Report: Omicron is much more contagious - Discussion on severity (2 Viewers)

[Terminalxylem]

You mean the almost 900,000 reports currently on file from the covid-19 vaccines? 

How many VAERS reports of heart attacks and strokes have occurred in young, otherwise healthy people within 1 week of the vaccine?

I mean @Tha Guru ‘s friend sees it weekly, so there must be a bunch. Never mind that EMT’s don’t actually make final diagnoses, nor have any idea about patient outcomes beyond the brief window before they’re handed off.

For one guy with such fleeting patient exposure to draw those conclusions, there must be thousands of cases a week. At this point, they may actually outnumber hospitalizations for covid. Surely, VAERS reflects such terrible AEs?

 

[Max Power]

How many VAERS reports of heart attacks and strokes have occurred in young, otherwise healthy people within 1 week of the vaccine?

I mean @Tha Guru ‘s friend sees it weekly, so there must be a bunch. Never mind that EMT’s don’t actually make final diagnoses, nor have any idea about patient outcomes beyond the brief window before they’re handed off.

For one guy with such fleeting patient exposure to draw those conclusions, there must be thousands of cases a week. At this point, they may actually outnumber hospitalizations for covid. Surely, VAERS reflects such terrible AEs?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure you can look up all those numbers on VAERS.  It's also widely assumed that VAERS is an under-utilized tool; although it's probably on the upswing due to it's recent exposure because of the vaccines. 

Ron Johnson had a graph that showed the majority of VAERS reporting from the covid-19 vaccines comes in the first week after taking a dose. 

 

[Terminalxylem]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure you can look up all those numbers on VAERS.  It's also widely assumed that VAERS is an under-utilized tool; although it's probably on the upswing due to it's recent exposure because of the vaccines. 

Ron Johnson had a graph that showed the majority of VAERS reporting from the covid-19 vaccines comes in the first week after taking a dose. 

Maybe. It’s pretty unwieldy to use, but I’ll look later.

But surely someone in the field of ER medicine would have noticed an uptick in heart attacks and strokes among young, otherwise healthy people?

@jm192, we’ve got an EMT claiming he sees the above frequently, usually within a week of vaccination. How many severe vaccine AEs fitting that description have you seen or heard about? How do you plan to cover it up?

 

[Max Power]

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) — North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper said Monday that he has tested positive for COVID-19 but is continuing to work from home while experiencing mild symptoms.

Cooper's office released a statement saying that he has begun taking the antiviral pill Paxlovid to treat the virus. The statement said that he has been vaccinated and has had two booster shots. The governor said that he believes the shots helped ensure he's only having mild symptoms.

Two boosters and now taking Paxlovid for some reason even though it doesn't work in the vaccinated.  

 

[jm192]

Maybe. It’s pretty unwieldy to use, but I’ll look later.

But surely someone in the field of ER medicine would have noticed an uptick in heart attacks and strokes among young, otherwise healthy people?

@jm192, we’ve got an EMT claiming he sees the above frequently, usually within a week of vaccination. How many severe vaccine AEs fitting that description have you seen or heard about? How do you plan to cover it up?

None.  

We usually just blame it on their meth use.

 

[Terminalxylem]

None.  

We usually just blame it on their meth use.

Yeah, I have several close friends who work in the ER (doctors and nurses), and one of my groomsmen is a cardiologist (coincidentally, he also published a review of meth-induced cardiomyopathy). In total, I probably know/interact with 100+ frontline healthcare workers, in six different states.

NONE of them has said a peep about an unexplained uptick in heart attacks or strokes in younger healthy people. Nothing in the literature either. Weird that an EMT has noticed so many, and took the time to get a vaccination history. 

Hopefully he notifies someone about this alarming trend. 

 

[Max Power]

That doesn't sound good...

Covid Vaccines More Likely to Put You in Hospital Than Keep You Out, BMJ Editor's Analysis of Pfizer and Moderna Trial Data Finds – The Daily Sceptic

A new paper by BMJ Editor Dr. Peter Doshi and colleagues has analysed data from the Pfizer and Moderna Covid vaccine trials and found that the vaccines are more likely to put you in hospital with a serious adverse event than keep you out by protecting you from Covid.

The pre-print (not yet peer-reviewed) focuses on serious adverse events highlighted in a WHO-endorsed “priority list of potential adverse events relevant to COVID-19 vaccines”. The authors evaluated these serious adverse events of special interest as observed in “phase III randomised trials of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines”.

A serious adverse event was defined as per the trial protocols as an adverse event that results in any of the following conditions:

death;

life-threatening at the time of the event;

inpatient hospitalisation or prolongation of existing hospitalisation;

persistent or significant disability/incapacity;

a congenital anomaly/birth defect;

medically important event, based on medical judgement.

Dr. Doshi and colleagues found that the Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an increased risk of serious adverse events of special interest of 10.1 events per 10,000 vaccinated for Pfizer and 15.1 events per 10,000 for Moderna (95% CI -0.4 to 20.6 and -3.6 to 33.8, respectively). When combined, the mRNA vaccines were associated with a risk increase of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated (95% CI 2.1 to 22.9).

The authors note that this level of increased risk post-vaccine is greater than the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalisation in both Pfizer and Moderna trials, which was 2.3 per 10,000 participants for Pfizer and 6.4 per 10,000 for Moderna. This means that on this measure, the Pfizer vaccine results in a net increase in serious adverse events of 7.8 per 10,000 vaccinated and the Moderna vaccine of 8.7 per 10,000 vaccinated.

Addressing the difference between their findings and those of the FDA when it approved the vaccines, the authors note that the FDA’s analysis of serious adverse events “included thousands of additional participants with very little follow-up, of which the large majority had only received one dose”. The FDA also counted ‘people affected’ rather than individual events, despite there being twice as many individuals in the vaccine group than in the placebo group who experienced multiple serious adverse events.

The authors wonder where the U.S. Government’s own studies of adverse events are. They note that in July 2021, the FDA reported detecting four potential adverse events of interest following Pfizer vaccination – pulmonary embolism, acute myocardial infarction, immune thrombocytopenia and disseminated intravascular coagulation – and stated it would further investigate the findings. However, no update has yet appeared.

They also note that “while CDC published a protocol in early 2021 for using proportional reporting ratios for signal detection in the VAERS database, the agency has not yet reported such a study”.

The authors point out their results are compatible with a recent pre-print analysis of COVID-19 vaccine trials by Benn et al., which found “no evidence of a reduction in overall mortality in the mRNA vaccine trials”, with 31 deaths in the vaccine arms versus 30 deaths in the placebo arms (3% increase; 95% CI 0.63 to 1.71).

 

[Prinefan]

That doesn't sound good...

Covid Vaccines More Likely to Put You in Hospital Than Keep You Out, BMJ Editor's Analysis of Pfizer and Moderna Trial Data Finds – The Daily Sceptic

This guy has been vehemently anti ANY VACCINE since 2009.  I'm not too worried about his "study".

 

[Max Power]

Double boosted Tony Fauci is covid positive again after a Paxlovid rebound. He felt worse after the rebound than from his initial symptoms.  He is now on a second round of paxlovid (because it works so well).

Dr. Fauci talks COVID after Pfizer's Paxlovid treatment (nypost.com)

 

[Max Power]

BA.5 sub-variant can re-infect you with Covid 'within weeks': Experts

That means even if you were infected in 2020 with Delta or even Omicron BA.1 last winter, you can still get BA.5. Your previous immunity does not protect you from the latest strain.

New Delhi: The BA.5 Omicron sub-variant, which is known to evade immunity induced both by vaccines as well as prior infection, has the potential to reinfect you with Covid again "within weeks", global researchers have said.

BA.5, together with BA.4 and other sub-variants, are said to be behind the current surge in infections seen in a slew of countries including India, China, US, and European nations, notably the UK and Italy.

It has been a common assumption during the pandemic that being infected with a Covid variant provides a natural immune boost, enabling one's immune system to better recognise and fend off infection in the future.
However, Omicron BA.5 proves to be different, with several researchers terming it as "the most easily transmissible Covid variant to date".

"The main reason this variant has become the predominant one that is now circulating is that it is able to evade previous immunity," said Dean Blumberg, chief of Paediatric Infectious Diseases at University of California, Davis, Children's Hospital. "Even people who have partial immunity from a previous infection or vaccination can still have a breakthrough infection."

That means even if you were infected in 2020 with Delta or even Omicron BA.1 last winter, you can still get BA.5. Your previous immunity does not protect you from the latest strain.

"What we are seeing is an increasing number of people who have been infected with BA.2 and then becoming infected after four weeks," Andrew Roberston, the chief health officer in Western Australia, was quoted as saying to News.com.au.

"So maybe six to eight weeks they are developing a second infection, and that's almost certainly BA.4 or BA.5," he added.

This may be explained by a recent study, published in the journal Science, which showed that Omicron provides a poor natural boost of Covid immunity against reinfection even with Omicron and also in people who are triple-vaccinated.

Researchers at the Imperial College London called the BA.5 "an especially stealthy immune evader".

"Not only can it break through vaccine defences, it looks to leave very few of the hallmarks we'd expect on the immune system - it's more stealthy than previous variants and flies under the radar, so the immune system is unable to remember it," said Professor Danny Altmann, from Department of Immunology and Inflammation at Imperial.

omicron ba5 variant: BA.5 sub-variant can re-infect you with Covid 'within weeks': Experts - The Economic Times (indiatimes.com)

 

[Doug B]

from linked article:

That means even if you were infected in 2020 with Delta ...

Like if Sam from Quantum Leap existed in 2020, but leapt forward a year, then came back to 2020 infected with Delta ... ?
 

 

[Max Power]

Like if Sam from Quantum Leap existed in 2020, but leapt forward a year, then came back to 2020 infected with Delta ... ?
 

Maybe they forgot a comma or its all still a blur. 

I'm curious how well a BA4/5 infection protects against another BA4/5 infection. 

 

[Doug B]

I'm curious how well a BA4/5 infection protects against another BA4/5 infection. 

My understanding is that broadly ... there is no such thing as lasting protection from COVID infection anymore. You might get a few weeks, you might get a few months -- anything over that is gravy and luck.

Protection from symptoms, infirmity, hospitalizations, and deaths are wholly different matters.

 

[Max Power]

Also dealing with a covid outbreak at work thanks to a 4th of July party.  One of the teams threw a party and 13 people aren't at work today due to testing positive.  

 

[Max Power]

My understanding is that broadly ... there is no such thing as lasting protection from COVID infection anymore. You might get a few weeks, you might get a few months -- anything over that is gravy and luck.

Protection from symptoms, infirmity, hospitalizations, and deaths are wholly different matters.

Thanks, I'd really love for the medical community to try to get on the same page with this. The government is being slow (as always) and ridiculous with their covid policy.  They are still in Summer 2021 protocol 

 

[jobarules]

BA.5 sub-variant can re-infect you with Covid 'within weeks': Experts

My cousins entire family had covid during Christmas break. They all have it again now.

 

[Battersbox]

I recently subscribed on Substack to this German dude who writes by the pen-name Eugyppius. I find him to be thought provoking but I have no idea of his credentials in the real world. Anyway, I found this piece interesting and would be curious to hear others' take on it:

 

From Wild-Type SARS-2 to Omicron: Towards a Theory of Corona Evolution

With additional thoughts on why mass containment probably made everything worse, by playing to the most central strategy of the virus
 

Scientific discourse on Corona remains focused on microbiological minutiae, while ignoring the broader evolutionary and behavioural patterns of SARS-2. This is especially frustrating, because our mass containment policies were at base attempts to change the behaviour of the virus, and yet their broad-scale failure prompted no introspection about the limits of our understanding.

Equally neglected is the evolutionary trajectory of Corona. Aside from simplistic, one-dimensional concerns about things like escape variants, almost nobody in mainstream scientific circles has tried to account for observed evolution or describe the various selection pressures SARS-2 faces.

In fact, one of the only people to have given serious thought to the evolution of viral pathogens is Paul Ewald, author of the book Evolution of Infectious Disease, as well as numerous articles explaining the evolutionary pressures on the virus virulence and transmissibility.

As he explains in this piece from 2011:

Much of the variation in the harmfulness of acute infections is associated with the dependence of transmission on host mobility. When transmission occurs by direct contact, infected hosts generally need to be mobile to facilitate contact with susceptibles. When transmission of pathogens does not depend on the mobility of infected hosts, evolutionary considerations predict that natural selection should favor high degrees of host exploitation and hence high degrees of virulence.

Basically, the virus wants to make as many copies of itself as possible. But, very roughly speaking, the more aggressively the virus copies itself, the sicker its hosts become. This places an upper limit on the virulence of viruses that depend on person-to-person contact, and it explains why widely transmitted respiratory viruses all fall within the same narrow range of virulence and cause the same kinds of symptoms. The pandemicists raise money by wargaming pandemic viruses with 10% fatality rates, but in the real world, the truly deadly viruses never get very far. They’re all like SARS-1 – they put people in the hospital too soon to get anywhere.

But what about smallpox? And cholera, and yellow fever and dengue fever? Are these not deadly viruses?

They are, but they don’t spread via direct contact. Smallpox falls into what Ewald calls a “sit-and-wait” category of transmission. These are viruses that have remarkable durability, remaining viable in the external environment for months or (in the case of Variola) even years. They can thus disable their hosts while still having hope of new victims. Yellow fever and dengue, meanwhile, are “vector-borne.” They depend on mosquitoes to hop from host to host, and they’re free to make their victims as sick as they want. “Waterborne” pathogens like cholera are similarly advantaged.

More importantly for our purposes, Ewald defines a fourth category of what we might call mediated transmission facilitating higher virulence. This is “attendant-borne” transmission, which occurs primarily in hospitals, where staff unwittingly circulate viruses among patients. Attendant-borne viruses, like their vector-borne and waterborne colleagues, are free to develop remarkably high virulence. Ewald believes that the 1918 influenza outbreak achieved its unusually high mortality via attend-borne transmission related to troop transports at the end of the First World War.

SARS-1, although never properly adapted to human hosts, also depended on attendant-borne transmission, and MERS is a more straightforward case of this phenomenon. But the clearest example of all is surely pre-Omicron SARS-2, which caused elevated mortality near the top of what we would expect for pandemic influenza; and which flourished nowhere as effectively as in healthcare institutions, including hospitals and especially nursing homes.

Remember that SARS-2 arrived in Europe no later than November 2019, and in America no later than December 2019. The West saw multiple months of community transmission, in other words, and nobody noticed any strange mortality patterns. Hospitals remained as empty or as full as ever. As soon as we imposed lockdowns and started testing everybody, though, mortality spiked. These containment procedures involved nothing so much as identifying Corona patients and putting as many of them as possible in environments favouring attendant-borne transmission – from Corona testing centres to hospitals. And as the mass containment regime continued through 2021, SARS-2 began evolving towards greater virulence, as nosocomial and nursing home infections came to dominate the case statistics almost everywhere.

Omicron, whatever its origins, broke this dynamic. Unlike prior SARS-2 lineages, this is a classic direct-contact respiratory pathogen. With the advent of Omicron, Corona no longer spreads preferentially in healthcare institutions, and behaves much more like a mild flu or the common cold, with an emphasis on keeping its hosts healthy and mobile.

The worst thing we could do, from an evolutionary perspective, is continue the mass containment regime. We want to keep SARS-2 circulating via direct contact in the community. All such respiratory viruses, despite their stark differences, have been subject to the same convergent evolution, with remarkably similar effects on their human hosts. We must stop intervening in matters we don’t understand, or we’ll just continue our recent history, of always making everything worse.

 

[Doug B]

My cousins entire family had covid during Christmas break. They all have it again now.

BA.5 during Christmas break? Or an older Omicron variant?

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Never mind that EMT’s don’t actually make final diagnoses,

we’ve got an EMT claiming he sees the above 

Weird that an EMT has noticed so many

Did an EMT hurt you?

 

[Doug B]

I recently subscribed on Substack to this German dude who writes by the pen-name Eugyppius. I find him to be thought provoking but I have no idea of his credentials in the real world. Anyway, I found this piece interesting and would be curious to hear others' take on it

Don't have time for a point-by-point right now, but I want to come back to this later on. First impression is that the author is taking some nice-looking swings, but whiffing over and over with an occasional foul tip.

 

[Battersbox]

Don't have time for a point-by-point right now, but I want to come back to this later on. First impression is that the author is taking some nice-looking swings, but whiffing over and over with an occasional foul tip.

Cool. Curious to hear your take. The read really isn't too long.

 

[Doug B]

Cool. Curious to hear your take. The read really isn't too long.

I'll quote from Eugyppius' article as you've posted -- I understand that it is (free) subscription-based and can't be linked directly.

Scientific discourse on Corona remains focused on microbiological minutiae, while ignoring the broader evolutionary and behavioural patterns of SARS-2. This is especially frustrating, because our mass containment policies were at base attempts to change the behaviour of the virus, and yet their broad-scale failure prompted no introspection about the limits of our understanding.

I think he's going off the rails from the start by talking about COVID containment policies as attempts to change the "behavior" of the virus. Rather, the clear aim of these policies were to limit and/or slow spread of the virus. Speaking of a virus' behavior is akin to speaking of a mass of water's "behavior" in flowing downhill. A virus does not act with intention or even instinct.
 

Basically, the virus wants to make as many copies of itself as possible.

The virus doesn't want to do anything. Even speaking metaphorically, couching viral transmission this way fosters a lot of misleading assumptions.

Remember that SARS-2 arrived in Europe no later than November 2019, and in America no later than December 2019. The West saw multiple months of community transmission, in other words, and nobody noticed any strange mortality patterns. Hospitals remained as empty or as full as ever.

He overstates here. A very small number of cases so early on did not constitute "months of community transmission". Why would there have been "strange mortality patterns" from a disease borne by a few dozen people among the large populations of North America and Europe?

As soon as we imposed lockdowns and started testing everybody, though, mortality spiked.

Correlation does not imply causation. He would need to show a plausible chain of causality here. How would lockdowns and testing (really?) cause mortality to spike? Doesn't it make more sense to look at it the other way -- that lockdowns (such as they were in the U.S.) and calls for testing instead came in response to early COVID's impact on society?

These containment procedures involved nothing so much as identifying Corona patients and putting as many of them as possible in environments favouring attendant-borne transmission – from Corona testing centres to hospitals. And as the mass containment regime continued through 2021, SARS-2 began evolving towards greater virulence, as nosocomial and nursing home infections came to dominate the case statistics almost everywhere.

He's got the timeline wrong here. I can agree that some healthcare environments (esp elder care) were prime breeding grounds for early COVID in spring 2020, but to say that "continued through 2021"? And through 2021 was when  "nosocomial and nursing home infections came to dominate the case statistics"? That's an exaggeration by a good 12-18 months. Through early summer 2020, sure. Beyond that? Hospitals and nursing homes were no longer major drivers of case counts compared to regular old community spread.

Omicron, whatever its origins, broke this dynamic. Unlike prior SARS-2 lineages, this is a classic direct-contact respiratory pathogen. With the advent of Omicron, Corona no longer spreads preferentially in healthcare institutions, and behaves much more like a mild flu or the common cold, with an emphasis on keeping its hosts healthy and mobile.

"With the advent of Omicron, Corona no longer spreads preferentially in healthcare institutions"? Again, he has the timeline wrong here.

The worst thing we could do, from an evolutionary perspective, is continue the mass containment regime.

Maybe he means Germany or 'Europe overall' here. "Continue the mass containment regime"? Or maybe he means China? "Mass containment" in the U.S. -- if it was ever really imposed -- has been over for a good two years now.

We want to keep SARS-2 circulating via direct contact in the community.

As if we could prevent this in an absolute sense. Doesn't mean we have to be completely cavalier about sickening others at the individual level, though.

All such respiratory viruses, despite their stark differences, have been subject to the same convergent evolution, with remarkably similar effects on their human hosts. We must stop intervening in matters we don’t understand, or we’ll just continue our recent history, of always making everything worse.

I agree with Eugyppius that COVID will eventually settle in, calm down, and achieve a kind of symbiosis with human society. I don't agree that efforts to contain or slow the spread have made things worse. It's worth noting that major variants that truly can be said to have "made things worse" have emerged where COVID has spread more or less unchecked and not in places which had robust COVID mitigations in place.

 

[Max Power]

I don't agree that efforts to contain or slow the spread have made things worse. It's worth noting that major variants that truly can be said to have "made things worse" have emerged where COVID has spread more or less unchecked and not in places which had robust COVID mitigations in place.

Made things worse in what way?  Public policies harmed our economy, education and social development.  Many counties are starting to address the elephant in the room of excess deaths since 2020.  These are not excess covid deaths, but overall excess deaths.  There are plenty of theories as to what is causing these, but considering the substantial increase started in 2020, it's hard to deny covid related policies caused the majority of them.  

 

[Max Power]

Undercounted Covid-19 cases leave US with a blind spot as BA.5 variant becomes dominant

Official Covid-19 case metrics severely undercount the true number of infections, leaving the United States with a critical blind spot as the most transmissible coronavirus variant yet takes hold.

The Omicron offshoot BA.5 became the dominant variant in the US last week, according to data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the subvariant carries key mutations that help it escape antibodies generated by vaccines and prior infection, aiding its rapid spread.

With that will come "escalating numbers of cases and more hospitalizations," Dr. Eric Topol, a cardiologist and professor of molecular medicine at Scripps Research, said on CNNi Monday. "One good thing is it doesn't appear to be accompanied by the ICU admissions and the deaths as previous variants, but this is definitely concerning."

But to look at official case counts, it's hard to tell.

The share of cases that are officially reported is at an "all-time low," said Dr. Michael Mina, an epidemiologist and chief science officer at telehealth company eMed. "There's no doubt about that."

Covid-19 cases have been undercounted to some degree throughout the pandemic for reasons including a lack of available tests at some points and asymptomatic cases that may have been missed. But as people increasingly rely on rapid at-home tests -- and as attitudes toward the pandemic shift overall -- the US hasn't landed on a reliable way to track transmission levels.

An estimate from the Institute for Health Metrics, a research center at the University of Washington, suggests that actual infection numbers in the first week of July have been about seven times higher than reported cases -- which have averaged about 107,000 each day over the past two weeks, according to data from Johns Hopkins University.

Before the CDC lifted the requirement for international travelers to test before coming into the country last month, Mina said, it was an "amazing opportunity" to monitor the state of Covid-19 across the US among a group of mostly asymptomatic people. About 5% of travelers were testing positive throughout the month of May, which he says probably translates to at least 1 million new infections every day in the broader US population -- 10 times higher than the official count.

Now that BA.5 is here, "we know that there is going to be a wave in the fall -- there's almost no doubt about that -- if not before. So you just have to be really cognitive that that is what might happen," Mina said.

 

[Max Power]

Also dealing with a covid outbreak at work thanks to a 4th of July party.  One of the teams threw a party and 13 people aren't at work today due to testing positive.  

Up to 16 (out of 40) testing positive.  They can not return to work until they have a negative test (which they have to purchase themselves), and then they can come back but don't have to show proof of a negative test.  

So this is a stay home from work on the honor system now.  At least half of these people aren't showing any symptoms. talk about screwing up a policy 

 

[Battersbox]

I'll quote from Eugyppius' article as you've posted -- I understand that it is (free) subscription-based and can't be linked directly.

I think he's going off the rails from the start by talking about COVID containment policies as attempts to change the "behavior" of the virus. Rather, the clear aim of these policies were to limit and/or slow spread of the virus. Speaking of a virus' behavior is akin to speaking of a mass of water's "behavior" in flowing downhill. A virus does not act with intention or even instinct.
 

The virus doesn't want to do anything. Even speaking metaphorically, couching viral transmission this way fosters a lot of misleading assumptions.

He overstates here. A very small number of cases so early on did not constitute "months of community transmission". Why would there have been "strange mortality patterns" from a disease borne by a few dozen people among the large populations of North America and Europe?

Correlation does not imply causation. He would need to show a plausible chain of causality here. How would lockdowns and testing (really?) cause mortality to spike? Doesn't it make more sense to look at it the other way -- that lockdowns (such as they were in the U.S.) and calls for testing instead came in response to early COVID's impact on society?

He's got the timeline wrong here. I can agree that some healthcare environments (esp elder care) were prime breeding grounds for early COVID in spring 2020, but to say that "continued through 2021"? And through 2021 was when  "nosocomial and nursing home infections came to dominate the case statistics"? That's an exaggeration by a good 12-18 months. Through early summer 2020, sure. Beyond that? Hospitals and nursing homes were no longer major drivers of case counts compared to regular old community spread.

"With the advent of Omicron, Corona no longer spreads preferentially in healthcare institutions"? Again, he has the timeline wrong here.

Maybe he means Germany or 'Europe overall' here. "Continue the mass containment regime"? Or maybe he means China? "Mass containment" in the U.S. -- if it was ever really imposed -- has been over for a good two years now.

As if we could prevent this in an absolute sense. Doesn't mean we have to be completely cavalier about sickening others at the individual level, though.

I agree with Eugyppius that COVID will eventually settle in, calm down, and achieve a kind of symbiosis with human society. I don't agree that efforts to contain or slow the spread have made things worse. It's worth noting that major variants that truly can be said to have "made things worse" have emerged where COVID has spread more or less unchecked and not in places which had robust COVID mitigations in place.

Thanks for your take. His points about the virus circulation in EU & US for months before we noticed struck me as pointless also...it takes time for a virus to find enough hosts to show up on the radar no matter how transmissible it is.

 

[Max Power]

DR. FAUCI: One of the things that's clear from the data [is] that even though vaccines - because of the high degree of transmissibility of this virus - don't protect overly well, as it were, against infection, they protect quite well against severe disease leading to hospitalization and death. And I believe that's the reason, Neil, why at my age, being vaccinated and boosted, even though it didn't protect me against infection, I feel confident that it made a major role in protecting me from progressing to severe disease. And that's very likely why I had a relatively mild course. So my message to people who seem confused because people who are vaccinated get infected - the answer is if you weren't vaccinated, the likelihood [is] you would have had [a] more severe course than you did have when you were vaccinated. 

And this guy is leaning towards recommending a 2nd booster for all 18+ even though the three doses already work amazingly well against severe disease. 

 

[(HULK)]

And this guy is leaning towards recommending a 2nd booster for all 18+ even though the three doses already work amazingly well against severe disease. 

I have to wonder if the protection against severe disease wanes over time. I don't know if we have much info on that just yet.

 

[Max Power]

I have to wonder if the protection against severe disease wanes over time. I don't know if we have much info on that just yet.

It might and I don't think we'll know until we see it in the real world.  What we don't have a reason to recommend healthy 18-49 years go get vaccinated again with a known risk for an unknown reward (if any reward).  

Now they have Paxlovid they can recommend after infection.  To me that takes the place of needing constant boosters that don't stop infection. 

 

[(HULK)]

It might and I don't think we'll know until we see it in the real world.  What we don't have a reason to recommend healthy 18-49 years go get vaccinated again with a known risk for an unknown reward (if any reward).  

Now they have Paxlovid they can recommend after infection.  To me that takes the place of needing constant boosters that don't stop infection. 

I'll probably get the Omicron booster whenever it comes out.

 

[Max Power]

I'll probably get the Omicron booster whenever it comes out.

Here is a recent video of Paul Offit on why he voted "No" on the Omicron specific booster at the FDA advisory meeting.

He said the data from the study showed a 1.75 fold increase in neutralizing antibodies against Omicron with the new booster. He felt that data wasn't really impressive as Moderna had a 2 fold increase over Pfizer during the initial vaccine rollout and we did not see any noticeable difference in the efficacy of the two vaccines. 

He goes on to question the FDA's whole process after that, but its a solid listen. 

 

[Doug B]

I don't agree that efforts to contain or slow the spread have made things worse. It's worth noting that major variants that truly can be said to have "made things worse" have emerged where COVID has spread more or less unchecked and not in places which had robust COVID mitigations in place.

Made things worse in what way?

The Eugyppius article is narrowly focused on the evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 virus strains. He wasn't addressing sociological effects of the pandemic.

 

[Max Power]

The Eugyppius article is narrowly focused on the evolution of the SARS-CoV-2 virus strains. He wasn't addressing sociological effects of the pandemic.

I dont see how someone can make any claims on the covid mitigation strategy without taking the entirety of the situation into account. 

 

[Doug B]

Here is a recent video of Paul Offit on why he voted "No" on the Omicron specific booster at the FDA advisory meeting.

He said the data from the study showed a 1.75 fold increase in neutralizing antibodies against Omicron with the new booster. He felt that data wasn't really impressive as Moderna had a 2 fold increase over Pfizer during the initial vaccine rollout and we did not see any noticeable difference in the efficacy of the two vaccines. 

Offit and a colleague lay all this out in a June 29th StatNews article:

If an Omicron-based booster provides little advantage over the vaccine stocks that already exist, is it worth the switch? Making and rolling out an entirely new supply of Covid-19 vaccines on a nationwide basis is no trivial matter, particularly when Congress seems reluctant to provide the funds. Would the country be better off using the available resources to accelerate the creation of next-generation vaccines that can produce neutralizing antibodies in amounts high enough to deal with most variants? Or vaccines that can be delivered into the nose, a route that may provide stronger protection against infection? Strategic decisions of this nature require a deep dive into the immunology of how vaccines work; and the use of sophisticated models on neutralizing antibody actions.

Vaccines remain of critical importance at this stage of the pandemic. We strongly urge that everyone who needs a vaccine dose gets one, particularly never-vaccinated people who have been fooled by distortions about vaccine safety. But it’s important to understand what vaccines can and cannot now do, and what any composition switch really means for protection against Covid-19.

Perhaps researchers will learn that particularly vulnerable people, like those who are older or sicker, might benefit sufficiently to justify the use of an Omicron-based booster, but the wider population would not. Decisions could be tailored to specific sub-populations.

Personally, in my individual health situation, I want any and all available boosters early and often. In practice, I hope that settles into an annual shot. As an ideal -- I hope the nasal COVID vaccine gets perfected before too long because if it ever is ... that actually will prevent infections.

 

[Doug B]

I don't see how someone can make any claims on the covid mitigation strategy without taking the entirety of the situation into account. 

What he wrote boiled down to "COVID mitigation strategies make the virus more virulent." His point was pretty narrow.

 

[Max Power]

What he wrote boiled down to "COVID mitigation strategies make the virus more virulent." His point was pretty narrow.

Gotcha.  Thanks. Geert Vanden Bosche had a similar theory about that with non-sterilizing vaccines. 

 

[Max Power]

New 'Centaurus' Covid variant detected feared to be most contagious version yet

The World Health Organisation said in its latest update that globally, the number of new weekly cases increased for the fifth consecutive week after a declining trend since the last peak in March 2022

Virologists have sounded the alarm over the emergence of another deadly Covid-19 Omicron variant which is rapidly spreading across the globe including Europe.

The BA.2.75 variant, nicknamed “Centaurus”, was first detected in India in early May and cases are rising steeply as it has been reported the new variant spreads at an ever faster rate than its cousins, the BA.5 and BA.2 variants.

Since spreading in India, Centaurus has reached the UK, US, Australia, Germany, Canada and now the Netherlands.

The European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) has assigned BA.2/75 as a “variant under monitoring”, meaning they are keeping a close eye on whether it could be linked to a severe bout of the disease.

This latest strain has evolved with a huge number of extra mutations, giving it a “wildcard” effect, where "the sum of the parts could be worse than the parts individually", according to Dr Tom Peacock, a virologist at Imperial College London.

Dr Peacock told the Guardian that it’s hard to predict the effect of that many mutations appearing together, but that he sees it as a potential candidate for what comes after the latest most deadly strain, BA.5.

Antoine Flahault, director of the Institute of Global Health at the University of Geneva said that Centaurus might be more contagious than BA.5 Omicron subvariant given the severe spike of cases in India.

He said it appears to be becoming the dominant strain in India and poses the question of whether it will become the most prevalent one all over the world.

New 'Centaurus' Covid variant detected feared to be most contagious version yet - World News - Mirror Online

 

[Stealthycat]

New 'Centaurus' Covid variant detected feared to be most contagious version yet

Quote

this will be keep very low key - Biden administration & Democrats cannot afford another covid variant outbreak, they'll have to try and keep it suppressed best they can

 

[Max Power]

this will be keep very low key - Biden administration & Democrats cannot afford another covid variant outbreak, they'll have to try and keep it suppressed best they can

There isn't a lot of data on this variant yet. Its just another thing to keep an eye on.  Each new variant seems to spread faster and has the potential to be more deadly. This one probably evades the original vaccine as well.  

I wouldn't be shocked if this is the one that hits the US hard over the winter. 

 

[Godsbrother]

Getting my second booster today.   Was trying to hold out until fall but my last one was 8 months ago.  Numbers are on the rise and I have travel plans coming up so might as well get one now.

 

[Stealthycat]

This one probably evades the original vaccine as well. 

 what does that mean ??

 

[Max Power]

 what does that mean ??

It will most likely evade the original strain vaccine that is currently administered.  Just like Omicron can.  Meaning that any antibody boost is short lived and doesn't protect you against getting infected or spreading the virus. 

There is hope to have an Omicron specific booster ready in fall, but that was designed for the early Omicron variant and not BA4/5 or this new one.  The Omicron booster is only marginally better, but again is likely to be outdated by the winter. 

 

[Stealthycat]

It will most likely evade the original strain vaccine that is currently administered.  Just like Omicron can.  Meaning that any antibody boost is short lived and doesn't protect you against getting infected or spreading the virus. 

There is hope to have an Omicron specific booster ready in fall, but that was designed for the early Omicron variant and not BA4/5 or this new one.  The Omicron booster is only marginally better, but again is likely to be outdated by the winter. 

I thought Fauci came out the other day admitting the vaccines didn't really stop infections ?  if it didn't do well against the prior variants/virus, I don't think it will against this one for certain

"One of the things that's clear from the data [is] that even though vaccines - because of the high degree of transmissibility of this virus - don't protect overly well, as it were, against infection"

 

[(HULK)]

The naming of these things is getting to be a mouthful. Covid-19 Omicron-Centarus? Sheesh, I feel like we're at 2 AM Syfy channel movie titles now.

 

[Max Power]

I thought Fauci came out the other day admitting the vaccines didn't really stop infections ?  if it didn't do well against the prior variants/virus, I don't think it will against this one for certain

"One of the things that's clear from the data [is] that even though vaccines - because of the high degree of transmissibility of this virus - don't protect overly well, as it were, against infection"

These vaccines don't stop infections.  They delay them.  They prevent severe disease at the same rates as a natural immunity does.  

I'll admit I'm in the boat of not understanding the constant need for boosters when we have other treatment options.  New more contagious variants on the horizon just serve to undercut the need for boosters more in my mind as well. 

 

[[icon]]

 if it didn't do well against the prior variants/virus, I don't think it will against this one

Wat? 

The vaccine was QUITE effective at reducing odds of infection by the strain it was designed for. Now that the virus has mutated dramatically, the key doesn't quite fit the new lock as well... which is to be expected. 

It was EXTREMELY effective at preventing hospitalization (and still is very good at that). 

 

[Stealthycat]

Wat? 

The vaccine was QUITE effective at reducing odds of infection by the strain it was designed for. Now that the virus has mutated dramatically, the key doesn't quite fit the new lock as well... which is to be expected. 

It was EXTREMELY effective at preventing hospitalization (and still is very good at that). 

Fauci said it - not me

 

[Max Power]

Wat? 

The vaccine was QUITE effective at reducing odds of infection by the strain it was designed for. Now that the virus has mutated dramatically, the key doesn't quite fit the new lock as well... which is to be expected. 

It was EXTREMELY effective at preventing hospitalization (and still is very good at that). 

Was is the key word there.  Efficacy has diminished with each following variant. Hence the need to reformulate the vaccines.  Its entirely logical to assume 'Centaurus' will elude the current vaccine even more and quite possibly the Omicron specific one.

A good case can be made these variants are coming from vaccinated people as the virus learns how to stay alive in the vaccinated population by mutating to elude current protections. 

 

[Doug B]

These vaccines don't stop infections.  They delay them.

Against Delta and later, I wouldn't say 'delay'. Vaccinations just help your body get a jump on an infection faster than without.

Say your nasal passages are a rowdy biker bar. Hair-trigger bikers are SARS-C0V-2 virions.

Without the vaccine: the bouncers at your bar are Pee Wee Herman, Urkel, and Screech from Saved by the Bell. When two guys jawing turns into an out-and-out melee, bouncers like that can't clear out the bar by themselves -- they have to call the in-no-hurry cops that are five miles away in town. Yeah, the cops will polish off their donuts and show up eventually to clear out the bikers, but by then the place is completely trashed. Tables and stools reduced to matchsticks. A bunch of liquor stolen. Pee Wee, Urkel, and Screech dutifully break out the trash cans and the mop buckets.

With the vaccine: You've hired new bouncers, and more of them -- The Road Warriors, Brock Lesnar, Chuck Liddell and a bunch of other MMA guys, the Gracie family, young Chuck Norris, Steve James, Tong Po, Jet Li, etc. They can't do anything about bikers bumping into each other and throwing fists (aka 'infection'). But your new bouncers are on it fast. They head things off and throw out the punks in no time flat, without having to wait for the cops. Yeah, there's an odd cracked pool stick and some broken bottles to sweep up but no biggie -- not the disaster scene there was with the pencil-neck geek bouncers.

 

[Max Power]

Against Delta and later, I wouldn't say 'delay'. Vaccinations just help your body get a jump on an infection faster than without.

Say your nasal passages are a rowdy biker bar. Hair-trigger bikers are SARS-C0V-2 virions.

Without the vaccine: the bouncers at your bar are Pee Wee Herman, Urkel, and Screech from Saved by the Bell. When two guys jawing turns into an out-and-out melee, bouncers like that can't clear out the bar by themselves -- they have to call the in-no-hurry cops that are five miles away in town. Yeah, the cops will polish off their donuts and show up eventually to clear out the bikers, but by then the place is completely trashed. Tables and stools reduced to matchsticks. A bunch of liquor stolen. Pee Wee, Urkel, and Screech dutifully break out the trash cans and the mop buckets.

With the vaccine: You've hired new bouncers, and more of them -- The Road Warriors, Brock Lesnar, Chuck Liddell and a bunch of other MMA guys, the Gracie family, young Chuck Norris, Steve James, Tong Po, Jet Li, etc. They can't do anything about bikers bumping into each other and throwing fists (aka 'infection'). But your new bouncers are on it fast. They head things off and throw out the punks in no time flat, without having to wait for the cops. Yeah, there's an odd cracked pool stick and some broken bottles to sweep up but no biggie -- not the disaster scene there was with the pencil-neck geek bouncers.

And yet its taking the good bouncers longer on average to clear the bar of the infection. Its not a good selling point. They might be beefed up, but they suck at their jobs when their time is called.