Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Medical Discussion of Coronavirus

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • This comes up over and over and maybe I am mistaken but does Delta need a different booster? Isn't the target unchanged from vanilla covid to the Delta? Isn't boosting just to boost AB levels not to change targets?

    Similar to Pertussis boosting?

    Not similar to Flu?


    Comment


    • Originally posted by MaxPower View Post

      I’m in your same position and am going to get Moderna. I want my immune system to have as much exposure as possible to different configurations of the spike protein, and since it already has a look at Pfizer’s version, why get the same one?

      thanks for the response... your approach seems logical.

      so are you currently waiting for the moderna booster (half dose of the original 2 shots) to become available? i wonder if i should just get the available pfizer booster now versus waiting a few weeks for the moderna booster.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by pitt1166 View Post


        thanks for the response... your approach seems logical.

        so are you currently waiting for the moderna booster (half dose of the original 2 shots) to become available? i wonder if i should just get the available pfizer booster now versus waiting a few weeks for the moderna booster.
        Won’t have to wait a few weeks, it’ll be approved within a week. That being said the need for a booster is somewhat overrated for younger people. I believe the NNT to prevent one hospitalization was anywhere from 5-8K boosters.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Lordosis View Post
          This comes up over and over and maybe I am mistaken but does Delta need a different booster? Isn't the target unchanged from vanilla covid to the Delta? Isn't boosting just to boost AB levels not to change targets?

          Similar to Pertussis boosting?

          Not similar to Flu?

          There is no delta specific booster. All vaxxes have anti delta effectiveness. From my understanding there is a period of time post vaccination where your antibody titers are extremely robust and you are relatively impervious to Covid “infection” after this period ends you still remain protected against severe illness but the protection against Covid infection is much less. Therefore I believe the vaccines aren’t that great in preventing Covid infection but excellent at preventing severe illness which is all I really care about.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Lordosis View Post
            This comes up over and over and maybe I am mistaken but does Delta need a different booster? Isn't the target unchanged from vanilla covid to the Delta? Isn't boosting just to boost AB levels not to change targets?

            Similar to Pertussis boosting?

            Not similar to Flu?
            Right now it's just boosting to bump up antibody levels. The pharm companies ARE working on modifying the spike protein in their vaccines to better match Delta's version, but that's not ready to roll out yet.

            Comment


            • The current thinking is that the multiple spike protein mutations in the delta variant make binding with cell membranes more efficient and binding with antibodies to the original variant less efficient. It sounded to me like structural blocking of binding by the antibodies kind of like the way hemoglobin blocks complete binding with oxygen but not carbon monoxide.

              Oh and I'm only getting the third shot now because of the data for people on the immunosuppressants I'm taking.
              Last edited by Shant; 10-21-2021, 04:41 PM.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by MaxPower View Post

                I’m in your same position and am going to get Moderna. I want my immune system to have as much exposure as possible to different configurations of the spike protein, and since it already has a look at Pfizer’s version, why get the same one?
                I can't find whether Pfizer and Moderna's mRNA sequence is exactly the same, or if one is different from the other. Does anyone know if that information is published somewhere?

                Comment


                • Originally posted by redsand View Post

                  I can't find whether Pfizer and Moderna's mRNA sequence is exactly the same, or if one is different from the other. Does anyone know if that information is published somewhere?
                  Here is an interesting article with a line-by-line explanation of the Pfizer vaccine mRNA sequence. The same person write a follow-up article that compares several other vaccines.

                  The second article includes this line, which says Moderna has not published the exact RNA sequence in their vaccine.

                  Both the Moderna and BioNTech/Pfizer vaccines use such modified mRNA, although I think they don’t use the exact same modification. But in many ways, the Moderna and BioNTech vaccines are very alike. Sadly Moderna has not published the RNA sequence of its vaccine, so we can’t compare directly.
                  Update: The Moderna sequence was reverse engineered and is available on Github.
                  Last edited by Hober Mallow; 10-25-2021, 03:04 PM.

                  Comment


                  • It's a question that scientists have been trying to answer since the start of the pandemic, one that is central to the rancorous political debates over coronavirus vaccine policies: How much immunity does someone have after recovering from a coronavirus infection, and how does it compare with immunity provided by vaccination? The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has weighed in for the first time in a detailed science report released with little fanfare Friday evening. Reviewing scores


                    It seems the CDC has a study regarding previous infection.

                    Very little fanfare from the CDC. As a non educated reader, it seem to say "better" but not much about "how much better" or seem to support that it is "reckless" to not get vaccinated. Casual read from a non-physician. Does the data from these studies move the needle?

                    Comment


                    • Proof of antibodies + proof of one post-antibody test vaccine dose probably.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Tim View Post
                        https://news.yahoo.com/cdc-finds-imm...212536485.html

                        It seems the CDC has a study regarding previous infection.

                        Very little fanfare from the CDC. As a non educated reader, it seem to say "better" but not much about "how much better" or seem to support that it is "reckless" to not get vaccinated. Casual read from a non-physician. Does the data from these studies move the needle?
                        I think this is the actual publication from the CDC.



                        It's over my head, but maybe someone more educated can summarize.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Hober Mallow View Post

                          I think this is the actual publication from the CDC.



                          It's over my head, but maybe someone more educated can summarize.
                          Thank you.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Hober Mallow View Post

                            I think this is the actual publication from the CDC.



                            It's over my head, but maybe someone more educated can summarize.
                            The executive summary is in layman terms, AFAIK

                              • The immunity provided by vaccine and prior infection are both high but not complete (i.e., not 100%).
                              • Multiple studies have shown that antibody titers correlate with protection at a population level, but protective titers at the individual level remain unknown.
                              • Whereas there is a wide range in antibody titers in response to infection with SARS-CoV-2, completion of a primary vaccine series, especially with mRNA vaccines, typically leads to a more consistent and higher-titer initial antibody response.
                              • For certain populations, such as the elderly and immunocompromised, the levels of protection may be decreased following both vaccination and infection.
                              • Current evidence indicates that the level of protection may not be the same for all viral variants.
                              • The body of evidence for infection-induced immunity is more limited than that for vaccine-induced immunity in terms of the quality of evidence (e.g., probable bias towards symptomatic or medically-attended infections) and types of studies (e.g., observational cohort studies, mostly retrospective versus a mix of randomized controlled trials, case-control studies, and cohort studies for vaccine-induced immunity). There are insufficient data to extend the findings related to infection-induced immunity at this time to persons with very mild or asymptomatic infection or children.
                            • Substantial immunologic evidence and a growing body of epidemiologic evidence indicate that vaccination after infection significantly enhances protection and further reduces risk of reinfection, which lays the foundation for CDC recommendations.

                            Comment


                            • Well I had a tough time grasping this study and I still do. And i say this understanding there are people out there that I consider of questionable reliability trying to poke holes in it due to personal agendas.

                              Anyway whenever a conclusion is expressed as a relative risk I try to go back and look at the absolute numbers since RR is so easily misleading. Also I was taught to start to evaluate a study by looking first at the methods. I am having trouble getting a good handle on both the methods and the numbers, maybe I'll try again tomorrow.

                              I'd also question why they included the group of vaccinated patients and the group of patients with COVID histories, but did not compare it to the group of unvaccinated with no COVID history. It should have been pretty straightforward as they already had the model set up.

                              It's also what amounts to a retrospective chart review, something that used to be looked on as kind of iffy but these days is probably the best we can do.

                              Comment


                              • I think there's probably a middle ground here. Those who have had previously documented infection should probably get at least one vaccine dose while those who have been harping on these people and basically considering them unvaccinated probably need to lighten up.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X