Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

CDC: Covid vaccine effectiveness fell from 91% to 66% with Delta variant

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 37 posts

Re: CDC: Covid vaccine effectiveness fell from 91% to 66% with Delta variant

#21

Post by criticaltinker »

hattmall wrote: post #18
Falandafa2021 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only for New Zealand who locked down an entire country over one case

Unless they lockdown forever it's literally not going to matter. Additionally the longer they delay the acquisition of natural immunity the worse it will eventually be. The best course of action in the begining would have been to encourage only the vulnerable to isolate. Natural immunity is much better than the vaccines. COVID currently is worse for vaccinated people than it was for unvaccinated a year ago. The rate…

I'm with you on your general point - however you made some strong claims which are not supported by any literature I've seen (and I read a lot of literature on the topic, but of course I haven't read it all).

> Natural immunity is much better than the vaccines

The literature supports the fact that immunity acquired through natural infection is at least as effective as vaccination. I'm not aware of any strong evidence that one is better than the other in terms of individual health outcomes. It has been established that natural infection induces an immune response that includes nucleocapsid protein antibodies whereas vaccination with the current mRNA formulations does not. There are other subtle differences in the immune response, and those may have a significant long-term impact on both individual health outcomes and viral evolution at a population level, but scientific evidence on those points is extremely limited.

> The rate of severe infection with Delta among vaccinated is higher than the rate of severe infection of the general population a year ago with Original COVID

> Natural immunity has less than 1% reinfection rate vs a nearly 40% infection rate for fully vaccinated

I'm all for challenging the status quo but folks really need to start citing primary sources to support such claims, otherwise they will be dismissed as uninformed opinion.

Re: CDC: Covid vaccine effectiveness fell from 91% to 66% with Delta variant

#22

Post by zeku »

criticaltinker wrote: post #21
hattmall wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless they lockdown forever it's literally not going to matter. Additionally the longer they delay the acquisition of natural immunity the worse it will eventually be. The best course of action in the begining would have been to encourage only the vulnerable to isolate. Natural immunity is much better than the vaccines. COVID currently is worse for vaccinated people than it was for unvaccinated a year ago. The rate…

I'm with you on your general point - however you made some strong claims which are not supported by any literature I've seen (and I read a lot of literature on the topic, but of course I haven't read it all). > Natural immunity is much better than the vaccines The literature supports the fact that immunity acquired through natural infection is at least as effective as vaccination. I'm not aware of any strong evidence…

Looks like we responded to him in basically the same way at the same time. I had a check of his profile and he has a comment claiming that: "

hattmall 16 days ago | parent [–] | on: Big Tech are supposed to be the plumbers, not patr...

All evidence shows it to be the other way around, the vaccinated are far more dangerous to the unvaccinated than vice versa, it isn't even close. Leaky vaccines create more virulent and deadlier viruses in the unvaccinated.

"

Looks like he is just an antivaxxer spreading unscientific lies.

Re: CDC: Covid vaccine effectiveness fell from 91% to 66% with Delta variant

#23

Post by criticaltinker »

zeku wrote: post #17
angelzen wrote: post #7

I do not understand what the 5 year plan is. Even less what the 50 year plan is. On one hand: We are blessed to have access to mass genetic vector vaccines. Genetic vector vaccines are amazing at shaving off the sharp edge of the pandemic. Even after effectiveness drops against infection, they are still amazing at preventing severe infections. "VE for severe disease is *still high* after 6 months - 94% for ages 40-59…

We pretty much can play with vaccines forever. Every healthy responsible person gets a flu shot every single fall, we already do this and no one complains about the long term flu plan. You might be allowing the current discourse to knock your reasoning off track. Not trying to attack you, it's easy to get carried away with something so impactful to all of us.

> Every healthy responsible person gets a flu shot every single fall

The implication of your phrasing here is that people who do not get a flu shot every single fall are irresponsible - which seems pretty silly to claim given that seasonal influenza does not pose a significant risk to a majority of the population, especially healthy children and adults.

Re: CDC: Covid vaccine effectiveness fell from 91% to 66% with Delta variant

#24

Post by zeku »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #4
smt88 wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter in countries like the US where the vaccine is free to anyone who wants it. We know the vaccine improves survival regardless of previous infections. https://www.uchicagomedicine.org/forefront/coronavirus-disea... It's a little bit like mixing and matching vaccines to get better protection (which some countries are forced to do because they don't have access to the best single vaccine).

Nothing in your link supports the claim "we know the vaccine improves survival regardless of previous infections." > It doesn't matter in countries like the US where the vaccine is free to anyone who wants it How about the medical bills for a life-altering adverse event? Are those free for anyone who has to pay them? These considerations matter when we're talking about administering a vaccine which may provide very s…

Link the study or delete your comment.

Re: CDC: Covid vaccine effectiveness fell from 91% to 66% with Delta variant

#25

Post by zeku »

criticaltinker wrote: post #23
zeku wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We pretty much can play with vaccines forever. Every healthy responsible person gets a flu shot every single fall, we already do this and no one complains about the long term flu plan. You might be allowing the current discourse to knock your reasoning off track. Not trying to attack you, it's easy to get carried away with something so impactful to all of us.

> Every healthy responsible person gets a flu shot every single fall The implication of your phrasing here is that people who do not get a flu shot every single fall are irresponsible - which seems pretty silly to claim given that seasonal influenza does not pose a significant risk to a majority of the population, especially healthy children and adults.

We get flu shots to reduce the incidence of the flu in the population so that we don't kill a bunch of old people a decade too early.

You're purposefully ignoring a piece of the "critical thinking" so that you can be anti-science.

I'm very disappointed in the anti science comments on HN as of late.

Re: CDC: Covid vaccine effectiveness fell from 91% to 66% with Delta variant

#26

Post by criticaltinker »

zeku wrote: post #22
criticaltinker wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with you on your general point - however you made some strong claims which are not supported by any literature I've seen (and I read a lot of literature on the topic, but of course I haven't read it all). > Natural immunity is much better than the vaccines The literature supports the fact that immunity acquired through natural infection is at least as effective as vaccination. I'm not aware of any strong evidence…

Looks like we responded to him in basically the same way at the same time. I had a check of his profile and he has a comment claiming that: " hattmall 16 days ago | parent [–] | on: Big Tech are supposed to be the plumbers, not patr... All evidence shows it to be the other way around, the vaccinated are far more dangerous to the unvaccinated than vice versa, it isn't even close. Leaky vaccines create more virulent an…

> he is just an antivaxxer spreading unscientific lies

No need for ad hominem rebuttals here.

The threat of vaccine resistance is real and acknowledged by many experts [1][2], but I agree he is not doing these ideas justice by making such simple and unbalanced comments without citing any primary sources.

[1] Risk of rapid evolutionary escape from biomedical interventions targeting SARS-CoV-2 spike protein https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33909660/

[2] Can we predict the limits of SARS-CoV-2 variants and their phenotypic consequences? https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/long-term-evoluti...

Re: CDC: Covid vaccine effectiveness fell from 91% to 66% with Delta variant

#27

Post by angelzen »

zeku wrote: post #20
hattmall wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless they lockdown forever it's literally not going to matter. Additionally the longer they delay the acquisition of natural immunity the worse it will eventually be. The best course of action in the begining would have been to encourage only the vulnerable to isolate. Natural immunity is much better than the vaccines. COVID currently is worse for vaccinated people than it was for unvaccinated a year ago. The rate…

Last medical paper I read was using a cohort of 20,000 people. This paper concluded that natural covid immunity doesn't last forever. Median time to reinfection was 160+ days. Is there new research or something? I keep seeing people talk about this and no one ever provides a source. source: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.13.21249642v... Additionally here's a bunch of data that makes me doubt your poi…

Appreciate your effort to link to sources. We fundamentally suffer from lack of data: what are the morbidity and mortality by age group, by comorbidity (obesity and diabetes), by unvax / unvax + covid / vax? Furthermore, being 'published' on medrxiv is not a guarantee for accuracy or reproducibility. Cue in the Ivermectin saga...

I wish CDC would actually collect basic epidemiological data, but it seems completely disorganized and able to perform simple functions. Is there some alternative source, perhaps in some other country?

Re: CDC: Covid vaccine effectiveness fell from 91% to 66% with Delta variant

#28

Post by zeku »

zeku wrote: post #22
criticaltinker wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm with you on your general point - however you made some strong claims which are not supported by any literature I've seen (and I read a lot of literature on the topic, but of course I haven't read it all). > Natural immunity is much better than the vaccines The literature supports the fact that immunity acquired through natural infection is at least as effective as vaccination. I'm not aware of any strong evidence…

Looks like we responded to him in basically the same way at the same time. I had a check of his profile and he has a comment claiming that: " hattmall 16 days ago | parent [–] | on: Big Tech are supposed to be the plumbers, not patr... All evidence shows it to be the other way around, the vaccinated are far more dangerous to the unvaccinated than vice versa, it isn't even close. Leaky vaccines create more virulent an…

It won't let me reply to this "criticalthinker" guy anymore, but I will post this for anyone looking at this before they get sucked into these purposeful lies.

Just go read what he linked me to supposedly support his argument:

[1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33909660/

This paper states that covid will mutate due to "neutral variation" and evade the vaccine. This isn't a point against the vaccine, this is just stating the obvious that eventually we will need a different vaccine. The paper also recommends a combination of vaccination and therapeutics. "trategies for viral elimination should therefore be diversified across molecular targets and therapeutic modalities. "

They then go on to disclose that the authors have ownership in a therapeutics company.

[2]The second link he provided also recommends that we receive booster shots and again doesn't support the anti vax argument. Go actually read it if you want. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/long-term-evoluti...

These people are grifting.

Re: CDC: Covid vaccine effectiveness fell from 91% to 66% with Delta variant

#29

Post by SnowProblem »

In the FDA's press release yesterday [1], they justified Pfizer approval by saying the vaccine had a 91% effectiveness. But everyone knows that number is no longer true - the data was from March, before Delta. If the FDA were acting responsibly and credibly, they would have used the latest data, but then approval doesn't look so favorable.

It's probably relevant that Pfizer spent over $200M lobbying politicians over the past 20 years, more than any other pharmaceutical [3]. And Biden's administration clearly weren't happy with the FDA - just last week they said they are looking for a new head for November [3]. Interesting how approval came the next week. How much money does Pfizer stand to gain, once mandates and boosters? $15/shot?

[1] https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-appr...

[2] https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullar...

[3] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-19/janet-woo...

Re: CDC: Covid vaccine effectiveness fell from 91% to 66% with Delta variant

#30

Post by AndrewBissell »

zeku wrote: post #25
criticaltinker wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Every healthy responsible person gets a flu shot every single fall The implication of your phrasing here is that people who do not get a flu shot every single fall are irresponsible - which seems pretty silly to claim given that seasonal influenza does not pose a significant risk to a majority of the population, especially healthy children and adults.

We get flu shots to reduce the incidence of the flu in the population so that we don't kill a bunch of old people a decade too early. You're purposefully ignoring a piece of the "critical thinking" so that you can be anti-science. I'm very disappointed in the anti science comments on HN as of late.

It's anti-science to say not everyone should necessarily be expected to get a flu shot now?
Post reply on HN