19 ms·

Moderna presentation on the vaccine from ReSViNET Conference (RSVVW 2023): https://s29.q4cdn.com/435878511/files/doc_presentations/2023/02/rsvvw-p301-ia-oral-p

by fsagx 3y ago

Moderna presentation on the vaccine from ReSViNET Conference (RSVVW 2023): https://s29.q4cdn.com/435878511/files/doc_presentations/2023/02/rsvvw-p301-ia-oral-presentation_final-update.pdf https://s29.q4cdn.com/435878511/files/doc_presentations/2023... some commentary summarized from alexberenson.substack.com : Nine people who received the shot got RSV. Fifty-five who received the placebo did. Thus the 17,500 shots prevented 46 cases of RSV. It shows people who received the jab instead of the placebo reported an extra 10,156 side effects such as headache or fatigue. Those side effects included an extra 455 severe effects, rated as Grade 3 or worse. Side effects are rated on a five-point scale, with Grade 5 being death and Grade 4 usually requiring immediate medical treatment and hospitalization. Grade 3 side effects are defined as “severe or medically significant.” For example, a Grade 3 fever is usually defined as over about 102 degrees, while a Grade 4 is over 104. In other words, a single Grade 3 side effect is likely to be considerably more severe than a case of RSV for most adults. Again, Moderna’s shot caused 10 of those side effects for every RSV infection it prevented. https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/how-can-modernas-rsv-jab-be-approvable https://alexberenson.substack.com/p/how-can-modernas-rsv-jab...

markus92 3y ago
Note: OP posted about the GSK vaccine, not the Moderna one.
philjohn 3y ago
This feels like something that will be of benefit to the immunocompromised, or with conditions such as Asthma (RSV can be super non fun with Asthma)
- peteradio 3y ago
  I wish there was a way to determine more stratified outcomes according to potential correlates... without having to perform high statistics human trials. I imagine that kind of detail is released after some time, I wonder how long that usually is.
icegreentea2 3y ago
The approved vaccine (Arexvy) is a GSK vaccine. It's also not an mRNA vaccine - it's recombinant subunit vaccine (ie, you tinker with microbes to spew out relevant pieces of the virus which you harvest and purify). Edit: Also your linked commentary basically completely hinges on what we believe the risk of RSV to actually be (fair). The lower bound estimate provided by tallying up actual death certificates is just that - a lower bound. The linked study for that number dedicates a huge pile of its discussion section to the very weakness of just using death certificates. I'm not saying that the 14k number must be true, but it's also quite unlikely that the 35 per year number is the right order of magnitude as well.
evancox100 3y ago
(I vouched for this post because I think it's important to actually address these issue head on with facts and not just shout people down.) Berenson's numbers based on the presentation you shared seem to check out, but the interpretation seems odd. Just looking at how many cases were averted doesn't tell you what types of tail risks were averted. It may be a worthwhile trade off to have 10x as many "severe side effects" in exchange for having many many fewer severe, debilitating, or fatal infections. Also, Berenson is looking at the ratio of severe side effects induced to RSV cases prevented. But the vaccine side effects only happen once, at the time of injection, while the vaccine may continue to confer long term benefits. So this ratio is highly dependent on the time period in question.
- breck 3y ago
  > But the vaccine side effects only happen once, at the time of injection, while the vaccine may continue to confer long term benefits. So this ratio is highly dependent on the time period in question. One must be extremely skeptical of these kind of claims now, though, given what we just went through as a society. The side effects of the mRNA vaccines seemed to become uncapped (some people I know have now received 4 shots), and the long term benefits went to nil (if not negative), commonly thought due to mutation. So the question is what are the odds that it really will be just "once" and what are the odds that it will really provide protection against RSV, and future mutated strands. It seems to me the vaccine industry should be put in a severe category of "distrusted entities" until we have significant improvements in our symbolic infrastructure to the point where they could be trusted again.
  - burnished 3y ago
    Are you suggesting that the limited duration of protection and hence the need for followups (like flu shots) is.. the result of a conspiracy? Its not clear why you think they should be 'distrusted' which calls your judgement into question.
    - stevehawk 3y ago
      the common argument I heard from the anti-vaxxers was that the mRNA COVID vaccine was obviously bad/fake/contrived because it required a booster and "no other vaccine requires a booster!" And if you mention tetanus, hepatitis or meningococcal, or other vaccines that required a booster/multiple shots then you just get ignored. Ignorant gonna ignorant.
version_five 3y ago
Like it or not, these sort of not-very-effective-vaccines-for-mostly-mild-diseases are going to be a very tough sell for a lot of people post-covid. I assume there will be ongoing attempts to ride of covid's coattails to get them pushed or mandated wherever possible. The real concern is that if we ever get new effective vaccines for bad diseases, there are going to be lots of people not taking them after all the abuse of trust that's happened. At this point, how do you even know who to belive?
- Spooky23 3y ago
  Honestly, who cares. If you think reducing likelihood of getting really sick by 80%, especially if you’re vulnerable is no big deal, and you want to suffer or spend your life savings on unnecessary medical care because some YouTuber told you so, that’s your problem.
  - peteradio 3y ago
    If you want to base your medical decisions on wildly average data that's your problem.
  - burnished 3y ago
    I don't think I would agree broadly with the person you are responding to (riding the coattails of covid is a phrase that paints a picture), but this narrow point has merit due to the way herd immunity works. It is genuinely a matter of community health. No idea what to do about it given all the absolutely unhinged perspectives on the topic, but still, I care.
- peteradio 3y ago
  Then one time, I believe it was July ... no August, there's a knock on the door. Open the door and there's this cute little girl scout. Ah she was so adorable with her little pigtails and all. And she says to me "how would you like to buy some cookies?" I said "well what kind do you have?" She had thin mints, graham crunchy thins, oatmeal raisin... I said "we'll take a graham crunchy. How much will that be?" She looks at me says "I'll need about three fitty." WELL! IT WAS ABOUT THAT TIME I NOTICED THIS LITTLE GIRL SCOUT WAS ABOUT 8 STORIES TALL CRUSTACEAN FROM THE PALEDOZOLIC ERA! THE LOCHNESS MONSTER!
tikkun 3y ago
Does someone have the same stats re side effects for the approved vaccine?
Spooky23 3y ago
If you look at the actual data ( https://s29.q4cdn.com/435878511/files/doc_presentations/2023/02/rsvvw-p301-ia-oral-presentation_final-update.pdf https://s29.q4cdn.com/435878511/files/doc_presentations/2023... ), 0.6% with the vaccine had a grade 3 fever, compared to 0.4% of placebo. The population in question is 60+ or 70+. RSV can be very significant in that population, even in young kids, it is a virus that shuts down schools. The author is a well known anti-vax guy, so I’d assume he’s presenting the most negative scenario possible.
pastor_bob 3y ago
No skin in the game, but a cursory look at this article indicates it is bogus. Citing supposed death certifications is a really disingenuous tactic IMO: >A review of death certificates found that RSV kills about 35 American adults a year National Foundation for Infectious Diseases claims it kills 14,000[0]: > RSV is second only to influenza as a cause of medically significant respiratory tract illnesses in adults7,8 and is estimated to cause 177,000 hospitalizations and 14,000 annual deaths in US adults age 65 years and older [0]https://www.nfid.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/rsv-report.pdf https://www.nfid.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/rsv-report.p...
- peteradio 3y ago
  [flagged]

by fsagx 3y ago

markus92 3y ago

Note: OP posted about the GSK vaccine, not the Moderna one.

philjohn 3y ago

This feels like something that will be of benefit to the immunocompromised, or with conditions such as Asthma (RSV can be super non fun with Asthma)

peteradio 3y ago
I wish there was a way to determine more stratified outcomes according to potential correlates... without having to perform high statistics human trials. I imagine that kind of detail is released after some time, I wonder how long that usually is.

icegreentea2 3y ago

The approved vaccine (Arexvy) is a GSK vaccine. It's also not an mRNA vaccine - it's recombinant subunit vaccine (ie, you tinker with microbes to spew out relevant pieces of the virus which you harvest and purify). Edit: Also your linked commentary basically completely hinges on what we believe the risk of RSV to actually be (fair). The lower bound estimate provided by tallying up actual death certificates is just that - a lower bound. The linked study for that number dedicates a huge pile of its discussion section to the very weakness of just using death certificates. I'm not saying that the 14k number must be true, but it's also quite unlikely that the 35 per year number is the right order of magnitude as well.

evancox100 3y ago

(I vouched for this post because I think it's important to actually address these issue head on with facts and not just shout people down.) Berenson's numbers based on the presentation you shared seem to check out, but the interpretation seems odd. Just looking at how many cases were averted doesn't tell you what types of tail risks were averted. It may be a worthwhile trade off to have 10x as many "severe side effects" in exchange for having many many fewer severe, debilitating, or fatal infections. Also, Berenson is looking at the ratio of severe side effects induced to RSV cases prevented. But the vaccine side effects only happen once, at the time of injection, while the vaccine may continue to confer long term benefits. So this ratio is highly dependent on the time period in question.

breck 3y ago
> But the vaccine side effects only happen once, at the time of injection, while the vaccine may continue to confer long term benefits. So this ratio is highly dependent on the time period in question. One must be extremely skeptical of these kind of claims now, though, given what we just went through as a society. The side effects of the mRNA vaccines seemed to become uncapped (some people I know have now received 4 shots), and the long term benefits went to nil (if not negative), commonly thought due to mutation. So the question is what are the odds that it really will be just "once" and what are the odds that it will really provide protection against RSV, and future mutated strands. It seems to me the vaccine industry should be put in a severe category of "distrusted entities" until we have significant improvements in our symbolic infrastructure to the point where they could be trusted again.
- burnished 3y ago
  Are you suggesting that the limited duration of protection and hence the need for followups (like flu shots) is.. the result of a conspiracy? Its not clear why you think they should be 'distrusted' which calls your judgement into question.
  - stevehawk 3y ago
    the common argument I heard from the anti-vaxxers was that the mRNA COVID vaccine was obviously bad/fake/contrived because it required a booster and "no other vaccine requires a booster!" And if you mention tetanus, hepatitis or meningococcal, or other vaccines that required a booster/multiple shots then you just get ignored. Ignorant gonna ignorant.

version_five 3y ago

Like it or not, these sort of not-very-effective-vaccines-for-mostly-mild-diseases are going to be a very tough sell for a lot of people post-covid. I assume there will be ongoing attempts to ride of covid's coattails to get them pushed or mandated wherever possible. The real concern is that if we ever get new effective vaccines for bad diseases, there are going to be lots of people not taking them after all the abuse of trust that's happened. At this point, how do you even know who to belive?

Spooky23 3y ago
Honestly, who cares. If you think reducing likelihood of getting really sick by 80%, especially if you’re vulnerable is no big deal, and you want to suffer or spend your life savings on unnecessary medical care because some YouTuber told you so, that’s your problem.
- peteradio 3y ago
  If you want to base your medical decisions on wildly average data that's your problem.
- burnished 3y ago
  I don't think I would agree broadly with the person you are responding to (riding the coattails of covid is a phrase that paints a picture), but this narrow point has merit due to the way herd immunity works. It is genuinely a matter of community health. No idea what to do about it given all the absolutely unhinged perspectives on the topic, but still, I care.
peteradio 3y ago
Then one time, I believe it was July ... no August, there's a knock on the door. Open the door and there's this cute little girl scout. Ah she was so adorable with her little pigtails and all. And she says to me "how would you like to buy some cookies?" I said "well what kind do you have?" She had thin mints, graham crunchy thins, oatmeal raisin... I said "we'll take a graham crunchy. How much will that be?" She looks at me says "I'll need about three fitty." WELL! IT WAS ABOUT THAT TIME I NOTICED THIS LITTLE GIRL SCOUT WAS ABOUT 8 STORIES TALL CRUSTACEAN FROM THE PALEDOZOLIC ERA! THE LOCHNESS MONSTER!

tikkun 3y ago

Does someone have the same stats re side effects for the approved vaccine?

Spooky23 3y ago

If you look at the actual data ( https://s29.q4cdn.com/435878511/files/doc_presentations/2023/02/rsvvw-p301-ia-oral-presentation_final-update.pdf https://s29.q4cdn.com/435878511/files/doc_presentations/2023... ), 0.6% with the vaccine had a grade 3 fever, compared to 0.4% of placebo. The population in question is 60+ or 70+. RSV can be very significant in that population, even in young kids, it is a virus that shuts down schools. The author is a well known anti-vax guy, so I’d assume he’s presenting the most negative scenario possible.

pastor_bob 3y ago

No skin in the game, but a cursory look at this article indicates it is bogus. Citing supposed death certifications is a really disingenuous tactic IMO: >A review of death certificates found that RSV kills about 35 American adults a year National Foundation for Infectious Diseases claims it kills 14,000[0]: > RSV is second only to influenza as a cause of medically significant respiratory tract illnesses in adults7,8 and is estimated to cause 177,000 hospitalizations and 14,000 annual deaths in US adults age 65 years and older [0]https://www.nfid.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/rsv-report.pdf https://www.nfid.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/rsv-report.p...

peteradio 3y ago
[flagged]