Israel Sees Decline in Pfizer Vaccine [Infection] Efficacy Rate, Ynet Reports

[SheltieLover]

Last edited Mon Jul 5, 2021, 02:03 PM - Edit history (1)

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-07-05/israel-sees-decline-in-pfizer-vaccine-efficacy-rate-ynet-says

Israel has recorded a steep drop in the efficacy rate of the Pfizer Inc.-BioNTech SE in preventing coronavirus infections, due to the spread of the delta variant and the easing of government restrictions, Ynet news website reported, citing Health Ministry data.

Snip

The figures show that between May 2 and June 5, the vaccine had a 94.3% efficacy rate. From June 6, five days after the government canceled coronavirus restrictions, until early July, the rate plunged to 64%. A similar decline was recorded in protection against coronavirus symptoms, the report said.

Snip

At the same time, protection against hospitalization and serious illness remained strong. From May 2 to June 5, the efficacy rate in preventing hospitalization was 98.2%, compared with 93% from June 6 to July 3. A similar decline in the rate was recorded for the vaccine’s efficiency in preventing serious illness among people who had been inoculated.

These figures are in line with ministry data that show that many of the new cases are among people who have been vaccinated, while the number of serious cases is rising much more slowly, Ynet said. Last Friday, 55% of the newly infected had been vaccinated, the website said. As of July 4, there were 35 serious cases of coronavirus in Israel, compared with 21 on June 19.

A bit more at link. Stay safe, all!

[Delarage]

1. We'll need a 3rd dose

According to Pfizer. I'm thinking this will be like the flu---annual shots. Doesn't help that dumbass Repukes are walking variant factories. Although the protection against serious illness remained, so maybe natural selection will help solve a lot of our problems......

[SheltieLover]

2. Israel is apparently planning 3rd doses for Sept. For those over 50

Great idea, imho!

I am really concerned with the false sense of security the CDC has instilled in those of us who are fully vaxed!

I know they need to try to encourage everyone to get vaxes, but imo mask recommendations being dropped & not reporting on breakthrough infections seems dangerous to me.

Even Dr. Fauci is telling people to mask up in low vax areas. Problem.is that people travel...

Stay safe!

[area51]

16. +1 n/t

[Baitball Blogger]

8. Now, why would we want to get a 3rd dose of Pfizer?

Shouldn't we opt for J&J since their vaccine has a better percentage of efficacy over variants?

[Pobeka]

17. Pls show me the number for J&J efficacy specifically for the delta variant.

I have yet to find it, and have searched for a while now.

TIA.

[Baitball Blogger]

19. I haven't found the statistics.

But the way it was developed, using far more variables than Pfizer or Moderna, would provide better protection against global variants.

[Pobeka]

21. Thanks. That means claims of efficacy for delta variant are useless.

And delta is the worst one we face at the moment.

[Baitball Blogger]

23. I respect your skeptism.

It does feel like we're at the mercy of the vaccine maker's projections, until something else comes around to disprove them.

[thesquanderer]

26. re: "J&J...has a better percentage of efficacy over variants"

I think it depends which variant you are talking about.

[Baitball Blogger]

28. I was thinking of global variants.

I think Pfizer and Moderna were perfect for the US, until Delta Dawn became a factor.

[SheltieLover]

34. Not sure

I've seen info on researchers saying an mRNA booster after J&J might be helpful.

I've been watching for recommendations, too!

[Ms. Toad]

46. J&J topped out at around 75%,

Significantly lower than the mRNA vaccines.

[Scrivener7]

3. Wow. That's really disappointing. And the protection against serious illness and death is

great, but even asymptomatic cases can leave big long term problems.

I am assuming Moderna would see similar results.

55%. That's bad.

[SheltieLover]

4. They are planning for 3rd shots for those over 50 in Sept.

Not sure about Moderna, as Israel only had Pfizer.

But other articles about vaccines have said the 2 would be similar in efficacy generally.

Stay safe!

[Scrivener7]

5. You too! This thing isn't over.

[SheltieLover]

6. No it isn't over!

Ty!]

[DFW]

7. In Germany there has been a curious statistic

I don't know if it will hold, but there was huge surge in Astra-Zeneca vaccine available during a short period, and then those people had to get their second shots with one of the mrna vaccines, usually Pfizer or Moderna. These people showed the highest amount of antibody protection of anyone yet vaccinated.

[Baitball Blogger]

9. I am wondering the same thing.

Would a cross section of vaccines work better?

[Laura PourMeADrink]

14. Chuck Todd asked that question of Fauci yesterday

But he didn't answer clearly if it was ok or not to mix

[wnylib]

13. Wish I could remember where I read

this in order to refer people to it and check that I remember it correctly. Might have been Yahoo News.

The combo shots of different vaccines maximize two different immune protections. The mRNA vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna) produce higher antibody levels and T cell response. The adenovirus vaccines (J&J, Astro Zenica) produce antibodies and B cell immune protection. Get both shots and you've got the immune system covered pretty well.

We should probably push for cross vaccinations here but I doubt that we will. I'm not sure that people would be allowed to get J&J now if they have already had 2 of Pfizer or Moderna. Health departments have records of who is vaccinated and people might get turned away when they try to make an appointment for another shot.

Also, insurance companies might not cover an extra shot.

[SheltieLover]

35. I recall reading that too, Wyn.

Can't recall source, though.

Ty for sharing!

I'm not a doc, but fuller immune support sounds great, esp. For those over 65!

[wnylib]

42. I did a search and came up with an article

in Science Magazine that tells about studies confirming the improved immunity with mixing vaccine types, but without the details about B cells. It only mentions antibodies and T cells with mRNA vaccines. Studies are ongoing for various combinations. If the link does not work, the article was published 6/9/2021, author June Vogel, title: Mixing covid-19 appears to boost immune responses.

Still looking for the comparisons of the two types of vaccine.

On edit: The link didn't work so I deleted it.

[SheltieLover]

43. Ty, Wyn!

[Phoenix61]

24. The reason the second shot was an mRNA was due to

the blood clotting issue with the Astra-Zeneca. They monitored the response because they didn’t know if it would be effective.

[uponit7771]

10. It was never meant to be inoculation.

"...protection against hospitalization and serious illness remained strong..."

Then it's doing its job effectively

[wnylib]

15. If you are content with only avoiding

hospitalization and death, that's up to you. I prefer to also avoid heart, lung, and kidney damage.

[thesquanderer]

27. re: "I prefer to also avoid heart, lung, and kidney damage"

I could be wrong, but my understanding was that these were consequences that came along with having a serious case to begin with. IOW, it's not a matter of being "content with only avoiding hospitalization and death," but rather, if protection is good enough to stop it from being serious enough to have to be hopitalized, that means you have probably also avoided having it be serious enough to create those ancillary damages. So the goal of "avoiding hopsitalization" covers all of that.

[lostnfound]

30. Asymptomatic cases can have long-haul problems months later, but vaccine may prevent it

https://www.henryford.com/blog/2021/05/asymptomatic-long-haulers

Fatigue, headaches, brain fog, loss of smell and taste, muscle aches, shortness of breath, chronic cough and heart damage are reported in COVID-19 long-haulers.

But now, research is showing that even those who have mild or asymptomatic COVID-19 infections (meaning they had little or no symptoms) can experience these long-haul symptoms of COVID-19. They feel fine while the virus is active in their body, but begin experiencing symptoms months after they’ve tested negative.

[SheltieLover]

38. Ty for posting!

My purpose in posting this thread was merely to alert people to take precautions.

[wnylib]

40. Not true that those negative consequences

occur only in serious cases. Even asymptomatic infections cause some organ damage. For younger people, the consequences will be more noticeable as they age - unless they already have some health problems, in which csse it will be more immediate. For people over 65, the results are more significant, since they are more likely to already have hypertension and some reduction in lung and kidney function that comes with age.

[SheltieLover]

36. Same here!

[NH Ethylene]

20. It WAS meant for inoculation.

It was only when the J & J came out in the US that we heard that protection against serious disease was an adequate goal.

[stopdiggin]

22. it was both MEANT

and promoted as exactly that. And performed pretty darned well in that capacity as well. Pre-delta, breakthrough cases were being observed in very low numbers.

[NH Ethylene]

44. If you look back at old news and medical articles

You will not see the term 'preventing serious disease' mentioned until the Johnson & Johnson was released and was being promoted. Since it has a much lower efficacy at preventing Covid than the mRNA vaccines, people were being urged to take it because it was still quite good at preventing serious disease.

Prior to that, it was all about if the vaccine was good at PREVENTING Covid. The terms used to describe vaccine effectiveness changed to make the J & J equally attractive to shot seekers.

That said, I am not complaining that the vaccines are doing a poor job. Even though the mRNA vaccines were touted as preventing illness, having them less effective at doing that but still diminishing the degree of illness in those who do get infected is a WHOLE lot better than no vaccines at all.

[Ms. Toad]

47. That wasn't the intent -

That was what could be tested most easily and get the product to market.

Post market, now that they have more experience and time to test and pull everyone back in for confirmation of disease prevention, not just symptom prevention, they have confirmed that the mRNA vaccines prvent disease (which is how they reduce severe consequences).

Death occurs with about the same frequency in breakthorugh cases as it does in the unvaccinated cases. Since it prevents infection at about 95%, and reduces death by about 95%, there really isn't any reason to believe the severe illness would behave differently. I.e. the reducitonin death is entirely accounted for by the reduction in infection.

[jaxexpat]

11. So, all is well. The rumor mills work as well as ever and here is new grist.

How much false contextualization does it take to undermine science? Any amount will do to some extent.

This has been the story of the pandemic from its first day. Confusion, contradictory conclusions at the ready. What-ifs and what-abouts on standby. We don't need no Trump to get us all running for cover. We're quite capable of making our own stuff up if we run low.

[Ford_Prefect]

12. Not rumors! When the vaccines were being tested prior to initial public release there was comment by

professionals at the time that we would likely see a need for ongoing vaccination. Their speculation was based on the nature of how COVID-19 infected and moved through the body, the ways it had been observed to mutate, and the type of immunity conveyed by the vaccines. They said then we may need additional vaccine updating after 5-6 months or so to account for this.

Prominent public health experts have predicted that COVID-19 in its various forms will likely continue to be part of our future world environment. They also said COVID was only the first pandemic and more may yet arise in the way of similar cross-over diseases.

[jaxexpat]

25. Most people receive 100% of their Covid-19 info through the media.

Media talking heads interpret scientists for their audiences. Some media have another purpose. Some want to discredit the data of science. Some interview scientists and ask awkward or unanswerably framed questions. Others try to cast doubt on the interpretations of their colleagues. Thus and in fact, the more one is exposed to media's efforts to inform, the more disinformed one may be. At this point, for MANY, the terms "professionals" and "prominent public health experts" and "scientists' and "health care specialists" have all taken on inappropriate definitions. Often more suspicious than trusted.

We're in a world where yesterday's unbelievable "rumors" are tomorrow's proclamation of fait accompli. Do I believe in rumors and conspiracy? I think not but it's best to keep an open mind.

[Ford_Prefect]

29. I agree that the media has mangled the message by poor practice or by deliberate distortion.

The facts were available last year and since.

Serious people have been worried about pandemics arising from habitat extinction and subsequent cross-contamination for decades. In the US and elsewhere there was prep work done to plan for it only to have much of it scuttled by recent conservative and anti-science trends in several governments (and ours).

I find it hard to believe there was once a widely supported action to contain Ebola and yet most news organizations appear to have forgotten it. Which is to say nothing about what the propaganda outlets have spewed out.

[Yavin4]

18. Israel has not had any deaths since June 10.

Their hospitalization rates are flat. Yes, their cases have seen an increase, but that is to be expected. Everyone has said all along that the vaccinated would still get the virus, but not with the same negative outcomes.

[Yavin4]

31. "At the same time, protection against hospitalization and serious illness remained strong."

From May 2 to June 5, the efficacy rate in preventing hospitalization was 98.2%, compared with 93% from June 6 to July 3. A similar decline in the rate was recorded for the vaccine’s efficiency in preventing serious illness among people who had been inoculated.

IOW, cases are indeed up which was expected, but the negative outcome from the growth in cases have not manifested themselves which was also expected. Israel has averaged zero deaths since June 10th.

[BannonsLiver]

32. I'm absolutely stunned none of that was mentioned in the OP

[SheltieLover]

33. We know that information from the CDC

I presented only new info.

[Yavin4]

37. The headline of the article is misleading and alarmist.

And gives credibility to the anti-vaxxers.

[SheltieLover]

39. Sorry. I didn't write headline, but included [Infection]

My only intention in posting was to alert members that they can still catch covid if fully vaxed.

Asymptomatic & mild cases can result in long-haul.



Ps -TY for pointing up the title issue!

[BannonsLiver]

41. Yes, very on brand.

[Ms. Toad]

48. Far from it -

It supports the need to continue multiple layers of protection - vaccination + masking + social distancing - as recommended by both WHO and Dr. Fauci, when in areas of increased exposure (low vaccination, high community infection, or both).

Why on earth would you throw out an effective tool just because multiple tools are available? Both vaccination and masks are effective, and work well together.

As to misleading - it is no more misleading than the LA snapshots which suggest miniscule risks to vaccinated individuals. Both are misleading becase they are snapshots in time, and can only be extended to substantially similar settings. Neither one is a prediction of risk, over time, in circumstances other than those they were gathered in.

[liberal_mama]

45. I couldn't open the article. Are they saying the vaccine's effectiveness is wearing off over time or

that without the restrictions in place, more vaccinated people are catching Covid than they anticipated?

[OhioChick]

49. K&R n/t