Posted on 08/17/2021 9:32:01 PM PDT by NoLibZone
A new preprint study raises concerns about vaccine efficacy against the Delta variant, and it seems like the Biden administration is getting worried.
The study, conducted by the Mayo Clinic, found that the Pfizer vaccine was only 42 percent effective against infection in July.
“If that’s not a wake up call, I don’t know what is,” a senior Biden official told Axios.
Overall, the study found that the Moderna vaccine was 86 percent effective against infection and Pfizer’s was 76 percent; Pfizer’s was 85 percent effective against hospitalization, while Moderna’s was 92 percent.
However, the vaccines’ effectiveness against infection dropped sharply in July to 76 percent with Moderna and 42 percent with Pfizer.
This was the case in states like Minnesota and Florida.
“Based on the data that we have so far, it is a combination of both [a reduction in effectiveness over time and a reduced effectiveness against Delta],” said Venky Soundararajan, a lead author in the study.
...that the "vaccine" sucks?
Pfizer is just following the Gillette Safety Razor marketing model.
First jabs (razor) = FREE
Extra blades (boosters) = Someone’s gonna pay.
See it's science.
Buy Pfizer. A drop in effectiveness = more boosters = more doses = more money.
I suspect Covid will be decommisioned as a crisis by Labor Day.
Don’t worry - if the Taliban variant overruns the country, Joek won’t have your back.
Dropped in effectiveness????
Or just not lying about the effectiveness as much?
(Virus sucked about viruses too, come to think of it.)
I can hardly wait for the "Pfizer ME" version.
“… Overall, the study found that the Moderna vaccine was 86 percent effective against infection and Pfizer’s was 76 percent; Pfizer’s was 85 percent effective against hospitalization, while Moderna’s was 92 percent.
However, the vaccines’ effectiveness against infection dropped sharply in July to 76 percent with Moderna and 42 percent with Pfizer.
This was the case in states like Minnesota and Florida.…”
*********************************************************
This study compared the outcome results of three large groups each with the same number of individuals. One group consisted of Moderna fully vaccinated individuals; the second group consisted of Pfizer fully vaccinated individuals; and the third group consisted of NON-vaccinated individuals. Each group’s participants were, at the beginning, matched one-for-one with the participants in the other two groups so the groups consisted of the same percentage mix of characteristics (age, comorbidities, etc).
IMHO, this was a well planned study when it came to successfully comparing the evolving efficacies of the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines. Moderna is CLEARLY hugely superior to Pfizer, particularly when it came to July’s experience (when the Delta variant exploded) — it wasn’t even close.
Where the study was deficient was selection of the “control” group’s participants. That control group consisted individuals that were all unvaccinated. But there was NO ATTEMPT to determine whether these unvaccinated individuals ALREADY had NATURAL immunity from prior infection. The individuals who already had natural immunity should have been excluded from being selected as participants in the 3rd group so that the TRUE evolving efficacy of the Moderna and Pfizer vaccine groups could have been accurately determined. Better yet a 4th one-for-one matched group could have been set up consisting solely of unvaccinated individuals who had previously been infected and thus had natural immunity. Then the evolving “efficacy” of natural immunity could also be determined relative to the determined evolving efficacy of the Moderna and Pfizer cohorts.
Since preexisting natural immunity was not considered the “absolute”efficacy of both the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines were UNDERSTATED since the control group consisted of both people WITH natural immunity and people WITHOUT natural immunity. As time went on, the proportion of the control group that had natural immunity would increase as time went on.
IMHO, natural immunity continues to get the “short end of the stick” when it comes to carefully controlled studies.
bookmark
Doesn’t stop infection
Doesn’t stop spread
Causes serious side effects
Tell me again why anyone must take it.
I’m waiting.
How do they measure effectiveness? Bet it has a lot of flexibility.
That was the first thing I thought of.
“Doesn’t stop infection
Doesn’t stop spread…”
********************************
You need to read for more UNDERSTANDING. The Mayo Clinic study determined that, in July 2021, the Moderna vaccine was 76% effective in PREVENTING detectable infections and the Pfizer vaccine was 42% effective in preventing detectable infections.
“Preventing infection” means stopping the virus from successfully infecting a person. If you have not been infected, you can NOT be infectious and thus can NOT spread the virus.
“How do they measure effectiveness? Bet it has a lot of flexibility.”
*******************************************************************
You can’t tell from this article since it doesn’t cover that and there’s no link to the actual study preprint. Another FR thread on the Mayo study had a link to the actual Mayo study preprint and it said they did regular swabs of all participants so they’d even pick up the asymptomatic infections and not miss them.
otoh, J and J has been shown to stand up well against Delta - 87% effective hospitalization, especially robust against Delta (phase 3 Ensemble study) across all demographics; realworld: 71% and 96% (South Africa Sisonke study 500K HCW subjects)
Stealing that!:)
Once again the tale of two tales:
These Israeli COVID-19 Graphs Prove Pfizer Vaccine Works
Like anything with Covid, choose your poison.
Vaxed are Typhoid Marys
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.