the primary benefit being antibody response. [3] Again, fine, but we know that antibody response wanes over time. It's completely unsurprising that you'd have more antibodies two weeks after vaccination. You'll have far lower antibodies 9 months from your third dose, too. [0] https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2114255 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2114255 [1] https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7044e2.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7044e2.htm [2] https://www.who.int/news/item/04-10-2021-interim-statement-on-booster-doses-for-covid-19-vaccination https://www.who.int/news/item/04-10-2021-interim-statement-o... [3]https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02717-3/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... > a mRNA 3rd dose cuts your chances of bad outcome (severe illness, hospitalisation) from omicron or previous variants to a lot lower than 2 doses ever did. Literally no evidence for this statement. We simply don't know anything about Omicron and boosters. This is why this press release from Pfizer is on the front page of HN right now.
detaro 5y ago
Previously it wasn't deemed necessary (i.e. the original design was good and universal enough), for Omicron as far as I know tests are running, depending on how that goes and how countries decide to treat the regulatory part of updating it we might see an adjusted one now. (EDIT: "universal enough": we don't want a vaccine extremely optimized for a variant, but one that has a good chance to work well against other/new variants too, so there's a balance if a improvement against one variant makes it worse overall) EDIT 2: apparently some small trials for modified variants are also running for Delta, so I guess this statement needs to be modified and it wasn't considered justified to rush out a new anti-delta variant, but testing is done so the findings can be used for upgrades.
CountDrewku 5y ago
They already have a Delta variant vaccine. You can probably guess why they haven't released it. Feel free to unflag me now- https://www.businessinsider.com/omicron-specific-booster-shot-planned-by-moderna-for-new-coronavirus-variant-2021-11?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/omicron-specific-booster-sho...
christrowe 5y ago
They can definitely update the vaccine but it's not easy as 1 2 3 then good to go.
bellyfullofbac 5y ago
I thin an appropriate analogy to your question is the question "Why haven't you written your masterpiece novel? I thought one of the major benefits of a computer is the ease with which you can write and publish anything."
tootie 5y ago
Not an expert, but I think the problem is in the testing and distribution. Just from a public health POV, it's hard enough tracking who is getting doses of what and all the public communication about what to do that it really needs and deal with hate tweets from Rand Paul. Synthesizing the vaccine could possibly be done in a week.
lobocinza 5y ago
That page says they are working on it and expect to have it ready for use in 100 days including the design and manufacturing but not approval.

jptech 5y ago

I bet they had leaked this article to Wall st. yesterday and that's why we saw the markets rise sharply.

AlanSE 5y ago
Really? This doesn't look like good news to me. It's fairly positive on the effectiveness of boosters, but negative on the original doses. That would still suggest a COVID spread through the vaccinated population (the bulk of the population) with vastly less social distancing that the first year of the pandemic. The US and Europe will not get boosters to even 40% of the population before the new wave's peak.
- jptech 5y ago
  It's an assurance that the current vaccines work + less severe cases/fatality compared to other variants. Good enough for the bulls to stay bullish.
podgaj 5y ago
The intense antagonism towards any criticism of the reality of corporate collusion with the news media and Wall Street on HN leaves me confused and depressed. The moment to have any critique against capitalism there is an invisible vocieless army of downvoters to suppress any chance for reality to invade the bubble of libertarianism on here. I get it, this is hosted on a capitalist funding platform, just do not pretend this is a refuge for inquiring thought. You really think this does not happen, that people on Wall Street do not get inside information before the rest of you suckers get it?
- seoaeu 5y ago
  It isn’t criticism. The comment is unsourced speculation. The stock market moves up and down all the time, so there are tons of other explanations for what happened yesterday and there was no effort to rule them out

roody15 5y ago

Interesting. So far the Omicron variant has shown itself to be mild with minimal hospitalizations and 0 reported deaths worldwide. Is there even a need to vaccinate at all? It would seem this is the variant we would want to spread worldwide and let it take over the more dangerous strains.

dlo_123 5y ago
From what I've learned about the previous variants, hospitalizations are usually delayed by as much as two weeks following the increase in cases. The increase in deaths would likely follow a couple of weeks after that. I'd still remain careful but agree the data we have now look promising. I also agree that if the Omicron variant is less dangerous it would be advantageous if it took over the delta variant
darkwizard42 5y ago
I think you mean a need to vaccinate against it specifically, but to be clear, we DO need to vaccinate to prevent serious hospitalization.
TurkishPoptart 5y ago
There isn't a need to vaccinate. But there are many, many leftover doses to sell. Scare the people, and sell them the "solution". Rinse and repeat every 6 months.
selcuka 5y ago
> It would seem this is the variant we would want to spread worldwide and let it take over the more dangerous strains. We don't want any variant to spread worldwide because with each infection it has the potential to mutate and turn into another (sometimes more dangerous) variant. That's how Covid-19 came to existence in the first place, mutating from a relatively harmless Coronavirus.
tim333 5y ago
Some provisos - it can be non mild in the unvaccinated so it's still worth having a jab even if it doesn't stop you catching it. Also there's a bit of uncertainty - there probably have been some deaths. However I'm optimistic it may spread and replace delta.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

1cvmask 5y ago

This is the scientific meat of the press release where it claims a 25 times neutralizing antibody titers against the Omicron strain with a third dose of Pfizer-BionTech: The sera were collected from subjects 3 weeks after receiving the second dose or one month after receiving the third dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine. Each serum was tested simultaneously for its neutralizing antibody titer against the wild-type SARS-Cov-2 spike protein, and the Omicron spike variant. The third dose significantly increased the neutralizing antibody titers against the Omicron strain spike by 25-fold. Neutralization against the Omicron variant after three doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was comparable to the neutralization against the wild-type strain observed in sera from individuals who received two doses of the companies’ COVID-19 vaccine: The geometric mean titer (GMT) of neutralizing antibody against the Omicron variant measured in the samples was 154 (after three doses), compared to 398 against the Delta variant (after three doses) and 155 against the ancestral strain (after two doses). Data on the persistence of neutralizing titers over time after a booster dose of BNT162b2 against the Omicron variant will be collected. --- At the bottom of the press release it mentions that Pfizer is the marketing distribution partner for BionTech in many countries. Does anyone have a list where BionTech distributes directly? "BioNTech is the Marketing Authorization Holder in the United States, the European Union, the United Kingdom, Canada and other countries and the holder of emergency use authorizations or equivalents in the United States (jointly with Pfizer) and other countries."

Arnt 5y ago
IIRC Biontech distributes directly in some part of Europe that includes Turkey but I wouldn't bet on Kazakhstan and its neighbours. (Also, Pfizer does more than distribute, it also produces the stuff somewhere in the US, and contract manufacturers including Rentschler Biopharma produce for both of them.)
- ls15 5y ago
  Mongolia got doses from Covax that are labeled with Pfizer. On the certificate it is labeled with both names.
logicchains 5y ago

tazjin 5y ago

Product manufacturer recommends use of its product. Surprise!

IAmGraydon 5y ago
Exactly this.
- herendin2 5y ago
  Please just upvote in that case. Because if we all commented "exactly this", or the opposite, this forum would become unreadable. Thank you.
- dmead 5y ago
  And what? so we shouldn't be protected because capitalism? There is a deafening lack of coherence here.
  - pcbro141 5y ago
    I think their point is just be mindful Pfizer is heavily incentivized to push for more and more boosters, if there's even a marginal benefit then they will advocate for more boosters (more $$$).
    - dmead 5y ago
      the benefit is not marginal. it's uhh, whats the opposite of marginal? substantial? bringing it up in this context is just low key anti vax bullshit.
drewcon 5y ago
Unclear why the cynicism is warranted here. They’re not just making a guess, they performed an experiment that is inline with a comparable experiment from non affiliated SA scientists to yield these results. Should they not run this type of experiment and make a useful and true recommendation to the public? Would that be a better more pure scenario for you?

zanethomas 5y ago

ridiculous

fractal618 5y ago

Is "First Shot" "Second Shot" and "Booster" the same as 3 "doses"?

IgorPartola 5y ago
Yes.
bmitc 5y ago
According to the CVS person who did my booster, the booster for Pfizer is a full dose while the Moderna booster is a half dose (relative to each manufacturer's original first and second shot doses).
- jsiepkes 5y ago
  Worth noting that Moderna uses a larger dosis then Pfizer for the first and second shot.
  - syntaxing 5y ago
    And at half dose of Moderna is still larger than a full dose of Pfizer
- prox 5y ago
  Probably because Moderna’s original shot was already a higher dosage than Pfizers.
- cure 5y ago
  According to this source https://www.statnews.com/2021/02/02/comparing-the-covid-19-vaccines-developed-by-pfizer-moderna-and-johnson-johnson/ https://www.statnews.com/2021/02/02/comparing-the-covid-19-v... the original Pfizer dose was 30 micrograms of vaccine, while Moderna's was 100 micrograms. If that is correct, then Moderna's booster would still be more vaccine (50 micrograms) than Pfizer's original dose. Of course more is not necessarily better!
  - 5y ago

neither_color 5y ago

It's not deadly enough for me to consider a booster, I'll pass on this supplementary shot https://www.marketwatch.com/story/who-has-not-seen-any-reports-of-deaths-caused-by-omicron-variant-urges-people-not-to-panic-as-delta-still-dominant-11638546502 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/who-has-not-seen-any-repor...

Jenk 5y ago
Not deadly enough _to you_. I'm sure those who are vulnerable will thank you immensely for your compassion.
- johnisgood 5y ago
  Do they actually prevent transmission significantly? Is there a study on this? I am curious.
  - bufferoverflow 5y ago
    I saw one study, the transmission rate of the vaccinated was around 10% lower than of the non-vaccinated. It's good, but won't stop the virus from spreading even if everyone is vaccinated.
    - johnisgood 5y ago
      Hmm, what about "everyone" catching the variant that causes mostly fatigue only? I heard it is related to common cold as well. If everyone (or the majority) caught it and went through it, we would have pretty good immunity against the more harmful variants, right?
      - bigodbiel 5y ago
        Well, lately even the CDC finally bend their knees to the alter of Immunology updating their internal guidance on natural immunity that "overall SARS-CoV-2-specific IgG remain detectable in approximately 90% of persons who seroconvert up to 10 months to one year post-infection" [1] [1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/vaccine-induced-immunity.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-br... I always joke that we should have placed all the elders, high risk, plus whoever else wanted, in stasis for a year, and let Rona rip!

_Understated_ 5y ago

Not to hijack the thread: why is my post being flagged? I'm asking a genuine question! I was linking to UK Government data here [0] and asking about the numbers. They're not adding up. I want to know if my interpretation is correct [0] - https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/datasets/deathsbyvaccinationstatusengland https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsde...

hugozap 5y ago
I think you should see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVRfBhy5vGI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVRfBhy5vGI
stuartloxton 5y ago
If you want to seriously discuss you should put which data points your comparing so others can also compare. When I look at that sheet and look at the rates comparing unvaccinated vs fully faccinated the death rate is lower for every age group when vaccinated. * Comparing week ending 24th September 2021
- fer 5y ago
  They're comparing different/dates/vaccination rates, classic Simpson's paradox. No adjusted data shows otherwise.
  - _Understated_ 5y ago
    I'm not. Taking the last available data point which is 24 Sep 21: Unvax 80+ - 28 deaths Double-vax 80+ - 243 deaths What does that mean? It lools like more die with a double-dose. Is that not correct?
    - mminer237 5y ago
      You are not. Slightly more vaccinated people died than unvaccinated. However, not from COVID-19. The elderly are more likely to be vaccinated and also more likely to die of heart disease or cancer. You'll note in Table 8 that 34k unvaccinated died of COVID, compared to 14k vaccinated. Also, 83% of people are vaccinated, meaning the unvaccinated would have had to have died at even greater rates, at over 900% the rate of vaccinated. However, to further account for the elderly being at greater risk of COVID, you'll further note that Table 8 has an "age-standardised mortality rate", showing that on an individual basis, choosing to remain unvaccinated made someone 3230% more likely to die of COVID.

marban 5y ago

Biontech founder Livestream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nojokAK2vgU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nojokAK2vgU

freemint 5y ago
Damn thanks. I like the German accent.

silent_cal 5y ago

Lately I have been feeling like I'm in a dystopian fiction. This is corporatist propaganda, plain as day. How do you all not see it?

disambiguation 5y ago

I have a few relatives in the medical field (all vaxxed and boosted) that have explained the booster shot is just more of the same stuff - they haven't had time to make a new recipe.. so isn't this just the same study all over again? i.e 2 shots had high protection in the beginning and waned over time. Can we expect the same from the booster shot?

base698 5y ago
Omicron the Pfizer marketing press release. Easy way to sell another 160 million doses.
glial 5y ago
My assumption at this point is: probably, but the immune system is complicated so nobody's really sure.
tgtweak 5y ago
They are comparing 3 weeks after second dose and 4 weeks after 3rd dose. Presumably efficacy drop over time after vaccination is not in scope. Not enough time has passed under observation to actually determine if it will wane similarly.
dom96 5y ago
The important bit is Omicron. Since as you say the recipe is the same it is an open question whether these vaccines can offer the same protection as for delta (and for how many doses)
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
gonehome 5y ago
I think immune response doesn’t necessarily work that way. It’s possible the third shot could improve immunity for a longer time frame of 1-3yrs. I think I read there is also a new omicron specific mRNA vaccine in the works too.
rich_sasha 5y ago

tppiotrowski 5y ago

From reading this article I understood that they drew serum (blood plasma?) from 2 or 3 shot recipients and introduced a similar virus to COVID (pseudo virus?) into the serum because a pseudo virus acts similar but is less dangerous (contagious?) and then I’m not sure if they looked at amount of white blood cells produced. Would love for someone more familiar with the topic to give a layman’s interpretation.

mafuy 5y ago
A virus is introduced just to see if/how much it gets attacked. This correlates with the efficiency against the real virus, inside a human. It has nothing to do with the introduced virus being more or less contagious.

swayvil 5y ago

Pfizer and Biontech provide update on their big fat bank accounts, more like. Taking the opiates-vs-weed situation as a model, keep a lookout for somebody trying to acquire a piece of that sweet vax pie. (Flagged? Seriously? You can stick that flag where the sun doesn't shine)

stolenmerch 5y ago

If I'm reading this correctly, this is "protection against severe disease" and has little to do with transmission. The National Airport Data from Israel seems to suggest "the absolute number of infected individuals in the Vaccinated (boosted) group is likely to be at least as high as in the Unvaccinated" [0] So it seems to me that as long as we all remain obsessed with case numbers and not actual hospitalizations and death, this isn't going away, at least not anytime soon. I personally find this beyond depressing. [0] https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3963606 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3963606

detaro 5y ago
> all remain obsessed with case numbers and not actual hospitalizations and death It's a balance. E.g. Germanys current trouble is a direct consequence of official policy that had a core of "we only care about hospitalizations now", but ignored "... and based on case numbers and other statistics, what will future hospitalizations look like if we don't change anything about our approach" - not helped by election campaigns and politicians publicly admitting they haven't understood this whole "exponential" malarky yet. You really need to consider more than just one number.
- formerly_proven 5y ago
  The superseded government (by way of Jens Spahn) admitted that it held back on acting w.r.t. COVID in 2021 to avoid negative impact on their campaign. General inaction or adverse action in other areas (e.g. ICU staffing, leerdenker) did not help, either.
- hef19898 5y ago
  As someone who has quite some experience in running operations based on data, numbers and metrics the German approach to COVID on that front alone really puzzled me from the beginning. First the incidence of 50 that they pulled out of their ass for contact tracing, which was ignored basically the next day. Then the fact that resources weren't really increased to improve contract traceability. Then the decision to use a backward looking KPI, ICU occupation, to tackle a highly dynamic situation. Which also meant to ignore the incidence, the only real predictive metric we have. And it is good at predicting ICU occupation and severe cases when combined with vaccination levels. That's simply amateurish, and means all measures, not all of which are bad, are usually a couple of weeks late. Even better, the 7-day average incidence is based on the daily numbers. Those numbers are, what a surprise, limited to the testing capacities of laboratories, so the incidence is reported based on the day the test was analyzed, not when the sample was taken. This flattens the 7-day average curve. Well, until the new numbers are reported once labs git through their backlog. Thing is, the 7-day average is not changed once published. Again just amateurish.

ekianjo 5y ago

Follow the money?

avsteele 5y ago

If there is an expert in immunology here I'd really like to ask a question: Aren't antibody titers just one measure of immunity? Since ~everyone with just two shots get them a while ago, and people receiving the boosters are receiving them now, wouldn't we expect must higher levels of neutralizing antibodies in boosted people? I know the number of antibodies fades over time, (whether from vaccine or infection) but this doesn't mean you don't have lasting protection after this, right? Wouldn't it therefore be a mistake/misleading to conclude something specific about a level of protection from this titer data alone?

lambdaba 5y ago
Not the expert you were asking but one thing I know is natural immunity isn't just antibodies, which is why traditional inactivated vaccines yield more robust and long-lasting protection.
- javagram 5y ago
  FYI, vector vaccines and mRNA vaccines also create t-cell immunity , not just antibodies. It’s not just “inactivated vaccines” that do so.
  - lambdaba 5y ago
    I did not know that. Thank you. Possibly in lesser quantities though? It is only related to the spike protein in the case of Covid. As I understand the natural immunity has a different fingerprint even with covid?
    - javagram 5y ago
      "natural" immunity would create antibodies and immunity that may be related to non-spike proteins of COVID-19 (I believe this depends on your own body's response and the severity of infection exactly what is generated). The vector and mRNA vaccines only expose the spike protein (in various forms), so they don't generate immunity to other proteins of COVID-19.

bingohbangoh 5y ago

It's amazing what being shielded from prosecution does for a company's ability to innovate!

swayvil 5y ago

Now they want us to take the vax every 9 months forever. The pharmacorps have become our landlords. Which is the whole point of course.

robotmay 5y ago
Ignoring that the vaccines are free to the individual and therefore not at all similar to a landlord/tenant relationship, you always have the option of not taking it and dying, which is a cool loophole that gets you out of the implied contract. Life hack.
- swayvil 5y ago
  Pfizer's reaping 33billion on vax alone this year. Three guesses where that money comes from.
  - Covzire 5y ago
    Saying they're free is certainly misleading.
    - robotmay 5y ago
      I mean, I pay nothing for mine. I already pay tax to fund our health service, which purchases many drugs from many vendors for many diseases. This is just one more, and by all accounts it's comparatively cheap for the overall cost-savings when it keeps the vast majority of people out of the hospitals.
  - plainnoodles 5y ago
    Isn't that supposed to be how capitalism funds and incentivizes R&D though? There is market demand for a Thing, if you can figure out how to make Things then the market will reward that with profit. Honestly, for being the firm to develop a vaccine for a global pandemic, $33B in revenue sounds a little light? Apple made 83B in revenue just in Q3 alone and all they do is make phones that aren't even improving that much year-over-year.

jptech 5y ago

I dont want to sound like pro- conspiracy theory but the way they advertise the third shot after US gov declining it, makes you really wonder if this variant at least is man-made.

phgn 5y ago

Isn't it a little suspicious that they claim more of their existing vaccine will protect that well against the new variant? I don't want to question the rigour of their scientific testing, but it might be good to have independent tests done. Of course in parallel to giving out more booster shots, which can only help (by an unknown amount).

gandalfgreybeer 5y ago
If they said they people will need a new vaccine (which with the current mRNA tech will be relatively quick), I can imagine a similar comment pointing out suspicion that they want to sell something new. Doesn’t make sense for them to market the current vaccine as still working if it’s not. Eventually more real world data will be coming in and it’s not something to easily hide from.
fsh 5y ago
First neutralization test results posted by the Sigal group in Durban and the Ciesek group in Frankfurt agree with the BioNTech/Pfizer data.
- peteradio 5y ago
  Sigal did not test triple vaxxed.

hamburglar1 5y ago

Is there a comprehensive white-paper anywhere with sample sizes and error bars? Otherwise this seems like an anecdote. "The sera were collected from subjects 3 weeks after receiving the second dose or one month after receiving the third dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine" How do we know this study isn't just measuring the effect of that additional week? Also how many subjects was this sera pulled from? Are the subjects materially similar between the second and third dose groups? Not exactly surprising the people selling the third dose conclude that it is needed. It's like when the waiter recommends the most expensive option.

phkahler 5y ago
>> Is there a comprehensive white-paper anywhere with sample sizes and error bars? Otherwise this seems like an anecdote. It's marketing. When the vaccine effectiveness is waning the solution seems to be more of it If it only took 2 days to create the vaccine, why do they not have an updated one? Is there another in development that targets more than just the spike protein? Why is the entire defense that vaccine?
- marcosdumay 5y ago
  > If it only took 2 days to create the vaccine, why do they not have an updated one? There's a deafening silence every time somebody asks this. From what I've been able to see, it's because regulatory bodies won't accept an update vaccine without 8 months of testing, and the manufacturers are doing the testing, but at those delays there isn't really any point. Why regulatory bodies won't accept updated vaccines is the more interesting question.
  - tremon 5y ago
    The regulator is only tasked with approving the manufacturer's end results, I don't think they audit the production facilities or the design process. If the production process were fully transparent and the manufacturer could prove it didn't change anything except for "this one input tweak here", the approval process could likely be further streamlined -- but I don't think the authority of the regulator stretches that far, and manufacturers will likely claim trade secrets on their internal processes. Besides, I don't expect the anti-vax crowd to be very forgiving about mistakes or unforeseen consequences of an updated vaccine. I'm perfectly happy with the regulator having very strict controls for what gets approved for rapid rollout to the entire population.

mrkramer 5y ago

Every new virus evolution = More money for Big Pharma It's hell of a business.

yumraj 5y ago

Has anyone seen research around mix and match? As in which is better, stay with the original or get a different booster? Especially mRNA followed by J&J, and J&J followed by mRNA? Additionally, is there any benefit to Pfizer followed by Moderna and vice versa.

martythemaniak 5y ago
Most Canadians had a mix of either AZ and mRNA or the two mRNAs mixed. There's some studies you can search for, IIRC, the mRNA ones are basically interchangeable, and the AZ/mRNA mix gave better results.
detaro 5y ago
Yes, there's been some research in that direction, of course I can't find the link right now ... If I remember right, core result was that using the other mRNA for booster doesn't hurt and might provide a small benefit.
bluGill 5y ago
There hasn't been a complete matrix. Using moderna as the booster when you started with the other two is best. In the case of J&J moderna as a booster is significantly better, pfizer slightly. However if you had moderna to begin with we don't know. There are many other vaccines out there have haven't been studied at all as well.
- yumraj 5y ago
  In my case I had Moderna, so trying to decide whether to go with J&J or Pfizer. I guess I’ll give J&J a shot.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

Covzire 5y ago

I think HN has hit a new low, people are swallowing press releases and acting like they're unquestionable. Go ahead, try to question anything in the PR in this HN thread.

swayvil 5y ago

All the puppets will wisely nod their heads. And repeat whatever their facetwitter tells them. And inject whatever the priest tells them to inject. And wear the holy facecover. And think only good thoughts.

alexk307 5y ago
Are you OK?

millettjon 5y ago

This paper from Africa Health Research Institute shows a 41x reduction in effectiveness of pfizer vaccine for omicron. https://www.ahri.org/omicron-incompletely-escapes-immunity-induced-by-the-pfizer-vaccine/ https://www.ahri.org/omicron-incompletely-escapes-immunity-i... https://www.ahri.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/MEDRXIV-2021-267417v1-Sigal.pdf https://www.ahri.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/MEDRXIV-2021...

Brybry 5y ago
This preprint also shows reduced antibody neutralization of omicron in comparison to delta (including for double vaccinated + previous infection). Note the sample sizes for all these studies is small. 12 participants for the AHRI paper and 8 to 20 per group for this one. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.07.21267432v1.full.pdf https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.07.21267432v...
- swader999 5y ago
  Sample size doesn't really matter much in this kind of study.
  - peteradio 5y ago
    Ideally you'd match it to some population of interest. For my own medical affairs, I don't care what grand-pappy's results are here, I want to know how cousin Tim fairs.
  - Stanleyc23 5y ago
    Why not? I’m no statistician, so my basic understanding is you should always prefer bigger sample sizes to ensure statistically significant findings.
fsh 5y ago
This paper doesn't even attempt to measure effectiveness. It measures neutralization titers which is a totally different thing.

globular-toast 5y ago

When I see threads like these with all the buried/flagged comments I get strong "dangerous thinking" vibes. I won't be taking any more of these.

AccountToUse 5y ago
Any more booster shots? Any more vaccines?
- globular-toast 5y ago
  Booster shots. Something doesn't smell right. People on all sides are scared and I don't think rational thought is being applied any more.
  - TurkishPoptart 5y ago
    Sounds like your gut is in the right place. I keep my fingers crossed that our governor doesn't issue mandates for boosters for us folks in the public sector. I did my part with shots 1 and 2, but I am _not_ doing this again, for a variant which hasn't even killed anyone.
somehnacct3757 5y ago
If all it takes is hacker news comment threads to sway your opinions on medical topics, you were probably looking for an excuse to not take the vaccine already. Barely anyone here is an expert on this topic and if there were experts here, you would find them at the top of the thread - not buried behind moderation at the bottom. This is a website for fans of startups and tech. The closest we get to statistics is some middleware vendor optimized for p-hacking. Applying startup thinking to mature fields is a constant source of egg-on-face for silicon valley, as demonstrated famously by IoT safety devices. [0] The reason for large downvotes and flags in a thread like this is because there are a lot of people who think they know what they're talking about, but don't. The rigor to participate in this conversation is much higher than having a hot take on the latest MacBook. But that doesn't stop people from oversharing anyway. [0] https://gekk.info/articles/iot.html https://gekk.info/articles/iot.html

dougmwne 5y ago

My main concern is that the tests were done several weeks after the dose at the moment of peak immunity. No evidence I’m aware of of how long the neutralizing antibodies last for Omicron after a booster, though it would not have been particularly difficult to test samples at 2 week intervals to get a trend line. Ideally the higher protection would last at least a few month since that’s how long a infection wave usually lasts in the population.

djrogers 5y ago

Very curious as to how this was determined: "Although two doses of the vaccine may still offer protection against severe disease caused by the Omicron strain, it’s clear from these preliminary data that protection is improved with a third dose of our vaccine" Based on the latest data, not a single person has died from Omicron, so what are they using to back this up? It's possible that Omicron is less deadly than previous strains, so what they're claiming may be kinda like saying "our water is wetter"...

thehappypm 5y ago
Their specific test was about how the immune system reacts, it says nothing about how dangerous the virus is.

milansm 5y ago

Can someone tell if this would be a good personal/societal strategy: once you had covid, or fully vaxxed, it’s much better to be among other people, to be exposed to the virus and continuously train your immune system.

macintux 5y ago
Much of that depends on who else you’re exposing. I have to be careful because I’m helping my elderly mother, and no amount of vaccination can fully protect older individuals in poor health. If I didn’t have to worry about other people, I’d feel much more comfortable with my current vaccination status.
aserdf 5y ago
in this layman's view of similar past events that seems to be exactly what happens. look at previous pandemics - Russian, Spanish, Hong Kong. Very similar infection and mortality waves; elderly, predisposed, poor health were the first casualties. as it made its rounds the rest developed immunity over time, along with children being incredibly resilient. as the population turns over those with immunity have low impact encounters. The corresponding viruses from those pandemics continue to circulate today as seasonal flu and cold strains. just my 2 cents.