Australian Reports of the Virus Spread

[Quickstatus]

I find this fellow is saying some important things about Covid, covid vax and the science (or lack of) surrounding it. And here

 

[wandering_fred]

Ivermetin cheap by comparison

Not on the PBS (pre prohibition) and 8 3 mg tablets (where found) were $au28
Not worth the wandering
Fred

 

[Quickstatus]

$au28

For a course of treatment thats cheaper compared to molnupiravir

 

[RooFlyer]

Can I ask a ( genuine) question?

Framing:
I’m not afraid of getting Covid again, I’m back to living life as before with 4 doses in the arm. I view it now as one of the several respiratory diseases we have to put up with.

But what I don’t understand is the antipathy or negativity towards having another booster shot, say 6-12 months after your last shot or last infection. Ignoring issue of cost to public.

I assume that a current booster would be more targeted to current strains. Maybe a bivalent or even a quad?

In fact, why shouldn’t it be just like the annual flu ‘booster’? Targeted as possible to current strains; free to the vulnerable, people like me pay for it?

 

[Quickstatus]

Maybe a bivalent

The current bivalent have not been shown to be better over previous. The FDA EUA approval for bivalent was based on some mice trials and NO human data.
The current Covid variants are losing strength and I think less than flu (IMO)
Vinay Prasad is thought provoking. He talks about diminishing efficacy of repeated jabs in people who are at low risk and lack of FDA regulatory independence, and the corruption of the same. FDA commissioner resigns then appointed to FDA board
And David McCune re bivalent

 

[RooFlyer]

He talks about diminishing efficacy of repeated jabs in people who are at low risk

Yes, but - anyone - why doesn’t the ‘No point getting Covid boosters’ hold the same for the flu? I’m after TL; DR, not a link to another study

I can’t believe that if they came so far so quick with mRNA vaccines for Covid, why there shouldn’t be incremental improvements now after a few years. If the benefit is marginal, and I don’t mind paying, why shouldn’t I be allowed to get it?

Do we have an ocean of statistics and a desert of simple medicine?

 

[Princess Fiona]

Can I ask a ( genuine) question?

Framing:
I’m not afraid of getting Covid again, I’m back to living life as before with 4 doses in the arm. I view it now as one of the several respiratory diseases we have to put up with.

But what I don’t understand is the antipathy or negativity towards having another booster shot, say 6-12 months after your last shot or last infection. Ignoring issue of cost to public.

I assume that a current booster would be more targeted to current strains. Maybe a bivalent or even a quad?

In fact, why shouldn’t it be just like the annual flu ‘booster’? Targeted as possible to current strains; free to the vulnerable, people like me pay for it?

I have had 3 Covid jabs. Last one more than 12 months ago. I don’t have any health issues but I would be eligible for a booster.
Contracted Covid 6 months ago.
Wasn’t pleasant and a fairly long recovery.

I’m not in a rush to get a 4th vaccine.
I’ll wait for some more robust data.
The only thing that would make me jump sooner is restrictions to my employment (there are none currently beyond 3 jabs for HCW in NSW) or restrictions to travel.

 

[RooFlyer]

@Princess Fiona - first para of my post above yours. Comment? ( and maybe the last para )

 

[Pom-DownUnder]

Can I ask a ( genuine) question?

Framing:
I’m not afraid of getting Covid again, I’m back to living life as before with 4 doses in the arm. I view it now as one of the several respiratory diseases we have to put up with.

But what I don’t understand is the antipathy or negativity towards having another booster shot, say 6-12 months after your last shot or last infection. Ignoring issue of cost to public.

I assume that a current booster would be more targeted to current strains. Maybe a bivalent or even a quad?

In fact, why shouldn’t it be just like the annual flu ‘booster’? Targeted as possible to current strains; free to the vulnerable, people like me pay for it?

doesnt stop you getting it
doesnt stop you spreading it

these are both accepted facts (now).

it is new, no long term studies done due to that, arguable as to how effective it will be against the new bxx 1.5 since that has developed after the bivalent strain was designed.

basically: the vax has question marks around it, and since omicron the juice isnt worth the squeeze, imo.

 

[JohnM]

Can I ask a ( genuine) question?

Framing:
I’m not afraid of getting Covid again, I’m back to living life as before with 4 doses in the arm. I view it now as one of the several respiratory diseases we have to put up with.

But what I don’t understand is the antipathy or negativity towards having another booster shot, say 6-12 months after your last shot or last infection. Ignoring issue of cost to public.

I assume that a current booster would be more targeted to current strains. Maybe a bivalent or even a quad?

In fact, why shouldn’t it be just like the annual flu ‘booster’? Targeted as possible to current strains; free to the vulnerable, people like me pay for it?

While both influenza and Covid are viral, you are conflating two different things and assuming that the response to one is the appropriate response to the other. It is highly arguable that they are not.

In a nutshell, corona viruses are much more labile than influenza, making variant-specific vaccine development much more a race than for influenza, which is more a punt on which type(s) are going to erupt in a forthcoming 'season'.

Hence testing on only 8 mice providing the US FDA with enough 'data' to allow an EUA (emergency use authorisation) for the Covid 'bivalent' vaccine (which, incidentally, must already be out of date given the rapid evolution of new variants). Its reported effectiveness of 30% or less actually falls below the (at least previous 50%) WHO standards for therapy.

That's one of the reasons that in the past vaccines, using the conventional 'killed virus'-type methodology, against the 'common cold' (which can also include rhinoviruses) were not developed. By the time it could be developed - and properly RCT - tested - it would be ineffective - not to mention that most of the time a 'common cold' was just a (usually minor irritant) fact of 'winter life'.

Covid is (actually was), unfortunately, a particularly nasty type of coronavirus.

Whether we still need to be vaccinating willy-nilly is now a question wide open for debate.

Pfizer and Moderna shareholders may disagree...

OK, it's Wikipedia, but I think it's safe to assume that these entries have been well-moderated:

Influenza - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Coronavirus - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[RooFlyer]

doesnt stop you getting it
doesnt stop you spreading it

Thanks - no kidding?

 

[Princess Fiona]

Yes, but - anyone - why doesn’t the ‘No point getting Covid boosters’ hold the same for the flu? I’m after TL; DR, not a link to another study

I can’t believe that if they came so far so quick with mRNA vaccines for Covid, why there shouldn’t be incremental improvements now after a few years. If the benefit is marginal, and I don’t mind paying, why shouldn’t I be allowed to get it?

Do we have an ocean of statistics and a desert of simple medicine?

The point of getting the Flu vaccine is that it does decrease your chances of contracting Flu and subsequently spreading it to very vulnerable people.
The Flu vax isn’t full proof but it’s tweaked yearly for the most prevalent strains.

To the last point, I guess the science is continually evolving.
It’s likely that the initial Covid vaccination course has led to significantly reduced hospitalization and significantly reduced morbidity and mortality compared overall to an unvaccinated population.

What’s still being looked at is the benefit to the individual and others of repeated vaccines beyond the initial course.

This is my own opinion, I’m not an expert in any of this.

 

[RooFlyer]

While both influenza and Covid are viral, you are conflating two different things and assuming that the response to one is the appropriate response to the other.

More precisely, I was asking the question . But valiant effort

But rather than the endless bloody studies and rodent head-counts, seems to me the answer to my query is:

Unlike the annual flu vaccine

* Corona virus vaccines to tackle new variants can’t be developed and tested fast enough

* And if they could, the ‘average’ positive response isn’t good enough

* And even if it was, the CV vaccine only diminishes symptoms whereas the flu vaccine aids non transmission .

How-zat?

But personally, I’d still be happy to pay for the most current Covid vaccine even if it was 2 or 3 dominant variants out of date and only ‘on average’ 20% or so effective.

 

[Pom-DownUnder]

Thanks - no kidding?

You say that as if its taken as read, but when the big push was on in 2021 the exact opposite was spouted by nearly every government going.

This is a large part of the loss of faith, scientists openly lying to millions at a time. Had covid twice, happy to take my chances without any more new products.

 

[JohnM]

More precisely, I was asking the question . But valiant effort

But rather than the endless bloody studies and rodent head-counts, seems to me the answer to my query is:

Unlike the annual flu vaccine

* Corona virus vaccines to tackle new variants can’t be developed and tested fast enough

* And if they could, the ‘average’ positive response isn’t good enough

* And even if it was, the CV vaccine only diminishes symptoms whereas the flu vaccine aids non transmission .

How-zat?

But personally, I’d still be happy to pay for the most current Covid vaccine even if it was 2 or 3 dominant variants out of date and only ‘on average’ 20% or so effective.

Well, to that I would say: what's the point?

The new Covid variants are tending highly infectious, but mild in effect.

But there is increasing concern about possible heart-damage issues from mRNA vaccines, not to mention ever-diminishing efficacy.

Risk-benefit ratio is a personal thing.

For me, Covid (most likely original Omicron given where I was locked up) was a tickle in the throat - and I'm in an ostensibly high-risk cohort on an age basis.

I'm running with Covid and natural immunity.

 

[RAM]

Well, to that I would say: what's the point?

The new Covid variants are tending highly infectious, but mild in effect.

But there is increasing concern about possible heart-damage issues from mRNA vaccines, not to mention ever-diminishing efficacy.

Risk-benefit ratio is a personal thing.

For me, Covid (most likely original Omicron given where I was locked up) was a tickle in the throat - and I'm in an ostensibly high-risk cohort on an age basis.

I'm running with Covid and natural immunity.

Horses for courses (and how many horses end up breaking down in a race & being shot....).

Did not get Covid-19 in 2020 nor 2021.

Had 3rd shot in early Jan 2022 and caught Covid-19 around March 28th to 30th.

Caught Covid-19 a 2nd time & tested positive on Nov 8th.

Was waiting to have 4th shot until mid December to (theoretically) cover Jan 2023 overseas holiday based on latest info seen that vaccines seem to now lose most efficacy within 6 weeks of dosage (& as take around 2 weeks before 'protected' seems to only provide a 4 week window - if those reports are accurate).

BTW - wore a mask the entire time flying from SYD to Europe apart from 'speed eating' sessions (3x).

Any betting on how long until my next brush with Covid-19?
_________________________________________

Until Covid-19 - I had been brought up to believe that a vaccine not only stopped you from contracting some disease but also stopped you transmitting it to others. Such as smallpox vaccine, rubella, hooping cough, polio, HPV etc etc.

This contrasted with the "Flu shot" which I do not recall ever previously being called a vaccine.

Also that drugs that reduced the severity of a disease were not known as vaccines.

How behind the times I must have been, or at least was not aware of the new definition created to suit the 2020 circumstances.

 

[N860CR]

Well, to that I would say: what's the point?

The new Covid variants are tending highly infectious, but mild in effect.

And this is the issue with hysteria, it removes logic. As many of us have been saying for a long time; “what is it that we’re actually scared of?”. Some clearly just cannot let go.

 

[RooFlyer]

You say that as if its taken as read, but when the big push was on in 2021 the exact opposite was spouted by nearly every government going.

I’m sorry, I’m not aware of any government, at any time, saying that Covid vaccines will stop you getting the disease, and/or stopping you spreading it. Maybe a flaky third world government here and there, but certainly none of the rational Western governments. With the emphasis on rational

But there is increasing concern about possible heart-damage issues from mRNA vaccines,

OK, that’s possibly the most relevant point to my actual initial query. I’ll ask my cardiologist next time I see him.

You know how conservative I am. When I travel I have every vaccine going and then some. I don’t mind getting and paying for a vaccine which may give me even a 10 or 20% marginal improvement in having an actual mild outcome as opposed to something which may lay me up for a day or three while on holiday. To me, that’s a no brainer.

Risk-benefit ratio is a personal thing.

Exactly. So I return to my question - why shouldn’t I be allowed to have an additional booster if I choose to and if I pay for it (assuming it’s safe which is something I probably should’ve said in the first place)

And this is the issue with hysteria, it removes logic. As many of us have been saying for a long time; “what is it that we’re actually scared of?”. Some clearly just cannot let go.

I’m not sure if they point is directed to me - apologies if not, - but I was very careful to try and frame my question in a calm and considerate way ( see ‘framing’ in post 34,424) stating that I have no lingering fear of Covid but just had a genuine query. You’ll see that I’m not scared of Covid in the slightest. But I am wondering why I shouldn’t be allowed to have a booster that may improve my chances of having a less interrupted holiday, if it’s safe, and if I pay for it. Why should anyone else care about that?

 

[Tropic]

I’m not in a rush to get a 4th vaccine.

Interested in your views on points raised by Prof Robert Clancy in the YT discussion I posted - esp the implications for immune tolerance due to repeated dosing with mRNA "vaccines" and the issues regarding dose and duration of response with mRNA vs traditional vaccines, and the point about the systemic distribution of antigen and its role in chronic inflamation?

 

[drron]

First of all you can't compare the Flu vaccine (and in medical circles it has always been called a vaccine not shot) and the mRNA covid vaccines as they are an entirely new type of vaccine and we don't have any long term experience with them. It has been shown after the third covid experience - either 3 vaccine doses or 2 plus covid - subsequent boosters have less and less antibody stimulation. The Bivalent vaccine at best decreases infection by at best 40%. Within 100 days that has fallen to 20%. But in the initial Phase 3 trials if that had been the result they would not have been approved. The cut off point was 50%.

the other problem was a study that followed up the participants in the Phase 3 trials of the covid vaccine. All cause mortality in the AZ,J&J trials was down ` 50%. However in the mRNA trials all cause mortality was trending up relative risk of death in the mRNA trials versus placebo was 1.03 but in the Attenuated virus trials it was 0.38. A significant difference.

Now this is a preliminary trial and should be followed up but I am unaware whether this is happening. Now Politifact has debunked this trial as most deaths in the mRNA trials were non covid. However that is the whole point of this study. Ignores the fact that in the mRNA trials the majority of extra deaths in the vaccinated were cardiac. And what is happening around the world now? An increase in cardiac deaths particularly sudden death. It may be due to covid itself but then why didn'y this happen in the AZ and J&J trials.
I have linked this trial before and this time could only find the pre print study. you can download the full trial from here.

Randomised Clinical Trials of COVID-19 Vaccines: Do Adenovirus-Vector Vaccines Have Beneficial Non-Specific Effects?

To examine the possible non-specific effects (NSEs) of the novel COVID-19 vaccines, we reviewed the randomised control trials (RCTs) of mRNA and adenovirus-vect

papers.ssrn.com

The other thing ignored in the articles on vaccines is cellular immunity. i posted the study from UQ recently which suggested that cellular immunity is the main reason apart from viral mutation leading to less severe disease. Also look at the interview with Robery Clancy that was posted by @Tropic in post 34418.
I have known Robert Clancy since the early 70s. He was the first Clinical Immunologist at RPAH. after I moved to maitland he came to Newcastle university as the first Professor of Pathology. Whilst there he was responsible for producing a vaccine against HIB which was a major cause of morbidity and mortality in COPD.

And just why is the bivalent vaccine being pushed hard?

"The most expensive price per dose paid by the government was for the recent purchase of bivalent booster doses from each manufacturer, including 105 million doses at $30.48 per dose from Pfizer and 66 million doses at $26.36 per dose from Moderna (or a weighted average price per dose of $28.89). This represented a 56% increase in the price per dose for Pfizer, compared to the initial Pfizer purchase price, and a 73% increase for Moderna. In total, the U.S. has purchased 171 million doses of the bivalent booster at a cost of $4.9 billion."

How Much Could COVID-19 Vaccines Cost the U.S. After Commercialization?

This analysis illustrates the potential total cost of Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines, based on their publicly-announced expected prices, once they enter the U.S. commercial market. It compare…

www.kff.org