Covid-19 Politics

[Stavros]

So are we getting a booster shot or not:

Tensions mount between CDC and Biden health team over boosters

http://www.politico.com/news/2021/09...oosters-511529

Departing FDA regulators pan Covid boosters in paper

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/0...h-paper-511638

I thnk the CDC is still reeling from the assaults of the ignorant, savage and seditious Trump Presidency, but to me a lot of the problems here are mostly political, rather than science-based, and that is true for most countries not just the US. In the 1990s I used the CDC's database a lot and it remains a major source of information, so it is tragic to see how bad politics has disrupted what ought to be one of the most reliable US institutions of learning and research.

The question of boosters is a diffcult one -Boris Johnson is to confirm that Boosters will be available to over-50s from December, just as the existing Covid vaccines are to be made available for 12-15 year olds -the December date reflects the anxiety in the UK Government that the coming winter months will see an increase in infections. Also, your second link doesn't, to me, suggest there is a medical/scientific problem with boosters, thus-

""Even in populations with fairly high vaccination rates the unvaccinated are still the major drivers of transmission and are themselves at the highest risk of serious disease," wrote the authors, which also include World Health Organization scientists.

Even if booster shots were shown to lower the risk of serious disease, they said, existing supplies would be better off deployed to unvaccinated corners of the world, rather than boosting vaccinated populations, to head off the development of more variants."

That said, Boris Johnson has no grip on policy -we were going to have Vaccine Passports, now they have been 'delayed', his plan to reform social care turns out to be anything but, linking social care to NHS funding and limiting the overhaul at a time when the 'Winter is Coming' fear seems to be as ominous as it was in Game of Thrones.

If I am offered a boost I will take it, though I would prefer to see existing vaccines and resources extended to those who don't have it, with surplus supplies given free to countries that need it. I don't know what to do about the militants who reject basic, elementary science -to me this is not based on any knowledge of medical science but a fetish for the politics that rejects Government as if it were a sinister organiation determined to take over people's lives, which right now is as likely to be found in Texas as Afghanistan, contradicting the fears expressed by loopy fanatics ike Lin Wood. As for vaccine passports, people need a licence to drive a car, is that an infringement of their liberty?

All round, sober reflection on what is needed, but as noted so many times in the last 18 months, co-ordinated leadership and organization of the kind that seems to be lacking.

Right now it is not the politicians to admire, but the continuing dedication and hard work of health care workers dealing with the reality on the ground 24/7, without whom some of us would not be here.

[filghy2]

Here's some more info on the Israeli data that is behind the push for booster shots. https://www.politico.com/news/2021/0...fficacy-511777

I think the media often overplay these stories about disagreement in official circles. A certain amount of disagreement is a normal, healthy part of the process of moving knowledge forward. There has to be a balance between this and avoiding unnecessary confusion, but too much enforced consensus can be counterproductive because it feeds a perception that alternative views are being suppressed. We should actually be more worried if officials never disagree, because that is a sign of group-think which leads to poor decisions.

[blackchubby38]

FDA scientists skeptical of COVID-19 booster evidence ahead of key meeting

hehill.com/policy/healthcare/572436-fda-scientists-skeptical-of-covid-booster-evidence-ahead-of-key-meeting

[blackchubby38]

Is disagreement and positive discourse in official circles good for a democratic government, Yes. But there is also the issue of who should have the final say in approving a drug and when it shall be administered. From the article I just posted:

"The FDA's independent panel of experts on Friday will review the evidence from Pfizer and will likely vote on whether there's enough evidence to show boosters are necessary.

The FDA does not have to follow the agency's advice, but if the agency breaks with the panel's recommendation it would likely stoke public confusion and raise major questions about political interference."

Then there is this:

"In an unusual move last month, President Biden and top health officials publicly announced a booster shot program would begin the week of Sept. 20, well before the FDA and CDC examined the evidence.

While officials have been careful to say the booster program is contingent on the FDA and CDC giving the green light, they have been criticized by some public health experts for speaking as if the approval was a given."

Its up to the CDC to devise public health guidelines, the FDA to approve the necessary treatments to to combat the disease, and the government to take everything into consideration and then implement those guidelines and treatments in order to fight the pandemic.

But with the booster shots, it seems like the Biden administration jumped the gun on the plan and now its up to the FDA and the CDC to try to make it work. Even if the evidence doesn't wind up supporting it.

Another thing, why are we just getting Pfizer's evidence tomorrow and not Moderna's as well.

Moderna releases new data on Covid breakthrough cases it says supports need for booster shots

http://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/15/covid...ird-doses.html

"The group, called the agency’s Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee, is scheduled to debate administering third doses of Pfizer and BioNTech’s vaccine as federal health regulators say they need more time to review Moderna’s application for extra doses."

So if the third booster shot for Pfizer is approved, those who got the Moderna one have to wait to get their booster shot. Even if there is a good chance that their efficacy is waning. Because from what I understand, you can't mix vaccines.

[broncofan]

I think Pfizer had better data simply because Israel only used Pfizer and had kept pretty careful records of its effects over time. I'm sure Moderna is tracking the use of its drug as well but the Israeli data was the first to indicate a need for boosters.

We'll see what the FDA and CDC say. Immunocompromised people, such as organ transplant recipients and people on immunosuppressant drugs have already been given access to boosters. I've seen some data indicating a benefit for older people, not just from symptoms but also serious disease. If our stockpiles are just sitting there and more people will not get the vaccine, even a benefit against mild disease can help slow the spread and provide benefits to us.

Even effective boosters will never provide the value that using the shots for unvaccinated people has. The question is how much benefit, for whom, and whether we can as an alternative convince new people to get shots or give them away.

[broncofan]

Because from what I understand, you can't mix vaccines.

This is trickier. It's likely you can mix vaccines and get good benefits but unless there are studies showing that nobody will recommend an unregulated use. People who got the Johnson and Johnson shot were encouraged to get boosters with an mrna vaccine after delta appeared. On the other hand, going from an mrna vaccine to az or Johnson & Johnson is seen as less effective. But there is likely a lot of compatibility between Moderna and Pfizer and probably an effective boost but data awaits.

A good example of the hesitancy is that many countries were reluctant to recommend scheduling the second shot 8 weeks after the first shot so that there would be more coverage before people finished their two shot regimen. It turns out waiting longer between shots probably causes a better response to the second shot but because they were tested in 3 or 4 week intervals many scientists advised against it. I'll see if I can find anything on the mix and match boosting.

[broncofan]

Because from what I understand, you can't mix vaccines.

Sorry. If what you meant is that regulators probably won't let people, you might be right. I was vaccinated with pfizer and if I had the option for a third shot with moderna when it's indicated to be effective I would probably prefer that to waiting. But maybe regulators won't allow it.

[sukumvit boy]

I received my 3rd Pfizer vaccination last week because I was directed to do so by my physician . I was instructed to get the same brand as my first 2 injections and they stamped my Vaccination card with the date of the 3rd shot.

[Stavros]

The FDA does not have to follow the agency's advice, but if the agency breaks with the panel's recommendation it would likely stoke public confusion and raise major questions about political interference."

Its up to the CDC to devise public health guidelines, the FDA to approve the necessary treatments to to combat the disease, and the government to take everything into consideration and then implement those guidelines and treatments in order to fight the pandemic.

But with the booster shots, it seems like the Biden administration jumped the gun on the plan and now its up to the FDA and the CDC to try to make it work. Even if the evidence doesn't wind up supporting it.

Your concern suggests the relationship between science and politics is not as secure as it could be owing to the view I think politicians have that results are not just medical, but political. We have a similar disconnect in the UK where the Johnson Govt is keen to 'move on' from Covid through a sweeping relaxation of rules, travel arrangements, and so on, even as the scentific advisors it has have recommend caution. Johnson's impatience is part of his character, famously uninterested in detail, he chases headlines with more zeal than a corrupt lawyer chasing ambulances.

Is Biden an old man in a hurry? Is there an impatience to his policy-making that is creating risks for the US as well as its people? I am quite relaxed about the Boosters, and am not too concerned about mixing vaccines either, but in a febrile atmosphere, notably in the US where anti-vaccination ignorance and hysteria is in some places destroying lives, I think the President needs to show more balance, or he risks leaving people behind, or confused, and that is not good for the desired outcome.

I suspect that if the States that adore Trump had not decided they no longer respect the Presidency, Congress, the Constitution, the Rule of Law, and elementary indeed, advanced science produced by the USA's once proud institutions, you would not be so anxious. Trump now claims that, in effect, if he is not re-elected President in 2024, it will mean the end of the USA, even as he did more than most to hasten that demise, on the basis that L'état, c'est moi, as anti-scentific as you can get, and lethal to democracy.

[blackchubby38]

Sorry. If what you meant is that regulators probably won't let people, you might be right. I was vaccinated with pfizer and if I had the option for a third shot with moderna when it's indicated to be effective I would probably prefer that to waiting. But maybe regulators won't allow it.

I was under the impression that the scientists/doctors weren't going to let people mix with vaccines. But if we are allowed to, like you I want my third shot to be with Moderna.