Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Elon Musk said the US must keep on innovating at a very rapid pace, or we will go bust. It's a knowledge-centric economy we live in. No one will hire an American to make a nail, but surely companies like Solidworks and Lockheed Martin are doing pretty well and are hiring in the US. If Americans cannot find or create jobs that the Chinese cannot do, then it's game over, at least before there is wage parity between China and the US.

Try to get a job as a programmer in America, the land of opportunity. Sure, they are hiring. At their subsidiaries in China, India, Korea, etc. My sister worked for a major financial company, and they decided to 'farm out' all of their programming. They actually asked their programming staff if they wanted to go 'all expenses paid' to India to help train their replacements. (Oh, if they took the offer, they didn't get much for benefits after they were fired) They were shocked that no one took them up on it)

They tried to send their programming QC department to India, and when no one took up their offer, they started forcing people to rotate for a month at a time in India to do the QC work there rather than here. It was 'quicker'. She went for a month, and came back, gave her notice, and was gone. It's so cheap to get India programmers to do their work, they would throw away employees that had worked for them for decades. Greed...

You find me a job that can;t be done in China! Aside from McDonald's, Walmart greeter/stocker/manager. ALL of the *good* jobs are either paying crap, or you will end up training your replacement in (fill in the blank)...

EDIT: On Innovation. Research is expensive. Research that leads no where is even more expensive. Some countries actually fund Basic Research for corporations. Their country says 'think different, try new things. We will help fund you'. America? Pfffft... Hell, more holiday time off is like asking for their first born. Better healthcare is too much. Yikes... I'm sure 'we' must keep innovating, but having other countries manufacture those great ideas, and innovations is giving the farm away to milk the cows.

But this thread is veering off course. Bye bye...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 0924487
EDIT: On Innovation. Research is expensive. Research that leads no where is even more expensive. Some countries actually fund Basic Research for corporations. Their country says 'think different, try new things. We will help fund you'. America? Pfffft... Hell, more holiday time off is like asking for their first born. Better healthcare is too much. Yikes... I'm sure 'we' must keep innovating, but having other countries manufacture those great ideas, and innovations is giving the farm away to milk the cows.

I'm in an area with a lot of defense contractors and I'm pretty sure that you have to be here and also have a security clearance to work for them.

We have lots of hospitals in Boston and I think that they have to higher R&D people locally.

Fidelity Investments has a bunch of CSRs in a facility near where I live in addition to lots of developers locally. I think that some kinds of financial developer jobs have to be located here.
 
And in this, you proved my point: The vaccines were shown to prevent serious illness or death, which is what I stated earlier. In this case, the vaccines did NOT prevent further transmission of COVID to other people: vaccinated, unvaccinated, or otherwise. Again, it showed that those who were vaccinated and infected with COVID from this event had the same amount of virus in their test samples as those who were unvaccinated and infected with COVID from this event.

BL.
Please see the post by poorcody (right after yours) that shows CDC data of 8 fold reduction in incidence of disease for vaccinated compared to unvaccinated. Nationally, the overwhelming majority of cases, hospitalizations and deaths are unvaccinated. You are hanging your hat on one cluster, which may be an outlier. Overwhelmingly, the evidence shows that the vaccines provide excellent protection (not 100% of course) against infection.

Rather than looking at large data sets, you are getting caught up in hyperbolic media coverage of a singular event. This media frenzy is stepping all over the message about the efficacy of the vaccine in protecting against infection and serious illness. Per CNN, The Washington Post ran a headline that read, "CDC study shows three-fourths of people infected in Massachusetts covid-19 outbreak were vaccinated." As Matthew Gertz commented, "Please don't do this. Provincetown has one of the highest vaccination rates in the country. As vaccination rates increase the percentage of cases that are in vaccinated people NECESSARILY increases."
 
Last edited:
I'm in an area with a lot of defense contractors and I'm pretty sure that you have to be here and also have a security clearance to work for them.

We have lots of hospitals in Boston and I think that they have to higher R&D people locally.

Fidelity Investments has a bunch of CSRs in a facility near where I live in addition to lots of developers locally. I think that some kinds of financial developer jobs have to be located here.

Um, she worked for Fidelity. They 'cash and carry' their development, like most companies now.
 
My mother is 99, frail and has a history of adverse reactions to vaccines. She worked as a Registered Nurse from the 1940s to the 1980s and had to retire due to work injuries.

And then there are a large number of people that can't be vaccinated.

They are called children.

Excluding children under 12 who are not yet FDA authorized to receive the vaccine, there are actually very few people who have medical contraindications to vaccines. Children are typically the last to get approval for new pharmaceuticals for obvious ethical reasons. It also makes sense considering they are at the lowest risk. I would be very surprised if the vaccine is not approved in children eventually.

1. Unlike a lot of other vaccines, especially historically, the vaccines don’t contain latex, egg, pork, etc. The vaccines have excipients that people can have allergies to, polyethylene glycol or polysorbate, but this is rare, especially compared to the aforementioned substances.

2. There is no live virus in the COVID vaccine so immunocompromised patients aren’t at risk of the vaccine causing an infection. It’s possible that the vaccine could cause immune function to drop further, but this has yet to be observed. The current protocol is vaccinate the immunocompromised because the risk of active infection is far more serious.

3. People with autoimmune disorders may be at risk of an autoimmune reaction from the vaccine. Again, there has been no observed association. Generally speaking those with autoimmune disorders or histories of autoimmune reactions will be recommended to get the vaccine.

4. Like most new drugs (and many older drugs), the effect on mother’s and their fetus or breastfed children is unknown (it’s not really ethical to test for toxicity in babies). Current protocol recommends pregnant/breastfeeding women get the vaccine.

The one population where there is concern is someone has numerous drug allergies. The more allergies (especially of unrelated substances) someone has, the more likely they are to develop allergic reactions to new substances. In such a situation that’s a decision to assess with one’s medical team. For someone like your mother I think it would be worth reviewing what vaccines she responded to poorly and see if there’s a common denominator between them. It’s also worth noting a surprising amount of people don’t understand the difference between side effects and allergic reactions. If there’s no trend, then it would probably be advisable to to not get the vaccine, especially in a 99 year old. On the other hand, patients are monitored after receiving the vaccine and allergic reactions can be easily managed - it really depends on the patients health status, risk factors, and what they’re comfortable with.

Cape Cod/Provincetown shows otherwise. That is the point you keep forgetting when you bring up this talking point.
Per 10Boston local news, out of a cluster of almost 900 people; "Seven people have been hospitalized in connection with this cluster -- five from Massachusetts and two from out of state -- and no deaths have been reported." So, it seems like this is a case were the vaccines worked to prevent serious illness or death.

We will need to learn more about this cluster as it relates to the number of infections. I would be very cautions about drawing general conclusions from a single event. There are numerous ways these cluster outliers can be misleading. And it is an outlier, since nationally the vast majority of new infections and people in the hospital/deaths are unvaccinated.

Personally, I am hesitant to draw any major conclusions from the Provincetown cluster. As it is, the studies looking at the vaccine efficacy vs. the delta variant are highly variable. For example, there are have studies out of the UK suggesting ~80%, while Israel is saying 39%. That’s a huge difference. It’s very possible there are flaws in these studies. Israel hasn’t released any data at all, so there’s no way to make an assessment. Other data I’ve seen reported is based off incredibly small population sizes, as little as a 200-300 people.

An important consideration is who are getting these breakthrough cases? People with reduced immune function for whatever reason (unmanaged HIV, old age, Chemo, immune suppressant drugs, etc) are likely to form less immunity than someone with a healthy immune system.

The Provincetown data has garnered a lot of attention, especially here in Massachusetts. There is a lack of specific data and context though. Initially the CDC reported 469 breakthrough cases and 74% being in fully vaccinated individuals (now 880 cases, not sure what the %vax’ed is).

First, one thing to consider is that the vax rate in P-Town is extremely high- 114% (more people vaccinated listing their address in P-town than the last census population indicated live there). Only about 3,000 people live there year round, but in the summer the population is as high as 60,000. The 4th of July weekend is the busiest weekend for any coastal tourist destinations in New England.

Provincetown is also an extremely liberal place and is known for being a Mecca of sorts for the LGBT community. I would expect high vaccination rates among visitors. If you estimate 651 breakthrough (0.75x880) cases out of 60,000 people, that’s like 1%.

The LGBT community, which is overly represented in P-town, may also have some factors that skew the stats on the vaccine efficacy and transmission rates (specifically the MSM cohort). For example men who have sex with other men are at significantly higher risk of HIV, which reduces immune function, reducing immune response to vaccines. 15% of HIV+ people don’t know they’re infected and less than 50% of infected people have their viral load managed. Gay men may be more sexually promiscuous. More intimate contact means higher risk of transmission. This is not to stereotype the LGBT community or cast judgement. It’s just factors that should be considered when comparing different groups.

It’s also worth noting the delta variant has not been confirmed in the P-town cluster, it has only been presumed as the likely cause. It’s possible some/many/all of these cases are a different strain or a new strain.

Anyways, the good news is if you’re vaccinated the chances of requiring hospitalization is incredibly low. It’s just concerning that if breakthrough cases are occurring in tbe vaccinated, the possibility of a vaccine resistant strain increases. And no one is talking about that.
 
Um, she worked for Fidelity. They 'cash and carry' their development, like most companies now.

All of it?

The facility near me has more employees than space. The pandemic has helped as people aren't coming into the office. There's talk about requiring people to come in one week per month and just using a flexible setup. I go there regularly to play tennis and the place is deserted.
 
Excluding children under 12 who are not yet FDA authorized to receive the vaccine, there are actually very few people who have medical contraindications to vaccines. Children are typically the last to get approval for new pharmaceuticals for obvious ethical reasons. It also makes sense considering they are at the lowest risk. I would be very surprised if the vaccine is not approved in children eventually.

1. Unlike a lot of other vaccines, especially historically, the vaccines don’t contain latex, egg, pork, etc. The vaccines have excipients that people can have allergies to, polyethylene glycol or polysorbate, but this is rare, especially compared to the aforementioned substances.

2. There is no live virus in the COVID vaccine so immunocompromised patients aren’t at risk of the vaccine causing an infection. It’s possible that the vaccine could cause immune function to drop further, but this has yet to be observed. The current protocol is vaccinate the immunocompromised because the risk of active infection is far more serious.

3. People with autoimmune disorders may be at risk of an autoimmune reaction from the vaccine. Again, there has been no observed association. Generally speaking those with autoimmune disorders or histories of autoimmune reactions will be recommended to get the vaccine.

4. Like most new drugs (and many older drugs), the effect on mother’s and their fetus or breastfed children is unknown (it’s not really ethical to test for toxicity in babies). Current protocol recommends pregnant/breastfeeding women get the vaccine.

The one population where there is concern is someone has numerous drug allergies. The more allergies (especially of unrelated substances) someone has, the more likely they are to develop allergic reactions to new substances. In such a situation that’s a decision to assess with one’s medical team. For someone like your mother I think it would be worth reviewing what vaccines she responded to poorly and see if there’s a common denominator between them. It’s also worth noting a surprising amount of people don’t understand the difference between side effects and allergic reactions. If there’s no trend, then it would probably be advisable to to not get the vaccine, especially in a 99 year old. On the other hand, patients are monitored after receiving the vaccine and allergic reactions can be easily managed - it really depends on the patients health status, risk factors, and what they’re comfortable with.




Personally, I am hesitant to draw any major conclusions from the Provincetown cluster. As it is, the studies looking at the vaccine efficacy vs. the delta variant are highly variable. For example, there are have studies out of the UK suggesting ~80%, while Israel is saying 39%. That’s a huge difference. It’s very possible there are flaws in these studies. Israel hasn’t released any data at all, so there’s no way to make an assessment. Other data I’ve seen reported is based off incredibly small population sizes, as little as a 200-300 people.

An important consideration is who are getting these breakthrough cases? People with reduced immune function for whatever reason (unmanaged HIV, old age, Chemo, immune suppressant drugs, etc) are likely to form less immunity than someone with a healthy immune system.

The Provincetown data has garnered a lot of attention, especially here in Massachusetts. There is a lack of specific data and context though. Initially the CDC reported 469 breakthrough cases and 74% being in fully vaccinated individuals (now 880 cases, not sure what the %vax’ed is).

First, one thing to consider is that the vax rate in P-Town is extremely high- 114% (more people vaccinated listing their address in P-town than the last census population indicated live there). Only about 3,000 people live there year round, but in the summer the population is as high as 60,000. The 4th of July weekend is the busiest weekend for any coastal tourist destinations in New England.

Provincetown is also an extremely liberal place and is known for being a Mecca of sorts for the LGBT community. I would expect high vaccination rates among visitors. If you estimate 651 breakthrough (0.75x880) cases out of 60,000 people, that’s like 1%.

The LGBT community, which is overly represented in P-town, may also have some factors that skew the stats on the vaccine efficacy and transmission rates (specifically the MSM cohort). For example men who have sex with other men are at significantly higher risk of HIV, which reduces immune function, reducing immune response to vaccines. 15% of HIV+ people don’t know they’re infected and less than 50% of infected people have their viral load managed. Gay men may be more sexually promiscuous. More intimate contact means higher risk of transmission. This is not to stereotype the LGBT community or cast judgement. It’s just factors that should be considered when comparing different groups.

It’s also worth noting the delta variant has not been confirmed in the P-town cluster, it has only been presumed as the likely cause. It’s possible some/many/all of these cases are a different strain or a new strain.

Anyways, the good news is if you’re vaccinated the chances of requiring hospitalization is incredibly low. It’s just concerning that if breakthrough cases are occurring in tbe vaccinated, the possibility of a vaccine resistant strain increases. And no one is talking about that.

A friend of mine was given the go-ahead by his oncologist to get the vaccine this past week. His markers had greatly increased this year so he was on chemo to get his markers down and the chemo got the job done. He's stage 4 with a rare form so it's unlikely that a miracle cure shows up - he's on the chemo for life program.

My mother is at the stage where I think that any kind of infection would kill her. My wife was weak for several days after the innoculation but she's in good shape. I think that someone would have to stay with my mother for several days in case of a response of just weakness. Something like a fever or the loss of use of her arm would be problematical as she only has full use of one arm. At any rate, it is her decision and she's said no up until now. I have two sisters from the west coast coming in this month and we'll see what they say and whether or not she changes her mind.

The explanation on the difference between Israel and the UK is that Israel followed Pfizer's guidelines with the gap of three weeks between doses. The UK (and Canada) wait 2-3 months between doses and this appears to greatly improve efficacy against getting infected. There is a video that I saw last night that shows the efficacy by month between Israel and the UK. This is why there is talk of getting a third dose in the United States and Israel. I sent a note to my oncologist yesterday asking about a third dose. I'm going to see him in a couple of weeks to get his answer unless he messages me before then. I suspect that I could get a third dose if I wanted to because the vaccination databases are at the state level so MA won't know that I was vaccinated in NH. But it would be nice if CDC moved on allowing older or immunocompromised people to get the booster.

 
Just give me the vaccine under development that covers the variants. That should outperform the original vaccines.
The way the vaccine works is to help the immune system produce the neutralizing antibodies that can neutralize the virus.

The way how the virus works is that it gets into our mucous membrane where there are these ACE2 receptors and the spike protein of the virus binds to these ACE2 and infects the person. The virus can not infect through the skin, because it doesn't have the mucous membrane that have those ACE2 receptors. So that's why "masking" and wearing glasses or a face shield works because it prevents the airborne virus particles from entering the eyes, nose and mouth where the mucous membrane are. Even a cloth mask can reduce the viral load and then whatever is left that enters into your system will be mitigated somewhat by your immune system that had been primed by the 2 dose vaccine. So masking PLUS current vaccination is enough to outperform someone who simply relies only on the vaccine as the sole preventer of infection.

Having said that, current vaccines are enough to mitigate the Delta variant. The key is those neutralizing antibodies specific to neutralizing COVID. You can have as many vaccines as you want and even the ones targeted specifically for the Delta variant, but what's important is not the vaccine, but rather if your immune system CAN PRODUCE detectable neutralizing antibodies in your system. I believe the current PCR testing threshold which turns positive if your system has 3000 or more copies of the virus. It will not show you being positive if your system has less than 3000 copies of the virus, but still you can still infect people. That's why fully vaccinated Savid Jahid (UK's health minister) and the fully vaccinated house staff of Pelosi's office also tested positive for COVID.

If you are fully vaccinated and yet lack those detectable neutralizing antibodies in your system, then you will be prone to COVID infection. This is why even fully vaccinated individuals can be easily infected because of the lack of neutralizing antibodies to neutralize the virus. It's the nature of how vaccine works.

There are also 2 stages that fully vaccinated people will experience. A relapse and a re-infection of the virus.

When a fully vaccinated person is exposed to the virus, the person's immune system then kicks into place and neutralizes the infection. But it depends on the person's immune system status at the time. For example; you can be infected by the virus and then recover, but after a few days later, you then get the symptoms coming back. This is a relapse phase where the immunity system did have the upper hand, the person recovered, but then the person's immune system for some reason weakens and then the virus in your system then gets the upper hand. This happens more common than you think with infectious diseases, because the immune system didn't fully rid of the infection. This happens more common because of the North American diet of junk food and highly processed foods and many unhealthy activities that don't necessarily help in maintaining the health of the individual's immune system.

The efficacy of the vaccine is predicated on healthy individuals and a healthy fully functioning immune system. So how many healthy ideal individuals can you find in North America that can achieve the same efficacy as those healthy individuals conducted in vaccine trials. That's why the efficacy of the Flu vaccine is roughly 40-60% from the CDC website, so that's a more realistic expectation.

The vaccine does not kill the virus. The vaccine can not prevent relapses nor re-infection which are what we now see. The vaccine isn't the one that's doing the work for your immune system. It only helps point to the virus' spike protein and teach the immune system to produce the necessary neutralizing antibodies which helps reduce death and hospitalization rates compared to the unvaccinated.

The best way to know that you are an ideal candidate for the booster shot is to consult with your trusted medical professional or your own trusted doctor and get his/her expert diagnosis and assess your risk/reward situation and not based your decision on fear and on a narrative that vaccine acts like a golden shield that guarantees that perfect protection.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: windrider42
The way the vaccine works is to help the immune system produce the neutralizing antibodies that can neutralize the virus.

The way how the virus works is that it gets into our mucous membrane where there are these ACE2 receptors and the spike protein of the virus binds to these ACE2 and infects the person. The virus can not infect through the skin, because it doesn't have the mucous membrane that have those ACE2 receptors. So that's why "masking" and wearing glasses or a face shield works because it prevents the airborne virus particles from entering the eyes, nose and mouth where the mucous membrane are. Even a cloth mask can reduce the viral load and then whatever is left that enters into your system will be mitigated somewhat by your immune system that had been primed by the 2 dose vaccine. So masking PLUS current vaccination is enough to outperform someone who simply relies only on the vaccine as the sole preventer of infection.

Having said that, current vaccines are enough to mitigate the Delta variant. The key is those neutralizing antibodies specific to neutralizing COVID. You can have as many vaccines as you want and even the ones targeted specifically for the Delta variant, but what's important is not the vaccine, but rather if your immune system CAN PRODUCE detectable neutralizing antibodies in your system. I believe the current PCR testing threshold turns positive if your system has 3000 copies of the virus. It will not show you being positive if your system has less than 3000 copies of the virus. If you are fully vaccinated and yet lack those detectable neutralizing antibodies in your system, then you will be prone to COVID infection. This is why even fully vaccinated individuals can be easily infected because of the lack of neutralizing antibodies to neutralize the virus. It's the nature of how vaccine works.

There are also 2 stages that fully vaccinated people will experience. A relapse and a re-infection of the virus.

When a fully vaccinated person is exposed to the virus, the person's immune system then kicks into place and neutralizes the infection. But it depends on the person's immune system status at the time. For example; you can be infected by the virus and then recover, but after a few days later, you then get the symptoms coming back. This is a relapse phase where the immunity system did have the upper hand, the person recovered, but then the person's immune system for some reason weakens and then the virus in your system then gets the upper hand. This happens more common than you think with infectious diseases, because the immune system didn't fully rid of the infection. This happens more common because of the North American diet of junk food and highly processed foods and many unhealthy activities that don't necessarily help in maintaining the health of the individual's immune system.

The efficacy of the vaccine is predicated on healthy individuals and a healthy fully functioning immune system. So how many healthy ideal individuals can you find in North America that can achieve the same efficacy as those healthy individuals conducted in vaccine trials. That's why the efficacy of the Flu vaccine is roughly 40-60% from the CDC website, so that's a more realistic expectation.

The vaccine does not kill the virus. The vaccine can not prevent relapses nor re-infection which are what we now see and hear as narratives being pushed by various agencies, because the vaccine isn't the one that's doing the work for your immune system. It only helps point to the virus' spike protein and teach the immune system to produce the necessary neutralizing antibodies which helps reduce death and hospitalization rates compared to the unvaccinated.

The best way to know that you are an ideal candidate for the booster shot is to consult with your trusted medical professional or your own trusted doctor and get his/her expert diagnosis and assess your risk/reward situation and not based your decision on fear and on a narrative that vaccine acts like a golden shield that guarantees that protection.

Israel is starting to give the third shot to people over 60.

The apparent problem is the recommended 3 weeks between doses which greatly decreases protection against infection. The video I looked at shows efficacy declines with time pretty rapidly with the 3 weeks between doses compared to two to three months.

I emailed my oncologist yesterday and I'm going to see him in two weeks to get his answer. Maybe he'll have a shot waiting for me in the office.
 
And in this, you proved my point: The vaccines were shown to prevent serious illness or death, which is what I stated earlier. In this case, the vaccines did NOT prevent further transmission of COVID to other people: vaccinated, unvaccinated, or otherwise. Again, it showed that those who were vaccinated and infected with COVID from this event had the same amount of virus in their test samples as those who were unvaccinated and infected with COVID from this event.

BL.
People do not really understand how PCR testing works and that's why they THINK vaccines will prevent further transmission when they look at the data.

The current PCR testing method, the gold standard in testing for COVID, will ONLY TURN positive if your system has 3000 or more copies of the virus. If you have less than 3000 copies of the virus, then it will show negative. Which is really ironic, because people think that a test shows you either have the virus or not. Basically, the idea of the test is that below 3000 copies of the virus, people won't really get sick, but they still can infect even if they show they are negative!

That's why airline passengers still get COVID even their requirement to get on a plane in many jurisdiction is to have a negative PCR test. But having a negative PCR test alone is NOT a sign of zero copies of the virus in your system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: windrider42
Israel is starting to give the third shot to people over 60.

The apparent problem is the recommended 3 weeks between doses which greatly decreases protection against infection. The video I looked at shows efficacy declines with time pretty rapidly with the 3 weeks between doses compared to two to three months.

I emailed my oncologist yesterday and I'm going to see him in two weeks to get his answer. Maybe he'll have a shot waiting for me in the office.
Israel and the US are following the Pfizer dated recommendation, which is weird when countries like the UK, Canada (now down to 7 weeks) and some European countries are following a longer gap and are showing better efficacy results. Always follow the recommendation of your oncologist and his advise -- you're doing the right thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pshufd
Vaccination trends in US.

Doses administered, up 31% on the week
Georgia, Missouri, Texas increasing
Alabama, up 159% on 3 weeks
Florida, up 78% on 3 weeks

(their base source is the CDC).

Good sign but these are probably from a low base.

Pfizer may receive FDA approval this week.
 
This is why even fully vaccinated individuals can be easily infected because of the lack of neutralizing antibodies to neutralize the virus. It's the nature of how vaccine works.
I would disagree with the notion that fully vaccinated can be easily infected. As poorcody’s post showed per the CDC’s presentation, vaccinated are much less likely to be infected than unvaccinated.

335BA0F8-D996-4A20-B2C7-6726C4EACB0B.jpeg
 
I would disagree with the notion that fully vaccinated can be easily infected. As another post showed per the CDC’s presentation, vaccinated are much less likely to be infected than unvaccinated.

Israel has an efficacy rate of about 39% on infection after six months. Efficacy is very good but declines with time when the doses are space by only three weeks. Yes, it's better than if you're not vaccinated but the much lower efficacy against infection was a big surprise that was basically released this past week.
 
Interesting insight from Gottlieb this morning on Face the Nation (video and transcript):
"High levels of the virus in the nasopharynx of individuals who were vaccinated and became subsequently infected on par with the level of virus that you would see in someone who wasn't vaccinated. But we know two things. First of all, nasopharyngeal swabs, the virus titers that you see in those nasopharyngeal swabs, while it's suggestive of someone's ability to spread the virus, it doesn't prove that they're able to spread the virus. So it's not a perfect correlate with your ability to transmit the virus and how contagious you are. You really want to measure virus levels in the lower airways because that's where aerosols are created. And we know that you spread this virus through aerosols."
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mainsail
Israel has an efficacy rate of about 39% on infection after six months. Efficacy is very good but declines with time when the doses are space by only three weeks. Yes, it's better than if you're not vaccinated but the much lower efficacy against infection was a big surprise that was basically released this past week.
I don’t know about Israel, but the CDC continues to maintain that you are significantly less likely to be infected if vaccinated….even with the delta variant. Once infected, you may be able to transmit…..but you need to be infected before you can transmit to others. Remember, the lion share of new cases are unvaccinated individuals, and over half the US population has been vaccinated.

I do agree that the CDC has done a terrible job of messaging on this thing. An absolute self-inflected wound that will only serve to increase vaccine hesitantcy and anti-vaxxer propaganda.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Richard8655
Face the Nation also had Israel's director of Public Health Services on.

She said "...we are seeing about 50% of the people who are infected right now are vaccinated, fully vaccinated individuals."

Also there has been some question of whether the increased cases in vaccinated people is solely because of Delta's strength, or if there is actual waning immunity. Her answer (a little convoluted in the transcript):

"That was the- the million-dollar question for us. And we've been following this for several weeks now, trying to tease apart whether it's a problem of elderly individuals who have lower immune system response, and that's together with a Delta variant- more infectious. We see this. Or it's really waning immunity. And what we have been seeing in the past several weeks is actually an evidence that there is waning immunity."

The video or transcript are worth a look/read.
 
I don’t know about Israel, but the CDC continues to maintain that you are significantly less likely to be infected if vaccinated….even with the delta variant. Once infected, you may be able to transmit…..but you need to be infected before you can transmit to others. Remember, the lion share of new cases are unvaccinated individuals, and over half the US population has been vaccinated.

I do agree that the CDC has done a terrible job of messaging on this thing. An absolute self-inflected wound that will only serve to increase vaccine hesitantcy and anti-vaxxer propaganda.

The problem is that the efficacy from vaccination declines rather quickly with time. Yes, you're better off than the unvaccinated but I don't consider 39% efficacy to be that great. The CDC agrees as it put back the mask recommendation for unvaccinated and vaccinated people.
 
Face the Nation also had Israel's director of Public Health Services on.

She said "...we are seeing about 50% of the people who are infected right now are vaccinated, fully vaccinated individuals."

Also there has been some question of whether the increased cases in vaccinated people is solely because of Delta's strength, or if there is actual waning immunity. Her answer (a little convoluted in the transcript):

"That was the- the million-dollar question for us. And we've been following this for several weeks now, trying to tease apart whether it's a problem of elderly individuals who have lower immune system response, and that's together with a Delta variant- more infectious. We see this. Or it's really waning immunity. And what we have been seeing in the past several weeks is actually an evidence that there is waning immunity."

The video or transcript are worth a look/read.

The video I posted last night shows declining efficacy with time. It compares Israel's results and the UK results.
 
The problem is that the efficacy from vaccination declines rather quickly with time. Yes, you're better off than the unvaccinated but I don't consider 39% efficacy to be that great. The CDC agrees as it put back the mask recommendation for unvaccinated and vaccinated people.
My understanding is they made the change because of concerns about transmission not efficacy. CDC continues to maintain that the vaccine is very effective against disease (infection), hospitalization, and death.
 
My understanding is they made the change because of concerns about transmission not efficacy. CDC continues to maintain that the vaccine is very effective against disease (infection), hospitalization, and death.

Did you see the CDC Powerpoint that came out this week?
 
Yes.

Did this have a slide on the difference in efficacy between spacing at 3 weeks vs 2 months? I saw a presentation on declining efficacy by month earlier and I think that it came from the CDC report though I am not sure.
I did not see it. But if there is waning immunity, it seems like the CDC would be recommending boosters.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.