t - cam said:

---

Fenrir said:

---

You also don't get the same flu vaccine every year.

---

Valid, there is plenty of evidence that this vaccine works for all variants. I guess they just want to boost the strength.

---

This is directly from pfizer:

• Phase 1 safety and immunogenicity data in individuals who received a third dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine (BNT162b2) show a favorable safety profile and robust immune responses
• The booster dose elicited significantly higher neutralizing antibody titers against the initial SARS-CoV-2 virus (wild type), and the Beta and Delta variants, compared to the levels observed after the two-dose primary series
• After the booster dose, neutralizing titers for variants were similar to wild type
• Given the high levels of immune responses observed, a booster dose given within 6 to 12 months after the primary vaccination schedule may help maintain a high level of protection against COVID-19

dylan said:

---

Just heard that the Biden administration is going to recommend people get booster shot eight months after their second or last vaccine shot. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/16/us/vaccination-booster-shots.html

---

Based on what the FDA just put out today... they are saying boosters are not suggested and may many Drs are saying the vaccines may be driving these variants

fullback44 said:

---

dylan said:

---

Just heard that the Biden administration is going to recommend people get booster shot eight months after their second or last vaccine shot. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/16/us/vaccination-booster-shots.html

---

Based on what the FDA just put out today... they are saying boosters are not suggested and may many Drs are saying the vaccines may be driving these variants

---

Which doctors? Source?

SamHou said:

---

fullback44 said:

---

dylan said:

---

Just heard that the Biden administration is going to recommend people get booster shot eight months after their second or last vaccine shot. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/16/us/vaccination-booster-shots.html

---

Based on what the FDA just put out today... they are saying boosters are not suggested and may many Drs are saying the vaccines may be driving these variants

---

Which doctors? Source?

---

Do you own research … it's all over the internet

my doctor offered to write me an off label prescription for one at 8 months past the 2nd dose

you can go get one easy but I think you have to lie about your status

My doc said: "you don't need a booster, so relax and schedule your flu shot"

KidDoc said:

---

KidDoc said:

---

FlyRod said:

---

KidDoc what are your own thoughts on how long you think 2 shot efficacy lasts? Do you think those of us at 6 months are fine until the 8 month booster? Guessing your are voraciously consuming the research as it hits so curious what you think.

And apologies if you already addressed this in another thread.

---

I'm not convinced yet but they haven't shared the data yet. I don't know if this is based on falling titers over time or break through cases or both. I think the CDC/FDA are pushed to err in the side of caution while Moderna and Pfizer want to sell more product so you come to this mutual "sure why not" decision. I'm about 7 months since my 2nd Moderna and I'm in no hurry at this point. I'm hoping for a delta variant booster in the near future instead.

---

A month later and it looks like the FDA expert panel agrees with this dumb ol Aggie doc.

---

So where are they on a variant-specific booster? That's all they could talk about a few months ago, but now they are just pushing more of the same vaccine. A vaccine that fades over time and was designed for a dormant version of the virus.

torrid said:

---

KidDoc said:

---

KidDoc said:

---

FlyRod said:

---

KidDoc what are your own thoughts on how long you think 2 shot efficacy lasts? Do you think those of us at 6 months are fine until the 8 month booster? Guessing your are voraciously consuming the research as it hits so curious what you think.

And apologies if you already addressed this in another thread.

---

I'm not convinced yet but they haven't shared the data yet. I don't know if this is based on falling titers over time or break through cases or both. I think the CDC/FDA are pushed to err in the side of caution while Moderna and Pfizer want to sell more product so you come to this mutual "sure why not" decision. I'm about 7 months since my 2nd Moderna and I'm in no hurry at this point. I'm hoping for a delta variant booster in the near future instead.

---

A month later and it looks like the FDA expert panel agrees with this dumb ol Aggie doc.

---

So where are they on a variant-specific booster? That's all they could talk about a few months ago, but now they are just pushing more of the same vaccine. A vaccine that fades over time and was designed for a dormant version of the virus.

---

Soon (hopefully). This article was from 9/19/21.

Moderna booster doses are effective for newer variants like Delta - Zyri

Lemme ask this. For a variant-specific version of a vaccine, can it go through an accelerated trial and approval process?

torrid said:

---

Lemme ask this. For a variant-specific version of a vaccine, can it go through an accelerated trial and approval process?

---

Yes if the head hanchos want to allow them to cut through the red tape with EUA again.

KidDoc said:

---

torrid said:

---

KidDoc said:

---

KidDoc said:

---

FlyRod said:

---

KidDoc what are your own thoughts on how long you think 2 shot efficacy lasts? Do you think those of us at 6 months are fine until the 8 month booster? Guessing your are voraciously consuming the research as it hits so curious what you think.

And apologies if you already addressed this in another thread.

---

I'm not convinced yet but they haven't shared the data yet. I don't know if this is based on falling titers over time or break through cases or both. I think the CDC/FDA are pushed to err in the side of caution while Moderna and Pfizer want to sell more product so you come to this mutual "sure why not" decision. I'm about 7 months since my 2nd Moderna and I'm in no hurry at this point. I'm hoping for a delta variant booster in the near future instead.

---

A month later and it looks like the FDA expert panel agrees with this dumb ol Aggie doc.

---

So where are they on a variant-specific booster? That's all they could talk about a few months ago, but now they are just pushing more of the same vaccine. A vaccine that fades over time and was designed for a dormant version of the virus.

---

Soon (hopefully). This article was from 9/19/21.

Moderna booster doses are effective for newer variants like Delta - Zyri

---

Moderna is the one that has had fewer efficacy issues with newer variants though right? I'm more interested in whether Pfizer and J&J are having any luck with variant specific versions considering they have seemingly been the weak links thus far.

Moderna has been the best one by far.

Fenrir said:

---

KidDoc said:

---

torrid said:

---

KidDoc said:

---

KidDoc said:

---

FlyRod said:

---

KidDoc what are your own thoughts on how long you think 2 shot efficacy lasts? Do you think those of us at 6 months are fine until the 8 month booster? Guessing your are voraciously consuming the research as it hits so curious what you think.

And apologies if you already addressed this in another thread.

---

I'm not convinced yet but they haven't shared the data yet. I don't know if this is based on falling titers over time or break through cases or both. I think the CDC/FDA are pushed to err in the side of caution while Moderna and Pfizer want to sell more product so you come to this mutual "sure why not" decision. I'm about 7 months since my 2nd Moderna and I'm in no hurry at this point. I'm hoping for a delta variant booster in the near future instead.

---

A month later and it looks like the FDA expert panel agrees with this dumb ol Aggie doc.

---

So where are they on a variant-specific booster? That's all they could talk about a few months ago, but now they are just pushing more of the same vaccine. A vaccine that fades over time and was designed for a dormant version of the virus.

---

Soon (hopefully). This article was from 9/19/21.

Moderna booster doses are effective for newer variants like Delta - Zyri

---

Moderna is the one that has had fewer efficacy issues with newer variants though right? I'm more interested in whether Pfizer and J&J are having any luck with variant specific versions considering they have seemingly been the weak links thus far.

---

Moderna is holding up pretty well but some of the early data from the study patients that got it > 12 months ago is showing a drop in efficacy.

CDC says forget following the science, we do what we want (or what Biden tells them to do).

CDC Director Just Broke With Experts in Surprising New Booster Guidance (yahoo.com)

The deafening silence from the medical community continues to be noteworthy.

KidDoc said:

---

CDC says forget following the science, we do what we want (or what Biden tells them to do).

CDC Director Just Broke With Experts in Surprising New Booster Guidance (yahoo.com)

---

I am not so sure it's really a black or white issue here, there is plenty of gray. So she modified it to include people who's occupation puts them at risk and those with comorbidities. Plus she dropped the age from 65 to 60. There are plenty of doctors that were arguing that this needed to happen. I am not a big fan of her but she was put into a difficult position. Was she supposed to ignore the frontline workers that want access to boosters? As you know Israel is giving booster to everyone vaccinated over 6 months ago and UK is giving them to anyone over 50 years old and out 6 months.

There is no data to support boosters for high risk occupations. Why have an ACIP when you ignore them?

As far as I know this is the first time ever the ACIP has ben ignored. Plus how are vaccine centers supposed to prove you work where you say you work? Do you bring a pay stub?

I agree this isn't that big of a difference.

Public health policy is like physics. Something that makes perfect sense and is the best decision at one scale can be completely different from what is the best decision on a microscale.

The ACIP was asking the question on the global scale. And basically decided that the marginal benefit of making boosters available to all Americans wasnt worth the trade off to the world.

The CDC decided that the marginal benefit of making boosters available to more Americans was worth it to America.

Just like if a MD were to prescribe ivermectin to their existing patients that they have a relationship with, it wouldn't be a net negative (probably won't help but it won't hurt, and you can still encourage them to get a vaccine.)

But having the CDC or some random MD on the tv pushing ivermectin is going to be a net negative. People have shown they will take unsafe dosages and they will forgo proven means of preventing hospitalization or death.

Just like quantum physics is different from Newtonian physics, public health policy is different from clinical practice and may seem contrary to each other at times.

KidDoc said:

---

There is no data to support boosters for high risk occupations. Why have an ACIP when you ignore them?

As far as I know this is the first time ever the ACIP has ben ignored. Plus how are vaccine centers supposed to prove you work where you say you work? Do you bring a pay stub?

---

What evidence are you looking for specifically? These individuals are just like everyone else and therefore subject to the same risks based on age and comorbidities. What is different is that they have increased exposure in high risk occupations there is a larger likelihood of breakthrough infections which would sideline these individuals for a period of time which is good for no one. Personally I see no harm in allowing these folks access to the booster as they are deserving and we all need them on the front line.

As for the ACIP I am less than impressed at how the whole vote played out. The first vote was for allowing access to Pfizer boosters for anyone over age 17 (which was shot down) and then a follow up vote for allowing booster for anyone over the age of 65. To me they seemed to pull 65 out of a hat and there was no other age groups evaluated which to me comes off as being arbitrary. Makes me wonder if there were some sort of politics involved. I suspect there was.

Lastly I am not concerned with the whole topic of proof of eligibility. This whole vaccination process has been a joke with a lack of database and paper cards that are easily counterfeited. IMO- Let those who want boosters get their booster, there really is no harm.