COVID-19 Vaccine Talk, 2nd Dose

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by Hackey

Pfizers revenue doubled for two years so I'm sure they would have loved to continue handing out vaccines but everyone realized the vaccine wasn't very effective and Covid wasn't that serious to the majority of people. They capitalized while they could.

Live expectancy dropped by 2 years in the US in 2020 and started to rebound in 2022

"everyone" who realized your narrative spends too much time on social media echo chambers.

[troutman]

https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...13260024001796

By March, 2023, 54 countries, areas, and territories (hereafter CAT) in the WHO European Region had reported more than 2·2 million COVID-19-related deaths to the WHO Regional Office for Europe. Here, we estimated how many lives were directly saved by vaccinating adults in the WHO European Region from December, 2020, to March, 2023.

Between December, 2020, and March, 2023, in 34 of 54 CAT included in the analysis, COVID-19 vaccines reduced deaths by 59% overall (CAT range 17–82%), representing approximately 1·6 million lives saved (range 1·5–1·7 million) in those aged 25 years or older: 96% of lives saved were aged 60 years or older and 52% were aged 80 years or older; first boosters saved 51% of lives, and 60% were saved during the Omicron period.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9537923/

Based on reported COVID‐19 deaths, vaccinations prevented an estimated 14.4 million deaths (95% credible interval [Crl] 13.7–15.9) from COVID‐19 in a year. However, if excess deaths were used, this estimate rose to 19.8 million (95% Crl 19.1–20.4) deaths prevented (Fig. 1), equating to a global reduction of 63% in total deaths (19.8 million of 31.4 million) during the first year of COVID‐19 vaccination.

[Engine09]

Hard facts and data are sometimes hard to understand, I'm starting to think antivaxxers deep down know their own mental limitations and just decide to say f it and deny what is kinda tough to wrap your head around. They basically embrace their stupidity.

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by Engine09

Hard facts and data are sometimes hard to understand, I'm starting to think antivaxxers deep down know their own mental limitations and just decide to say f it and deny what is kinda tough to wrap your head around. They basically embrace their stupidity.

"Everything is a conspiracy when you failed high school science"

[Fuzz]

Turns out covid infections in pregnancy lead to increased neurodevelopmental outcomes(autism, ADHD etc). Covid causes autism. Hope our education system is preparing itself to handle this. Oh ya, and get vaccinated, particularly if you plan on getting pregnant, or your wife is pregnant, or you are going to be around pregnant people. Or you might give their unborn child autism. And that's mean.

OBJECTIVE:

To determine whether in utero exposure to maternal severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is associated with increased risk of adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes in children by age 3 years.
METHODS:

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 18,124 live births to individuals who delivered between March 1, 2020, and May 31, 2021, within the Mass General Brigham health system. The exposure of interest was maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection, defined as a positive SARS-CoV-2 polymerase chain reaction test result during pregnancy. The outcome of interest was presence of any neurodevelopmental diagnosis up to 36 months after birth, identified using International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Tenth Revision diagnostic codes. To evaluate the association between SARS-CoV-2 exposure in pregnancy and these diagnoses, we used logistic regression models adjusting for maternal age, race and ethnicity, insurance type, hospital type, and preterm birth.
RESULTS:

Among the 861 individuals with SARS-CoV-2-exposed pregnancies (4.8%), 140 offspring (16.3%) received a neurodevelopmental diagnosis by 36 months after birth, compared with 1,680 of 17,263 unexposed offspring (9.7%) (unadjusted odds ratio 1.80, 95% CI, 1.49–2.17; adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.29, 95% CI, 1.05–1.57, P=.01). In sensitivity analyses, largest effects were observed in third-trimester exposures, overall (aOR 1.36, 95% CI, 1.07–1.72, P=.01), and among male offspring (aOR 1.43, 95% CI, 1.05–1.91, P=.02).
CONCLUSION:

Maternal SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy was associated with increased risk of adverse neurodevelopmental diagnoses by age 3 years, with effects most pronounced after third-trimester exposure and in male offspring. These findings highlight the importance of long-term neurodevelopmental monitoring for SARS-CoV-2–exposed children.

https://journals.lww.com/greenjourna...dren.1392.aspx


But hey, watch out for that Tylenol, and stay the #### away from vaccines...

[opendoor]

Makes sense. Pregnant woman gets COVID, takes Tylenol to reduce fever, then BOOM, autism. /s

But seriously, it does make some sense. Viral infections in pregnant women have been theorized to have a link to autism in the child, and some studies have shown a correlation. So I wouldn't be surprised if COVID was similar.

That said, there are a lot of confounding variables that could be driving the 29% increased odds ratio. The propensity to get tested (both for COVID and Autism) would probably be the biggest. I can easily imagine that the type of person who'd be very unlikely to bother with a COVID test would also be the type of person to not seek testing for neurodevelopmental diagnoses before their child turns 3. And conversely, someone who was vigilant in testing for COVID during pregnancy may also be more on top of screening for neurodivergence early on.

[Fuzz]

I get your point, but given the dates, wasn't that the period(9 months prior as well) where pretty much everyone got tested if they so much has sniffled?

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 18,124 live births to individuals who delivered between March 1, 2020, and May 31, 2021

[Manhattanboy]

Really not sure whether to get the vaccine now. I might have had a mild case of Covid a month ago but tested negative.

Need to do some research and chat with my family doc.

EDIT. Funny didn’t hesitate to get a flu shot. Do it every year. But just not sure about another Covid shot. I think my last one was 2 years ago.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I get your point, but given the dates, wasn't that the period(9 months prior as well) where pretty much everyone got tested if they so much has sniffled?

Not necessarily. Testing wasn't easily available for the first part of the pandemic and even when it was, there are a lot of reasons why lower propensity to testing for COVID could be correlated with lower propensity for testing for neurodevelopmental conditions. The two big ones are demographics and distrust of the medical system.

In the US, poorer people generally have much worse access to medical care, which can show up through poor prenatal and post-natal care, which is what's going to catch these things. For instance, it's quite easy to envision a wealthier person with excellent health insurance getting a precautionary PCR test at a prenatal appointment that may catch a minor case of COVID, and then having strong support from the medical system after the child is born where subtle symptoms of neurodivergence are recognized and further examined. Whereas a poorer person might basically just show up to the hospital when they're ready to deliver and receive little to no care after they're discharged, leading to a much lower chance of their child being diagnosed early.

And people who have distrust of the medical system (think antivaxxers, COVID deniers, people with religious objections, etc.) would also normally be less likely to either test for COVID or pursue diagnosis of a neurodevelopmental disorder for their young children.

I don't know, I don't have access to the full paper, so maybe they properly account for all that, but it'd be pretty hard to do with observational data based on health records.

But like I said, the general idea tracks with other evidence the demonstrates that things like maternal illness, fever, etc. impacts brain development of the fetus, so I wouldn't be surprised if there was a link.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Really not sure whether to get the vaccine now. I might have had a mild case of Covid a month ago but tested negative.

Need to do some research and chat with my family doc.

EDIT. Funny didn’t hesitate to get a flu shot. Do it every year. But just not sure about another Covid shot. I think my last one was 2 years ago.

I think it does make sense that the flu shot is a no brainer. Flu shots prevent spread, studies so far say that Covid shots don't prevent spread, so it's more of a decision for yourself.

My main driver for both vaccines was primarily so babies, old people and the immunocompromised don't get wiped out by me sneezing in their face. Not getting sick myself was secondary, as these shots knock me on my ass every year. That said, I personally went for the combo pack as having COVID sucked.

[Scroopy Noopers]

Covid was worse for me than any flu I’ve ever had by far. So I get both now, because I don’t want that smoke.

[WideReceiver]

@drneilstone has become one of my favourite Twitter follows. He tweets mostly about COVID and vaccine issues and is regularly vilified by anti-vaxers. He promotes vaccinations with a sense of humour. Check him out if you’re on Twitter.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by WideReceiver

@drneilstone has become one of my favourite Twitter follows. He tweets mostly about COVID and vaccine issues and is regularly vilified by anti-vaxers. He promotes vaccinations with a sense of humour. Check him out if you’re on Twitter.

I follow Dr. Jessica Knurick (drjessicaknurick) on Instagram for my occasional dose of "educational but depressing".

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

I think it does make sense that the flu shot is a no brainer. Flu shots prevent spread, studies so far say that Covid shots don't prevent spread, so it's more of a decision for yourself.

That's not really true though. If a vaccine is even minimally protective against infection (which all data I've seen shows COVID vaccines are for a period of time), then it will reduce transmission. If you're not infected, you can't spread it.

A lot of the "COVID vaccines don't prevent transmission" dialog relates to spread after a person becomes infected. So the secondary attack rate among vaccinated people who get infected isn't much different than it is among unvaccinated people, but that's true for flu vaccines too. But again, if you're not infected in the first place (and both COVID and flu vaccines do reduce the chance of being infected for at least several months after vaccination), then you're not going to spread it.

Neither vaccine is hugely effective, particularly if they don't match the circulating strain, but they do help and they're better than no protection, particularly for vulnerable people and those who interact with the vulnerable.

[Bill Bumface]

Happy to be wrong here, but are you saying this is not population level data that would account for the lower infection rates?

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...768-4/fulltext

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/39283431/