Pfizer vaccine antibodies gone by 7 months

[WhiteBuffaloATM]

all vax in history require boosting…… follow mfr.guidelines……. does not matter if booster required after seven months or seven years…. booster will be improved and protect better against latest variants….

covid is different…get used to it…..be flexible in your thinking…...this is not the 1960’s …...covid is being mastered ….scientific miracle being performed here…….be grateful…… originally “they” said no vaccine possible ! now we’re moaning about early boosters !

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, codemonkey said:

Seems to be an ever changing landscape since there is so much to learn about the safety and performance of the mRNA vaccines. Too much misinformation, changing daily. NOBODY knows unless you "know". Pfizer seems to be under performing,  dwindling to 6 month protection now. But no worries, new vaccines could be on the horizon according to pfizer. Could become like 90 day reporting soon, get your jab every 90 days. Ted Nugent nails it in his recent interview, complete with the sheep impersonation.

https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/575279-study-shows-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine-effectiveness-declines-after-six-months

https://news.yahoo.com/biontechs-ceo-says-world-might-113847622.html

Pfizer vaccine 90% effective against hospitalization, death six months later, study says

The Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine continues to be 90 percent effective in protecting against hospitalization and death from covid-19 up to six months after the second dose, even in the face of the widespread delta variant, a major study has found.

The study was based on research from Pfizer and the Kaiser Permanente Southern California health system and analyzed more than 3.4 million people who were members between December 2020 and August 2021. The findings, published in the Lancet medical journal on Monday, had been released in August but were not peer-reviewed until this week.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/10/05/covid-delta-variant-live-updates/

[Pravda]

Despite availability of vaccines US death toll so far is higher in 2021 than in 2020.

 

Yes, we all know US people can be a bit stubborn, but still a large percentage of population has been vaccinated. Then why so many deaths?

 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/10/05/covid-vaccination-mask-mandates-health-care-workers/5994168001/

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, Pravda said:

Despite availability of vaccines US death toll so far is higher in 2021 than in 2020.

 

Yes, we all know US people can be a bit stubborn, but still a large percentage of population has been vaccinated. Then why so many deaths?

 

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/10/05/covid-vaccination-mask-mandates-health-care-workers/5994168001/

Firstly,vaccinations only began in mid december

Secondly, Delta is far more contagious than earlier version. It hit the US starting in June

Now contemplate these graphs

 

 

[placeholder]

These 3 sentences are from the finding sections of the actual [Pfizer vaccine] study

 

"For fully vaccinated individuals, effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infections was 73% (95% CI 72–74) and against COVID-19-related hospital admissions was 90% (89–92). Effectiveness against infections declined from 88% (95% CI 86–89) during the first month after full vaccination to 47% (43–51) after 5 months. Among sequenced infections, vaccine effectiveness against infections of the delta variant was high during the first month after full vaccination (93% [95% CI 85–97]) but declined to 53% [39–65] after 4 months. "

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02183-8/fulltext

 

Here is the definition of "effectiveness" as it is used in epidemiology:

"Vaccine efficacy/effectiveness (VE) is measured by calculating the risk of disease among vaccinated and unvaccinated persons and determining the percentage reduction in risk of disease among vaccinated persons relative to unvaccinated persons. The greater the percentage reduction of illness in the vaccinated group, the greater the vaccine efficacy/effectiveness. The basic formula is written as:

https://www.cdc.gov/csels/dsepd/ss1978/lesson3/section6.html

 

 

[tgw]

On 10/5/2021 at 7:37 PM, WhiteBuffaloATM said:

all vax in history require boosting…

that's not true

[WhiteBuffaloATM]

placeholder: no. i discovered a glaring flaw in the Headline & Article referencing the study. study says 90% effective against Hospital but says Nothing ( from your extract) about DEATHS Protection which must by rough extrapolation be up around the 95-97% mark, being forced to guess, despite this marvellous but incomplete study. you also need to retract your ludicrous post statement that all unvaxxed die. 

[placeholder]

19 minutes ago, WhiteBuffaloATM said:

placeholder: no. i discovered a glaring flaw in the Headline & Article referencing the study. study says 90% effective against Hospital but says Nothing ( from your extract) about DEATHS Protection which must by rough extrapolation be up around the 95-97% mark, being forced to guess, despite this marvellous but incomplete study. you also need to retract your ludicrous post statement that all unvaxxed die. 

Where did I make the statement that all unvaxxed die?If I did, I certainly didn't do it intentionally. Please, show me where I wrote that. As for you using my extract as your sole source of information, what can I say but huh? Are you aware that we are allowed to quote only 3 sentences from sources? But I do include links. Nothing stopping you from clicking on them.

And, no,  the headline was correct. It used "effective" the way epidemiologists use it and the way it is used now by the media to report on covid statistics. It did not in any way signify that "study was 3.4 million so 10% ,thats 340,000, fully vaxxed with Pfizer ended up dead or in hospital."

Edited October 6, 2021 by placeholder

[WhiteBuffaloATM]

placeholder: you said “ Basically 100% is the rate at which unvaccinated people die and are hospitalized. So for vaccinated people the rate would be 10% of that.”

 

Now I could have misunderstood that first sentence…..its now less clear what it means although I accept 2nd sentence but cant manage the reverse thinking needed i think to properly understand 1st sentence……

 

your preceding attached article said 

“Pfizer vaccine 90% effective against hospitalization, death six months later, study says

The Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine continues to be 90 percent effective in protecting against hospitalization and death ……”

 

Hence I challenged this in my original post as it could have meant as little as 90% effective against only Death, which case would have been wrong.

 

 

[cdemundo]

On 10/6/2021 at 8:35 AM, WhiteBuffaloATM said:

placeholder: you said “ Basically 100% is the rate at which unvaccinated people die and are hospitalized. So for vaccinated people the rate would be 10% of that.”

 

Now I could have misunderstood that first sentence…..its now less clear what it means although I accept 2nd sentence but cant manage the reverse thinking needed i think to properly understand 1st sentence……

 

your preceding attached article said 

“Pfizer vaccine 90% effective against hospitalization, death six months later, study says

The Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus vaccine continues to be 90 percent effective in protecting against hospitalization and death ……”

 

Hence I challenged this in my original post as it could have meant as little as 90% effective against only Death, which case would have been wrong.

 

 

“ Basically 100% is the rate at which unvaccinated people die and are hospitalized. So for vaccinated people the rate would be 10% of that.”

 

This is correct.  I haven't seen it expressed this way but it is correct.

What is the 90% efficacy 90% of?

It is 90% protection compared to the number of cases in the unvaccinated group. So yes 90% compared to placebo group means for purposes of comparison the placebo group is 100%.

So whatever the monitored event was (usually symptomatic disease) the placebo group had 10 cases versus every 1 for the vaccinated group.

So again when people talk about the "dreaded" 51% efficacy number; that means the risk is cut in half relative to the unvaccinated group,

it does not mean that half of any group got infected or sick.

Most of us never paid attention to vaccine efficacy before COVID and with the announcement of the extraordinary numbers from the mRNA vaccines those quickly became the benchmark for comparison.

I didn't understand this when the numbers first came out and I took some time to look at the way the numbers were calculated and was able to understand it.

I have discussed this in another post and had the response "Clear as mud".  Unfortunately it cannot be made simpler than it is for those that don't understand.

 

 

 

 

 

[WhiteBuffaloATM]

yes it can be and must be better explained clearly.

Death way more “important” than “hospital” !

should not be a combined figure. even though technically correct.

 

this important study finding needs to be made crystal clear to lay people  like FDA final clinical trial protection findings for AZ , for example,i.e. Death (Final !) 100%, Hospital (Serious) 90%, Symptoms (Minor) 75%.

[placeholder]

9 hours ago, cdemundo said:

“ Basically 100% is the rate at which unvaccinated people die and are hospitalized. So for vaccinated people the rate would be 10% of that.”

 

This is correct.  I haven't seen it expressed this way but it is correct.

What is the 90% efficacy 90% of?

It is 90% protection compared to the number of cases in the unvaccinated group. So yes 90% compared to placebo group means for purposes of comparison the placebo group is 100%.

So whatever the monitored event was (usually symptomatic disease) the placebo group had 10 cases versus every 1 for the vaccinated group.

So again when people talk about the "dreaded" 51% efficacy number; that means the risk is cut in half relative to the unvaccinated group,

it does not mean that half of any group got infected or sick.

Most of us never paid attention to vaccine efficacy before COVID and with the announcement of the extraordinary numbers from the mRNA vaccines those quickly became the benchmark for comparison.

I didn't understand this when the numbers first came out and I took some time to look at the way the numbers were calculated and was able to understand it.

I have discussed this in another post and had the response "Clear as mud".  Unfortunately it cannot be made simpler than it is for those that don't understand.

 

 

 

 

 

Also, that 51% figure was the lowest of all the major trials. What's more Brazil engaged in an experiment where they vaccinated 95% of the citizens in a small city named Serrana. While death and disease was raging around them, their hospitalization and death rates collapsed.

After vaccinating 95 percent of adults, a Brazilian city is returning to normal

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/brazil-vaccines-coronavirus-covid-serrana-normal

Of course, this was before the Delta virus was a factor. But it does show that claims about the ineffectiveness of Sinovac's vaccine are nonsense.

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

On 10/6/2021 at 6:41 AM, Pravda said:

Despite availability of vaccines US death toll so far is higher in 2021 than in 2020.

 

Yes, we all know US people can be a bit stubborn, but still a large percentage of population has been vaccinated. Then why so many deaths?

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/10/05/covid-vaccination-mask-mandates-health-care-workers/5994168001/

 

The article you cited provides the obvious answers:

 

"But the combination of the hyper-infectious delta variant with the misinformation-driven refusal by so many Americans to get vaccinated -- some 70 million who are eligible have not received the free shots -- has left the country vulnerable to a virus that continues to adapt and find new victims."

 

All of the above is only an argument FOR more people to get vaccinated, not the opposite as you seem to be implying.

 

[Pravda]

25 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

The article you cited provides the obvious answers:

 

"But the combination of the hyper-infectious delta variant with the misinformation-driven refusal by so many Americans to get vaccinated -- some 70 million who are eligible have not received the free shots -- has left the country vulnerable to a virus that continues to adapt and find new victims."

 

All of the above is only an argument FOR more people to get vaccinated, not the opposite as you seem to be implying.

 

 

When I finally get my moderna vaccine I'll attach my proof of vaccination after every post that has slight doubts about efficacy of vaccines.

Edited October 8, 2021 by onthedarkside
flame comment removed

[onthedarkside]

Numerous off-topic, misleading and misininformation posts relating to COVID vaccines have been removed, along with replies to those, and flames directed at fellow posters.

 

Also a disallowed social media video. See the following forum rule:

 

"18) Social Media content is acceptable in most social forums. However, in factual areas such as news, current affairs and health topics, it cannot be used unless it is from a credible news media source or government agency, and must include a weblink to the original source."

 

Either stick to credible and credibly sourced information, and avoid personal attacks on other forum members, or this thread will be closed.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Here's a credible source.....the Health Minister of Singapore that corroborates waning anti-bodies: (watch video at 24:28 mark)

 

"“In Singapore, our data shows that the ability of vaccination to prevent a COVID infection is about 40%,”

 

 

Edited October 8, 2021 by LetsGoBrandon

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

16 hours ago, LetsGoBrandon said:

Here's a credible source.....the Health Minister of Singapore that corroborates waning anti-bodies: (watch video at 24:28 mark)

 

"“In Singapore, our data shows that the ability of vaccination to prevent a COVID infection is about 40%,”

 

 

 

And the same studies that are being done on the aftermath of Pfizer vaccinations also show that, despite the declining antibody rates over time, the vaccine still has a very high rate of preventing both serious COVID illness and death over those same extended timeframes.

 

[placeholder]

16 hours ago, LetsGoBrandon said:

Here's a credible source.....the Health Minister of Singapore that corroborates waning anti-bodies: (watch video at 24:28 mark)

 

"“In Singapore, our data shows that the ability of vaccination to prevent a COVID infection is about 40%,”

 

 

So what? At this point it's beyond question that when you post stuff like this you're acting in bad faith. As has been repeatedly pointed out, "infection" doesn't mean illness. Unlike laymen, scientists and public health authorities use it in a precise way that only means that the virus was able to commandeer cells and reproduce itself. It says nothing about whether or not the infected even had symptoms. But we know from Singapore govt that in Singapore the unvaccinated are 14 times more likely to die from Covid than the vaccinated.