So it is time to take a look at the glaring reality about the current situation. The effectiveness of the current Covid vaccines to prevent infection with Omicron BA.5 is a mere 12% -- this translates into a vaccination breakthrough rate of 60% or so -- which is much higher than the vaccination breakthrough rate of 0.56% with Delta. Similarly with the Omicron BA.2 sub-variant, vaccines had an effectiveness of only 35% to stop infection. All of these thresholds are below the 50% effectiveness point which is usually considered the cut-off point for vaccines to be providing value in reducing infection. Keep in mind that "natural immunity" with no vaccination provides zero immunity with Omicron against re-infection. Fortunately the above only deals with infection. The Covid vaccines are still very effective in stopping severe illness and death. With the Omicron BA.2, BA4, and BA.5 variants the unvaccinated are 9 times more likely to die than the vaccinated. However the have the best protection it is important to have a recent booster since the protection overall is "short-lived" when taking in account infection prevention and waning immunity to severe illness over time. The introduction of Omicron specific boosters will greatly enhance the situation this fall. Trials with the Omicron specific boosters for Pfizer and Moderna have found them to be effective in preventing infection and severe illness with the existing Omicron variants. However the issue becomes that the protection is "short-lived" -- the existing generation of Covid vaccines have effectively become the equivalent of yearly flu shots. A new "formula" will be needed every year to address the most recent Covid variants. Further work must be done on a universal coronavirus vaccine which will provide protection against all Covid variants for a longer period of time. However we are at least five years away from any viable next-generation universal vaccine. Similarly I will note they are also working on a universal vaccine for the flu - which allow a person to be protected without requiring a yearly flu shot. Covid vaccine protection ‘short lived,’ booster doses essential, study confirms ‘Continual updating of our vaccinations and booster shots is critical,’ scientists say https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/covid-vaccine-booster-dose-essential-b2125367.html
"VACCINE PITCH MEETING" Got a hair on your ass or just a person who acts obsequiously towards someone important in order to gain advantage, a sycophant? If you got a hair on your ass, SEE HARRISON SMITH'S LATEST - "VACCINE PITCH MEETING" Beautiful work Harrison. You are a Bad MoFo without doubt! More power to you. LOL! ! Minute 33:01 https://www.bitchute.com/video/K4It3oeAyVVM/
a. Delta breakthrough rates were found to be 15 to 27 percent in multiple studies . (not less than one percent as you claim) For instance: This study in Houston found the breakthrough rate to be 23.7 percent. (an it did not track every breakthrough infection but on the ones where people sought testing . https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.19.21260808v4.full.pdf b. Serious harm. The vaccines were associated with greater risk in the trials. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4125239 "Results: Pfizer and Moderna mRNA COVID-19 vaccines were associated with an increased risk of serious adverse events of special interest, with an absolute risk increase of 10.1 and 15.1 per 10,000 vaccinated over placebo baselines of 17.6 and 42.2 (95% CI -0.4 to 20.6 and -3.6 to 33.8), respectively. Combined, the mRNA vaccines were associated with an absolute risk increase of serious adverse events of special interest of 12.5 per 10,000 (95% CI 2.1 to 22.9). The excess risk of serious adverse events of special interest surpassed the risk reduction for COVID-19 hospitalization relative to the placebo group in both Pfizer and Moderna trials (2.3 and 6.4 per 10,000 participants, respectively). Discussion: The excess risk of serious adverse events found in our study points to the need for formal harm-benefit analyses, particularly those that are stratified according to risk of serious COVID-19 outcomes such as hospitalization or death." c. infection Multiple studies found that the vaccinated had negative efficacy vs infection after about 90 to 120 days. Many other studies showed very little or zero efficacy within 90 to 120 days after vaccination. Boosters seem to reset the clock.
I will review the first paper your referenced regarding the 23.7% vaccinated breakthrough rate but will note that I provided complete studies and information from both the CDC and KFF by state during Delta --- showing the vaccinated breakthrough rate was 0.56% across millions of people. Figures across millions of people are a lot more meaningful than the paper you cited which merely sequenced the genomes of 16,965 SARS-CoV-247 from samples acquired March 15, 2021 through September20, 2021 in the Houston Methodist hospital system. Page 17 of the study notes the significant limitations in the data set. Other information showing a vaccinated breakthrough rate during the Delta time frame of approximately 0.5% includes: 0.5 per cent of those vaccinated with Moderna or Pfizer were infected with Covid-19 https://www.straitstimes.com/singap...th-moderna-or-pfizer-were-infected-with-covid Study finds low rate of COVID-19 "breakthrough" infections, fewer symptoms in vaccinated people https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-breakthrough-infections-vaccine-rate-symptoms-study/
Your second link had a correction. It retracted the attribution of a .56 rate. Additionally the CDC data AND KFF data are not reporting breakthrough rates of delta across all vaccinees. You need to study the concept of breakthrough rate if you think you can derive the rate by only counting those who seek testing.
The CDC and KFF data show the vaccinated breakthrough rate for all vaccines being used in the U.S. during the Delta time frame. The majority of which are Pfizer and Moderna. This data is across millions of people -- and actually is the most complete vaccination breakthrough data set (during delta) on the face the earth. And show me where my "second link" has a correction. I am not seeing a correction for any of the links. What are you referencing here.
At some point nasal and pill vaccines will be available for Covid. With a sniff or a swallow, new vaccines aim to put the brakes on Covid-19 spread https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/18/health/mucosal-immunity-covid-19/index.html Injected vaccines against the coronavirus that causes Covid-19 have been hugely successful, saving nearly 20 million lives globally in their first year of use and slashing the pandemic's death toll by an estimated 63%, according to a recent study. Yet good as these shots are, they have not stopped the virus from spreading from person to person. As the SARS-CoV-2 virus spreads, it changes. That's helped it get past our firewalls, the immunity created by vaccines or left behind after we recover from an infection. Which is why, well into the third year of the pandemic, we're in the midst of another wave of Covid-19 caused by the most immune-evasive variant yet, BA.5. And more variants are coming. Even as vaccine manufacturers race to update the first-generation shots in the hopes of patching up our protection for the fall, other scientists are taking a different approach, making vaccines delivered via nasal sprays or tablets that would deploy more immune defenders to the body's front lines: the lining of the mouth, nose and throat. "The hope is to shore up the defenses right there in the nose so that the virus can't even replicate in the nose," said Dr. Ellen Foxman, an immunobiologist at the Yale School of Medicine. "And then someone who has a really effective mucosal vaccination can't even really support viral replication or make viruses that can infect other people. "That would be like the holy grail," said Foxman, who helped plan the International Congress of Mucosal Immunology meeting this week in Seattle, which is sponsored by pharmaceutical companies Pfizer, Janssen and Merck. If it works, there's hope that mucosal immunity could slow the development of new coronavirus variants and finally bring the Covid-19 pandemic under control. There's a long way to go before that happens, however, and many scientists say the approach needs an injection of funding to accelerate the pace of development, much in the same way the billions of dollars doled out by Operation Warp Speed delivered the first generation of Covid-19 vaccines in record time. An old approach meets new technology The idea behind vaccinating the mucosa -- the lining of "the tube" (as mucosal immunologists refer to it) that runs from our nose and mouths to our lungs and guts -- isn't new. There are nine existing vaccines that work this way, including oral drops that protect against polio, cholera, salmonella and rotavirus, and a nasal spray, FluMist, that inoculates against the flu. Most are based on the oldest types of vaccine technologies, using killed or weakened versions of a virus or bacteria to teach the body how to recognize it and fight it off when a real infection gets underway. Because of those actual pathogens, some people can't use these kind of vaccines. It's risky to expose certain groups -- including pregnant women and those with weakened immune systems -- to even weakened viruses. None has achieved the goal of blocking the transmission of an infection, but that may be because they haven't gotten the same kind of investment as injectable vaccines, says Ed Lavelle, an immunologist at Trinity College in Dublin. "What hasn't really happened with mucosal vaccines is kind of huge advances in technology that have happened with injectable vaccines, even before Covid," Lavelle said. That may be about to change, however. Can nasal spray vaccines put the brakes on new variants? More than a dozen nasal spray vaccines against Covid-19 are being tested around the world. Many use new kinds of technologies, like delivering instructions for making the spike protein of the coronavirus through harmless Trojan horse viruses. Others aim to deploy the mRNA technology that was so successful in the injectable vaccines in the form of a nasal spray. One company, Vaxart, has even made a tablet that delivers instructions for making parts of the new coronavirus to the gut, which then builds immunity in "the tube." In animal tests, hamsters vaccinated in the nose or mouth have been less likely to spread a SARS-CoV-2 infection to uninfected animals that are in separate cages but share the same air. "What we found is that if you did an oral immunization, you inhibited the ability for that breakthrough to infect other animals," said Sean Tucker, chief scientific officer for Vaxart. The Vaxart tablet, which is about the size and shape of an aspirin, uses an adenovirus -- the same delivery system utilized by the Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca Covid vaccines -- to ferry instructions for making parts of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein into cells in the gut, which stimulates the release of antibodies in the nose and mouth. In an early trial that included 35 participants, 46% had an increase of antibodies in their nose after taking the tablet vaccine. Those who did seemed to create a broad spectrum of immunity to a number of types of coronaviruses, and they appeared to hold on to that protection for about a year. That may be a bit longer than injectable vaccines, though more research is needed to confirm those results. Tucker is presenting these early results Monday at the Seattle conference. He says they'll also be published as a preprint study in the coming days. A phase 2 trial of a tablet with a slightly different formulation, involving almost 900 participants, is also underway, Tucker says. It is scheduled to be completed next summer. Most of the mucosal vaccines under development are designed to be delivered as a squirt of liquid or mist up the nose, and many are intended to be used as boosters in people who've had a complete primary series of Covid-19 vaccines. "I don't think of them as nasal vaccines. I think of them as nasal boosts," said Jennifer Gommerman, an immunologist at the University of Toronto who specializes in tissue-specific immunity. That's important, Gommerman says, because nasal vaccines -- like FluMist -- haven't really worked all that well. The next generation of inoculations will be something different, she says. They will build on the body-wide immunity that was created by shots; they'll just redeploy it to the nose and throat where it is needed most, she says. "But here, we're actually talking about something else, where we're talking about building on the systemic immunity that was induced by a vaccine to a three shots of mRNA and then training that systemic immunity to go to the upper respiratory tract by boosting through the nose," Gommerman says. One such approach was recently tested by Akiko Iwasaki, an immunobiologist at Yale University. According to their preprint study, Iwasaki and her team inoculated mice with a low dose of Pfizer's Comirnaty mRNA vaccine and followed up two weeks later with a boost of mRNA vaccine delivered via a nasal spray. The low dose of the injected vaccine was meant to simulate waning immunity. Other groups of mice got only an injection or only a dose of vaccine in the nose. Only the group that got the injection followed by the nasal spray developed robust immunity against the Covid-19 virus. "That approach we have shown in the mouse model to be 100% protective against lethal dose of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and it dramatically reduces the viral load in the nose and in the lung," Iwasaki said. Going for IgA antibodies Mucosal vaccines also target a slightly different part of the immune system than shots. Injections trigger the body to make antibodies against the virus that causes Covid-19. Most of these are Y-shaped proteins called IgG antibodies that are programmed to recognized and block specific parts of the SARS-CoV-2 virus along its spikes, the parts of the virus that latch onto and infect our cells. A much smaller portion of these are IgA antibodies, and they look like two Ys joined together at their tails and turned sideways so it looks more like a dog bone, Gommerman says. Like bouncers at a bar, IgA antibodies are the primary immune molecules on guard in the mucosa. These molecules are beefier than IgG antibodies. They have four arms instead of two, and they're special because they're less picky about what they grab onto than IgG antibodies. "They might be a little more promiscuous in the way they recognize different variants. And that's obviously a plus," Gommerman said. Shots increase IgA antibodies in the nose for a short time, but the hope is that mucosal vaccines will really ramp up the population of these sentries and help them stay active for longer. "Whether they'll be able to confer complete sterilizing immunity, that's a very tall order," Gommerman said. "But we should be now working on ways to slow down person-to-person transmission, because this virus continues to mutate and then fools our immune system and gets past that mucosal layer. "This is now a very contagious virus," she said. Iwasaki says she would love to move her vaccine out of animal studies and into clinical trials in people. "We're still at the stage where we're kind of struggling to raise money, even make the vaccine for human use, because it takes millions of dollars, and we are not sitting on that kind of money for research lab," she said, "so not yet."
You just posted a complete fabrication. If you wish to have a discussion with me. Post facts. ==== with respect to the correction - "Correction note: An earlier version of this story reported that 0.5 per cent of those who have been fully vaccinated with the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines have been infected with Covid-19. Mr Ong did not say this in Parliament. We are sorry for the error."
I stand corrected regarding the information at the link. I will note the FACTS from the KFF and CDC involves vaccinated breakthrough reporting from a majority of U.S. states during the Delta period -- the study group is millions of people. This is the largest data set on the face of the earth. There are plenty of additional studies from the U.K. and other locations showing the vaccinated breakthrough rate of approximately 0.5% during the Delta time frame. At this point these are confirmed facts. My other link showing the U.K. large-scale controlled study published in Lancet shows the following results. The data, gathered from December 8, 2020, through July 4, 2021, show that of more than 1.2 million adults who received a first dose, fewer than 0.5% reported contracting breakthrough infections two weeks or more after getting the jab. Among those who got both shots, fewer than 0.2% experienced a breakthrough infection a week or more after getting their second shot. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-breakthrough-infections-vaccine-rate-symptoms-study/ Are you going to explain why a study from the Houston medical system with a mere 16K samples including significant limitations is somehow more applicable than multiple vaccinated breakthrough studies and data gathering during the Delta time period across multiple countries involving millions of people.
You are citing limited data sets based on reported positive tests and other Covid recorded events. Breakthrough rates require the tracking of the entire database not just those seeking tests. However, more importantly you are citing studies which ended their tracking during the time just before the vaccine efficacy began to fade rapidly. By November of 2021 when we were seeing 20 to 50 percent breakthrough rates in many data sets. The chart below we confirm the explosion of breakthrough cases. .56 breakthrough rate is a lie.