The more times the virus replicates the more chance a mutation develops so getting people vaccinated reduces the hosts available to infect and replicate. Also vaccinated may have greatly reduced numbers in each person compared to the unvaxed if they do become infected.
No but if the 3rd booster is increasing the efficacy back well into the 90% range when delta had knocked the 2 shot down a peg, why did the vote fail so miserably yesterday?
I'd assume it's based on overall need for it. My understanding is they don't believe all eligible ages need a booster at 8 months. Only those 65+ or have other conditions that make them a higher risk.
Risk vs reward was judged not to be worth distributing and disbursing the correct doses to the general population.
I don’t know, it just seems like if you have the opportunity to push 65 or 75% efficacy back to 90%, you take it. Settling on “good enough” doesn’t really sit well with me.
Variants are the natural result of the virus spreading. Since the vast majority of new cases are in the unvaccinated population that means the majority of spread is the result of not enough people being vaccinated. The more the virus spreads the greater the chance of a negative mutation. I have not seen any evidence that the variants were the results of vaccination.
What is the risk? I’m genuinely curious if there were any side effects more than the standard side effect with those that received the 3rd trial. If there wasn’t anything significant I’m not sure what the risk is.
There’s no indication the Pfizer or Moderna vaccinations dropped to 65 or even 75% efficacy. The overall efficacy is still higher than that and that includes the 65+ population who are more likely to have a breakthrough infection. Not sure they have published a number but I assume that’s why they only approved for 65+ and high risk.
Sorry, this 35K breakthrough cases is from where?
No one has. But that won’t stop some from speculating in the interest of sowing seeds of doubt.
I don't know if there's a risk. I was under the impression that there simply isn't enough evidence (yet) that a third shot will improve the odds that much. No one's saying it won't, they simply don't have enough information to say it will. If two Tylenol are good, three must be great and four must be incredible! What could possibly go wrong?
www.forbes.com
The article mentions Delta, but to me it's not clear if the drop off in efficacy is due to time or Delta being introduced during the data gathering.
In terms of the bigger picture, getting more people vaccinated across the world first would be a better use of those extra doses.
www.nature.com
I may have missed a post but I didn’t think anyone made that claim?
You missed a post. Another poster suggested that variants were coming from the vaccinated and spreading to the unvaccinated.
This post does not mention Delta specifically though false claims attempting to tie vaccinations to the development of Delta and other variants are circulating on social media. The Forbes article does discuss the situation in terms of multiple variants and variants in general.
The Delta variant was cooked up in the basement of a DC pizzeria. Prove me wrong.
The Forbes article seemed to imply it had something to do with office parties and photocopiers.
