health

Pfizer seeks OK of updated COVID vaccine booster for fall

26 Comments
By LAURAN NEERGAARD

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2022 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

26 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Big pharmaceutical companies only in it for profit. Daylight robbery.

5 ( +15 / -10 )

The Food and Drug Administration ordered vaccine makers to tweak their shots to target BA.4 and BA.5 that are better than ever at dodging immunity from earlier vaccination or infection.

Interesting that medical professionals in the US were less prone to get the third and fourth boosters than the first two.

0 ( +14 / -14 )

At the start of the pandemic, Geert Vandal Bossche was the only scientist (at least that I'm aware of) who publicly argued that mass vaccination during an active pandemic would create evolutionary pressure favoring new vaccine-escape variants. His logic was sound but he was largely dismissed at the time. Now he's predicting that introducing an Omicron specific booster will again create new evolutionary pressure favoring variants that will likely exhibit greater virulence. So I guess we'll see in a few months whose model is right.

1 ( +11 / -10 )

Big pharmaceutical companies only in it for profit. Daylight robbery.

What evidence do you have that contradicts the available data that proves the vaccines reduce the risk from covid? without that evidence your statement have no relevancy.

Interesting that medical professionals in the US were less prone to get the third and fourth boosters than the first two.

If the first doses give enough protection to their age group there is nothing surprising about that, specially if they understand the next version of the booster is likely to offer better protection against omicron strains.

and I don’t believe in this pandemic at all!

Not believing in something proved beyond any rational doubt is not an argument, at much it just express incapacity to accept something that is proved as real.

So is putting your trust instead on someone that has repeatedly been proved to be mistaken or using false information.

https://medika.life/fact-checking-geert-vanden-bossche-cashing-in-on-covid-misinformation/

At the start of the pandemic, Geert Vandal Bossche was the only scientist (at least that I'm aware of) who publicly argued that mass vaccination during an active pandemic would create evolutionary pressure favoring new vaccine-escape variants.

And as proved he could not have been more wrong, the variants of interest have appeared in poorly vaccinated populations instead of those that had high vaccination rates, clearly proving he was completely mistaken. At this point him predicting something is a very strong argument against that happening in the first place.

-4 ( +10 / -14 )

the FDA will be relying heavily on scientific testing of prior tweaks to the vaccine recipe — rather than a study of the newest boosters that could take months 

Umm.. So by the time this new (untrialled) "vaccine" is released most people will have had the Omicron strain and received natural immunity which will make it redundant. On top of which now that Omicron is about to wane there will no doubt be a new variant which again will make these vaccines redundant. Seriously what is the point except to keep milking govts for cash?

1 ( +13 / -12 )

No thanks. Not had any yet, and never will. Useless shots.

0 ( +12 / -12 )

Umm.. So by the time this new (untrialled) "vaccine" is released most people will have had the Omicron strain and received natural immunity which will make it redundant.

The booster has been already tested in clinical trials, and no, even the current available boosters have demonstrated to reduce the risk for people that have been infected, so it is not rational to expect the new variety to be any different. Specially when reinfections between omicron variants are becoming more and more common.

No thanks. Not had any yet, and never will. Useless shots.

The professionals and experts that know the most about infectious diseases and public health explicitly contradict your statement, and they have the scientific evidence to prove it.

0 ( +11 / -11 )

Another booster- no thanks.

6 ( +15 / -9 )

Interesting that medical professionals in the US were less prone to get the third and fourth boosters than the first two.

If the first doses give enough protection to their age group there is nothing surprising about that, specially if they understand the next version of the booster is likely to offer better protection against omicron strains.

I wrote it was "interesting"--not "surprising" as you wrote, and there is no mention of any "age group"--the only group referred to is the "medical professionals"; but anyway, that is not a response relevant to my statement. The surprise would be that after your fervent promotion of the third or fourth shots here, and how people are "irrational" if they don't get those shots, you would be agreeing with my statement that those shots are not so urgently needed, and you agree with my belief that people should forego those boosters and wait for the bivalent vaccines, if any.

Also, "if they understand the next version of the booster is likely to offer better protection against omicron strains" doesn't make sense as they are the medical professionals, not you, so of course they would understand whatever factual information might or might not be available for them to make the decision whether or not to get the bivalent vaccine.

The other interesting trend is that the same medical professionals are planning to forego getting injected with the bivalent vaccines in comparison with the general population who plan to be vaccinated with those.

-7 ( +5 / -12 )

Virusrex

Not trying to disprove anything. I believe that your decision to get the shots is just as irrational as you think I am for refusing them.

3 ( +12 / -9 )

Not trying to disprove anything. I believe that your decision to get the shots is just as irrational as you think I am for refusing them.

The arguments that prove vaccines are much safer than not vaccinating are clear and undisputed, believing the contrary based on absolutely nothing is what is irrational.

-3 ( +9 / -12 )

I wrote it was "interesting"--not "surprising" as you wrote, and there is no mention of any "age group"--the only group referred to is the "medical professionals

What age do you think medical professionals are? over 90? it is quite obvious that those working in the medical profession are in great part in the age where the risk is not elevated, so the decision to be vaccinated but not necessarily boosted is in agreement with the evidence, again specially if a better booster is soon to be available.

The surprise would be that after your fervent promotion of the third or fourth shots here, and how people are "irrational" if they don't get those shots, you would be agreeing with my statement that those shots are not so urgently needed

There is no promotion only correcting "reasons" that are not consistent with reality or that have been proved false repeatedly, choosing the worst option is by definition irrational. For some people they are extremely urgent for other the protection is already elevated, that does absolutely nothing to disprove the point that vaccinating is better than not. It would be the same as wearing sun block to protect from cancer, people that spend 30 minutes at much in the sun do not need this as much as those that work under the sun the whole day, but even for those that spend a little time it is better to wear it than not.

and you agree with my belief that people should forego those boosters and wait for the bivalent vaccines, if any.

No, the argument is that some people can think that way, not that I do, being protected while waiting for new boosters is still a very valid thing to do.

doesn't make sense as they are the medical professionals, not you

As usual when you run out of arguments you make baseless accusations about what other commenters are or do, pulling things out of your imagination is not an argument, if anything is the opposite because you have to use baseless imaginations instead of rational arguments.

so of course they would understand whatever factual information might or might not be available for them to make the decision whether or not to get the bivalent vaccine.

They should, that does not mean they do. Looking at the amount of doctors that prescribe antibiotics against the common cold can let anybody understand some people are not prepared enough to do their job professionally. As usual evidence is a much stronger argument than just an appeal to authority.

The other interesting trend is that the same medical professionals are planning to forego getting injected with the bivalent vaccines in comparison with the general population who plan to be vaccinated with those

Interesting in the same way as the antibiotics example.

-3 ( +8 / -11 )

"Pfizer and its partner BioNTech aim to offer updated boosters to people 12 and older, and shots could begin within weeks if the FDA quickly clears the modified vaccine — a step not expected to require waiting on new studies."

"Its application to the FDA contains that data plus animal testing of the newest recipe update."

"Pfizer and BioNTech expect to start a trial using the BA.4 and BA.5 boosters in the coming weeks"

"In the U.S., the FDA will be relying heavily on scientific testing of prior tweaks to the vaccine recipe — rather than a study of the newest boosters that could take months "

Ummm INCORRECT! this "recipe" has not been trialled yet!

Maybe the resident pharmaceutical proponents should go back and read the article!

2 ( +10 / -8 )

No thanks. I'll rather have covid again. I've had colds twice & covid once in the last 12 months. Covid was by far the mildest.

2 ( +12 / -10 )

Lol.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

Could this not be due to a fall in Pfizer profits and falling share price, since people not taking the vaccine that doesn't stop Covid but "may" reduce symptoms? So create a new one that supposedly works against the current variant, then claim it may only be slightly effective against later variants, or doesn't work at all.

This is going to be a never ending story, folks. Roll up your sleeves like the good obedient sheeple you are.

Meanwhile, I am going to give this jab and future ones a miss and invest in Pfizer since their share price is headed up this fall with the new vaccine rolllout.

0 ( +8 / -8 )

Ummm INCORRECT! this "recipe" has not been trialled yet!

As is written in the article the vaccine against omicron variants has, and the same as with the influenza vaccines as long as evidence of safety and efficacy are obtained tweaks in the antigen formulation can be accepted using that data. There is no reason to think covid vaccines are in any way special in this aspect. If anything, the lack of new complications specific to the omicron variants are evidence that a vaccine based on its spike protein sequence have no specific safety issues either.

No thanks. I'll rather have covid again.

Which is completely your choice, but for people that want to make a rational decision based on evidence the vaccines are the less risky option by much.

This is going to be a never ending story, folks. Roll up your sleeves like the good obedient sheeple you are.

If the shots reduce the risk this is not something new, and if eventually the disease stops being an increase of risk (as the trend is) there is a very real possibility eventually even vaccination would become unnecessary except for the a tiny minority of people very susceptible to complications.

-2 ( +7 / -9 )

I think you will find he actually has no idea.

Can you prove any of the arguments are wrong? false? the whole point is that the experts support the value of vaccines and it is trivially easy to find actual scientific evidence that contradicts the idea that refusing to vaccinate or boost is as good as doing it.

The facts are that no matter how many does of the vaccine you get, you can still get Covid, apparently within just 3 weeks of getting vaccinated or "boosted" now.

That does absolutely nothing to refute the fact that vaccinating makes this risk lower, and even after infection it makes also much more difficult to have heavy symptoms, complications, be hospitalized or die, which is precisely what vaccines are meant to do.

Meanwhile, I know loads of people who are unvaccinated, and who have never had it .

You can characterize those loads of people, present evidence they have not been infected, compare their demographics and refute the data from literally hundreds of thousands of people that say vaccinating is the best option.

Else it is just hearsay and not a valid argument, anybody can say the opposite and it would "cancel" this argument.

-3 ( +7 / -10 )

I think there will be a time we will have to accept this is here to stay, and we will have to throw off our masks sooner or later, get the vaccine if you wish, and accept that some people will die. Similar to influenza!

0 ( +4 / -4 )

Big pharmaceutical companies only in it for profit. Daylight robbery.

I have nothing against them making profits. But I am against them using those profits to bride/influence officials, media, and doctors. Pfizer has already been convicted multiple times for bribing and falsifying data; why should anyone assume they are not doing it now.

What evidence do you have that contradicts the available data that proves the vaccines reduce the risk from covid? without that evidence your statement have no relevancy.

There is increasing evidence that the risk benefit ratio does not favor vaccinating healthy people, especially if they can get safe early treatment. The papers I have referenced over the past few months clearly show the vaccines do not reduce overall mortality (even when you focus on kids) and they have extremely high rate of heart damage in teenage boys,...

The professionals and experts that know the most about infectious diseases and public health explicitly contradict your statement, and they have the scientific evidence to prove it.

The regulatory officials might say that, but those who actually know the most about infectious diseases and public health say otherwise.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

But I am against them using those profits to bride/influence officials, media, and doctors.

When the whole scientific consensus is the same this is not a believable argument, Are companies investing decades worth of profit "influencing" every single institution of science or medicine in the world? is every doctor and scientist that supports vaccines doing it only for money even when supposedly knowing they will be used to damage their own family and friends? Nobody with common sense would believe this can happen, at much people that would actually do that for money would ever think anybody else would also do the same.

There is increasing evidence that the risk benefit ratio does not favor vaccinating healthy people

You keep repeating this, but never produce this "increasing evidence", that would indicated clearly that this is not the case. Misrepresenting what the research actually says and contradicting the conclusions of the authors of those papers is not the same as presenting evidence.

The regulatory officials might say that

Every institution of science or medicine says this, not just regulatory officials.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

is every doctor and scientist that supports vaccines doing it only for money even when supposedly knowing they will be used to damage their own family and friends?

We don't know whether they vaccinate their family and friends. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if you did not get the vaccine. Many doctors will get the vaccine, or recommend it, only so that they can hold onto their medical license, for which they worked very hard. And please note that a very large number of doctors and other medical professionals preferred to lose their job, rather than get the vaccine.

There is increasing evidence that the risk benefit ratio does not favor vaccinating healthy people

You keep repeating this, but never produce this "increasing evidence", that would indicated clearly that this is not the case.

You know very well that I've provided links to many such studies (from Thailand, Singapore, Denmark, US, ...) many times already.

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

We don't know whether they vaccinate their family and friends

It stretches the imagination a conspiracy at the same time so obvious and so complicated happening without plenty of proof, if your argument for an impossibly complicated conspiracy is to make it even more complicated and difficult to believe you are already accepting there is no logic or reason on it, so you have to conjure even less believable scenarios just to avoid accepting there is no realistic chance of this happening. Now not only every single institution of science and medicine in the world have to be in the conspiracy, also every singe source of information that would make the obvious lack of vaccination of family and friends of the doctors known? what is next, every single person is in the conspiracy except those that reject vaccines?

And no, hoding a medical licence in higher value than their own health or life, or those of their familiy members is still completely unbelievable, specially for the huge number of professionals that would supposedly be doing it.

You know very well that I've provided links to many such studies (from Thailand, Singapore, Denmark, US,

Not at all, none of the sources you have brought prove what you said they would do, which is why you don(t present them here.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites