This does not mention the variant in India: B. 1.617. Excuse my language but fuck the author and this article. They went out of their way to list multiple other variant names but left the word "India" and "B. 1.617" out entirely while proclaiming "Pfizer COVID vaccine protects against worrying coronavirus variants". Is there another strain that's more worrying right now or even on the day that this article was published?
Current RNA vaccines protect against worrying coronavirus variants
41–50 of 324 posts
Re: Current RNA vaccines protect against worrying coronavirus variants
#42I literally saw the opposite headline about Pzifer versus a strain in India today The actual article said "modest antibody evading capabilities“ I hate that the internet has become this way
I agree, unfortunately there have been so many half truths and misleading articles both online and on legacy media that I find myself not knowing what or who to trust anymore. I have an appointment to get my first jab in 43 hours from now and I am bouncing back and forth between getting it and cancelation. Five years ago I would not be having these doubts but it seems like everyone has alterior motives. I wish the so…
If you already have an appointment the only debate should be whether you will need an additional third booster shot in the future if the strain in India breaks out and is different enough.
The key thing you should notice about the COVID vaccine detractors is their inability to distinguish between vaccines and the wildly different technology between the different vaccines, alongside their inability acknowledge the geopolitical hurdles for any of their conspiracies. If a German-company made vaccine is part of an insidious plot, then should you get the Oxford one developed in the UK? If Bill Gates is influencing vaccines in some strange scheme, does the conclusion mean you should trust the Russian Sputnik vaccine more instead due to the geopolitical impossibility of a Bill Gates plot being involved? The absurdity basically cancels itself out, just get the shot you are offered.
Re: Current RNA vaccines protect against worrying coronavirus variants
#43I literally saw the opposite headline about Pzifer versus a strain in India today The actual article said "modest antibody evading capabilities“ I hate that the internet has become this way
I agree, unfortunately there have been so many half truths and misleading articles both online and on legacy media that I find myself not knowing what or who to trust anymore. I have an appointment to get my first jab in 43 hours from now and I am bouncing back and forth between getting it and cancelation. Five years ago I would not be having these doubts but it seems like everyone has alterior motives. I wish the so…
>I have an appointment to get my first jab in 43 hours from now and I am bouncing back and forth between getting it and cancelation.
Sorry, what is the downside to getting the vaccine in your mind?
Re: Current RNA vaccines protect against worrying coronavirus variants
#44How does the Moderna vaccine compare?
Since it’s based basically on the same mRNA technology (and has the same reported efficacy) I would assume it works as well as the Pfizer one. No hard data to back this up, though.
Re: Current RNA vaccines protect against worrying coronavirus variants
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's one: https://www.contagionlive.com/view/immune-response-from-mrna...
The study itself says that the immune response to the vaccine is not as diverse as a natural infection. That's how the study tried to figure out who had been infected: "Natural exposure induces a dominant Ab response against the nucleocapsid protein (NP), but since NP is not in the vaccine, there is no vaccine induced response against it. In this way vaccinated people who had a prior natural exposure can be classifie…
> Simply looking at one aspect of immunity - detectable antibodies in the blood - is a very incomplete way of looking at the overall level of protection. For example, it's well known that mucosal immunity is important, and injected vaccines have a hard time inducing that kind of immunity: https://theprint.in/opinion/why-a-mucosal-covid-vaccine-has-...
I have not seen an actual credible claim that injectable vaccines can’t produce mucosal immunity. IIRC the HPV vaccines seem to generate strongly protective mucosal immunity. The opinion piece you linked seems off, too: the mRNA vaccines and (possibly to a lesser extent) the viral vector vaccines do seem to prevent most infections.
But it’s definitely true that antibodies in the blood are an incomplete picture. There are also memory B cell and all kinds of T cells.
Re: Current RNA vaccines protect against worrying coronavirus variants
#46How does the Moderna vaccine compare?
Since it’s based basically on the same mRNA technology (and has the same reported efficacy) I would assume it works as well as the Pfizer one. No hard data to back this up, though.
This is a false assumption as they have different mRNA instructions. As you point out, wait until there is data and treat the vaccines independently.
Re: Current RNA vaccines protect against worrying coronavirus variants
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here's one: https://www.contagionlive.com/view/immune-response-from-mrna...
The study itself says that the immune response to the vaccine is not as diverse as a natural infection. That's how the study tried to figure out who had been infected: "Natural exposure induces a dominant Ab response against the nucleocapsid protein (NP), but since NP is not in the vaccine, there is no vaccine induced response against it. In this way vaccinated people who had a prior natural exposure can be classifie…
The spike protein is what is in common between all the variants. Getting a more diverse response doesn’t mean better protection.
Re: Current RNA vaccines protect against worrying coronavirus variants
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
mRNA vaccines produce antibodies targeting just the spike protein( S protein). There are other proteins on the virus like the M protein. Antibodies produced during an infection may target other parts of the virus so you can’t compare the two.
Isn't it the spike protein that is usually different between these variants? In that case antibodies that target a different part should even be more effective.
The vaccines target specific (and multiple) regions of the spike protein, so a given mutation of the protein is not likely to make a vaccine null and void (hence the current success of the vaccines against variants). A "natural" COVID infection could lead to similar protection, or less; but it's not likely that a natural infection gives you some kind of AAA protection. Being infected can also hurt you, after all. There is literally no downside to receiving the vaccine if you've already had COVID, so I would encourage everyone to get vaccinated regardless :)
Re: Current RNA vaccines protect against worrying coronavirus variants
#49I literally saw the opposite headline about Pzifer versus a strain in India today The actual article said "modest antibody evading capabilities“ I hate that the internet has become this way
This article doesn't seem to address any of the strains originating in India, fwiw. My guess is that they haven't known of them long enough to understand their reaction in vaccinated people.
India is by and large not using Pfizer. Evidence to date points to AstraZeneca (which they are using) being quite effective in preventing serious illness.
Re: Current RNA vaccines protect against worrying coronavirus variants
#50This does not mention the variant in India: B. 1.617. Excuse my language but fuck the author and this article. They went out of their way to list multiple other variant names but left the word "India" and "B. 1.617" out entirely while proclaiming "Pfizer COVID vaccine protects against worrying coronavirus variants". Is there another strain that's more worrying right now or even on the day that this article was publis…
The Pfizer vaccine is not used in India, so there's no data on that yet.