Most of our family has had the Covid vaccine (the British Astro Zeneca for those of us high risk and the weaker more available Chinese Sinovax for our lower risk employees).
And I have been aggressive in fighting the anti vax propaganda that fills the internet and social media, pointing out that for high risk folks, the vaccine is much safer than no vaccine, although I figure if healthy people want to take a small risk and not get the shot, then whatever: Like Influenza, Covid mainly kills the old and sick, although it can kill a small number of low risk folks.
We lost a friend, a nurse who was pregnant and refused the vaccine, and another friend got covid, went into premature labor: she lived but her child died of complications after a month in ICU. So yes, Covid can kill the young.
But now it appears the vaccines are not a magic prevention either.
Sigh.
Study shows dramatic decline in effectiveness of all three COVID-19 vaccines over time
Abstract
We report SARS-CoV-2 vaccine effectiveness against infection (VE-I) and death (VE-D) by vaccine type (n = 780,225) in the Veterans Health Administration, covering 2.7% of the U.S. population.
From February to October 2021, VE-I declined from 87.9% to 48.1%, and the decline was greatest for the Janssen vaccine resulting in a VE-I of 13.1%.
Hmm... one reason people didn't trust the Chinese vaccine is that it was found to give less than 50 percent prevention, and did not stop epidemics where it was used widely.
So are the much touted western vaccines seeing a similar problem of loss of immunity and breakthrough cases? Again, from the article:
Although breakthrough infection increased risk of death,
WTF? Say that again? I think they mean that yes you could die of breakthru infection, but the sentence is not well phrased.
vaccination remained protective against death in persons who became infected during the Delta surge.
make up your mind. did it have an increased risk of death or was did it give partial protection?
hard numbers are at the article, but what they found was:
... risk of infection accelerated in both unvaccinated and fully vaccinated Veterans beginning in July 2021 and through September 2021... This pattern was similar across age groups, and risk of infection was highest for unvaccinated Veterans.
 |
Fig. 1. Time dependent vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection |
Findings support continued efforts to increase vaccination, booster campaigns, and multiple, additional layers of protection against infection..
So they say the vaccines worked well at first but now they are not working very well, so continue to do the same thing over and over again.
not in the discussion: post covid immunity. That also goes down with time, which is why I told Joy's brother to get the vaccine after he recovered from a bad case of covid, because he is high risk.
But post covid infection immunity might be one reason for the decrease in cases in countries with poor vaccine coverage.
another reason for the decrease in cases might be the use of treatment, either in clinics (e.g. monoclonal antibodies in Florida) or buy buying various treatments (Zinc, Ivermectin, Vitamin D Etc all of which are touted as cures).
The anti viral drugs or antibody injections both of which need to be given early, a big game changer?
and some drugs like Ivermectin, not only are being used to treat covid, but are being used in low doses to prevent getting the disease.
I suspect a lot of this discussion ended up on conspiracy pages because the public health authorities thought that publicizing alternatives would decrease the rate of those accepting vaccinations.
But what ended up happening is that it merely increase the distrust of the medical establishment: not just in right wing nut cases but in the minority communities (who remember the Tuskegee experiment and don't want to be guinea pigs).
which brings us to a question: Is the politicization/ censorship of alternative treatment in the media confusing folks when they present one sided negative data on drugs like HCQ (which has mild prevention effects and mild side effects)? Since HCQ overdoses are fatal, one can see why the gov't is trying to discourage it's use.
But what about Ivermectin, which has been around for years to treat river blindness, filariasis, and scabies? Again, official discouragement by the Govt and by the media who calls it a "horse pill", which is wrong and the use of such language suggests propaganda rather than science in these stories.
The anti Ivermectin articles note that early studies that showed success included one that was fraudulent, and several that were poorly designed, that allowed the propaganda pushers to smirk, but then scientists did analyze it. The data is long and intricate, but it does suggest Ivermectin might work both as a prevention and cure (but not everyone) for COVID.
This was released in July, so why hasn't this gotten publicity outside of the conspiracy type websites?
Am J Ther. 2021 Jul-Aug; 28(4) article
Ivermectin for Prevention and Treatment of COVID-19 Infection: A Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Trial Sequential Analysis to Inform Clinical Guidelines...
DISCUSSION The findings indicate with moderate certainty that ivermectin treatment in COVID-19 provides a significant survival benefit.
lots of detail in the article, but this part of the article caught my eye:
There is also evidence emerging from countries where ivermectin has been implemented. For example, Peru had a very high death toll from COVID-19 early on in the pandemic. Based on observational evidence, the Peruvian government approved ivermectin for use against COVID-19 in May 2020.128 After implementation, death rates in 8 states were reduced between 64% and 91% over a two-month period.
Another analysis of Peruvian data from 24 states with early ivermectin deployment has reported a drop in excess deaths of 59% at 30+ days and of 75% at 45+ days.
However, factors such as change in behavior, social distancing, and face-mask use could have played a role in this reduction..
..
so the NIH has Ivermectin on it's website as a treatment, but the FDA still opposes it.
Dr. C. Explains:
Which brings us back to the Philippines.
cases are going down, at least in the NCR (Manila area).
from the Manila Bulletin:
 |
| (DR. GUIDO DAVID / TWITTER) |
our area, which was on a lower level of quarantine, is now opening up also: They held a party in the city plaza last week, although the cemeteries were still closed for Undos/All Saints day.
Since Manila has fewer cases, it has lowered the level of quarantine to level 2. Kids allowed out, but no cockfights allowed yet and high risk and the elderly folk are still told to stay home...............
But the country is still aiming to vaccinate everyone (I believe the numbers show 35 percent vaccinated ). There are problems with this, since a lot of folks are not getting the vaccine because they are waiting for the western vaccine (instead of the weaker Chinese shot), and alas our social media is full of anti vax stuff.
There also have been problems in logistics of course, getting the vaccines out to those who need it, although it seemed to go smoothly in our area (maybe because we have a good mayor who is trusted).
Duterte, in his typical Filipino hyperbole/humor said
"Kung ayaw, akyatin sa bahay, tusukin sa gabi. Ako ang mag-ano [turok sa kanila] (If they don't want the vaccine, let us go their house, inject them at night. I will do it myself)," he added.
And they are discussing giving out booster shots, at least to high risk folk.
but what about Ivermectin?
A lot of folks were buying it on the black market (which might be okay or might be counterfeit pills or might be the animal version).
So in early Sept Duterte said hey let them take it
He said he would let anyone who wants to take a “good gamble” in terms of trying the effectiveness of Ivermectin against Covid-19.
“I leave it really to the doctor-patient relationship. If the doctor believes in good faith that it can help, and the patient also believes in his heart that he will get well, we leave it up to you to decide,” Duterte said.
The Department of Health (DOH) has repeatedly warned the public against the use of Ivermectin as preventive medicine against Covid-19...On the other hand, the Department of Science and Technology (DOST) is set to begin the clinical trials on the safety and effectiveness of Ivermectin in treating Covid-19 patients in September this year.
The trials, the DOST said, would run for eight months.
so why are the number of cases going down, despite the slowness of giving the vaccines, and despite the tendency of Filipinos to ignore quarantine rules?
Is it herd immunity?
Are people here taking Ivermectin?
In our family, Kuya is anti Vax so I have him on a prevention dosage of ivermectin: And a stubborn rash on his foot cleared up. He works on the farm and so we figured it might have been scabies.
But even if Ivermectin is taboo to talk about, there are other alternatives:
Pfizer just released a new, expensive anti Covid pill.
The Pfizer drug called Paxlovid achieved an 89 percent reduction in risk of hospitalization or death among adult patients with Covid who are at high risk of progressing to severe illness, the US company said. The results from the middle-to-late stage clinical trial were so strong that Pfizer will stop recruiting new people for the trial, it said.
so there is hope on the horizen.
questioning the data on problems with US vaccine:In her 25 September email to the FDA Jackson wrote that Ventavia had enrolled more than 1000 participants at three sites. The full trial (registered under NCT04368728) enrolled around 44 000 participants across 153 sites that included numerous commercial companies and academic centres. She then listed a dozen concerns she had witnessed, including: Participants placed in a hallway after injection and not being monitored by clinical staff Lack of timely follow-up of patients who experienced adverse events Protocol deviations not being reported Vaccines not being stored at proper temperatures Mislabelled laboratory specimens, and Targeting of Ventavia staff for reporting these types of problems. Within hours Jackson received an email from the FDA thanking her for her concerns and notifying her that the FDA could not comment on any investigation that might result. A few days later Jackson received a call from an FDA inspector to discuss her report but was told that no further information could be provided. She heard nothing further in relation to her report.
Dr C discusses:
No comments:
Post a Comment