VA Study: How Long Does COVID-19 Vaccine Immunity Last?
This popped up in my email box today. I am not a member of any particular group representing veterans; but, I do use the VA for healthcare as a discharged Marine Sergeant. At times, I have written in support of various actions by different military groups supporting veterans.
With regard to healthcare, Medicare has started to use the VA Pharmaceutical formulary due to their pricing. In some cases such as Metoprolol, Medicare has changed from one version to another as a result of cost saves.
Groundbreaking VA Study Shows How Long COVID-19 Vaccine Immunity May Last
26 Mar 2021 Military.com | By Patricia Kime
Among the great unknowns of the COVID-19 vaccines now in use against the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus is how long immunity lasts and whether booster shots will be needed over time.
Scientists at the VA’s Office of Research and Development in White River Junction, Vermont, have found that the vaccines can provide immunity for at least seven to nine months, a time frame similar to the immune response generated in people who have had COVID-19.
The study examined antibodies in some of the 240,000 veterans who have contracted COVID-19, Dr. Richard Stone, VA’s acting under secretary for health, said Friday.
Speaking to reporters during a news conference Friday with VA Secretary Denis McDonough, Dr. Richard Stone:
“The evidence is that between seven and nine months, we can feel comfortable that you are still protected. We think it will be longer than that. That is not a limitation,”
While several studies have shown that immunity following a COVID-19 infection can last at least six months, and perhaps as many as eight months, research on the lasting impact of COVID-19 vaccines is ongoing, and scientists have been hesitant to discuss the time frame before all the data is compiled.
But the VA’s findings, Stone said, could “extend” the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s message that immunity from a vaccine lasts at least six months. Dr. Richard Stone:
“Right now it appears we will be able to publish in the next few weeks.”
The belief right now in Covid-19 like the flu is an endemic disease just like influenza. The issue then is how to reduce mortality and hospitalizations going forward
> The issue then is how to reduce mortality and hospitalizations going forward
In order to reduce mortality it is important to have valid statistical data of the number of infections (not positive PcR tests without specifying the number of amplifications )
Actual death count means the number of death where CODID-19 is primary cause means deaths from virus pneumonia only. All other needs to be excluded, IMHO. As money are involved, I think the statistics is grossly exaggerated.
In this respect, one effect that does need a valid explanation is almost total elimination of deaths from influenza this season. How this could be?
Development of direct methods of treating COVID-19 is also important and can help to reduce “real” mortality. This policy of putting all money on a single method — vaccination — looks pretty questionable to me, taking into account that coronaviruses mutate rapidly which limits the duration of vaccination, and the possibility of discovering long term side effects.
What about effective antibody treatment and new medications that supposedly can prevent the development of virus pneumonia? Which means that death from COVID-19 can be eliminated without vaccination as only pneumonia is deadly in this case.
Traditionally pneumonia is the main cause of deaths among elderly so the fact that now this is the COVID-19 pneumonia changes very little in statistics of death for the elderly. Post-influenza bacterial pneumonia is dangerous enough for this category of people, so COVID-19 pneumonia changes almost nothing here.
This wide-scale biological experiment with vaccination for age groups below, say, 50, does not look too promising if the effectiveness of the vaccine is limited to a single virus season. Which is what the CEO of Pfizer hinted recently.
Bloomberg triumphantly reported that Moderna effectiveness is 90% after six months. But what 90% effectiveness means is anybody guess. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-12/india-has-2nd-most-cases-u-k-hits-vaccine-target-virus-update?srnd=premium
If we assume that 10% of vaccinated who get infected (the vaccine does not prevent infection but does prevent development of virus pneumonia) will get virus pneumonia and if the effectiveness will drop further in 12 month this means that this particular vaccine is a grandiose failure.
Also constant vaccine cheerleading in
neoliberalMSM became a little bit annoying as for age groups below, say 50, this virus does not represent serious, statistically significant danger.And what if we discover serious side effects of Phizer or Moderna vaccine a year or two from now ? Then what?
IMHO attempt to immunize people below 25 or 30 years old without serious health problems would be highly questionable and possible harmful. And, unfortunately, I saw many such people in lines.
Also, one size does not fit all here. There areas with high density of population like NYC and vicinity (NY metropolitan area). Where the risk is highest and the virus represent serious and immanent threat due to the specifics of this env. Which is unhealthy env to start with.
And there are rural areas ( like in PA ) where so far there were no cases of COVID-19. At all.
It is wrong to treat them identically.
Also the value of vaccination depends on occupation, along with the age and general health. People who need to contact many other people can benefit more from the vaccination.
For them the small risk of complications from the vaccine is far less than the risk of being infected and develop COVID-19 pneumonia. Fpr people living more or less isolated life, and, especially, people paranoid about this virus — not so much.