Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

JurassicCotyledon t1_j8dpeiw wrote

Reply to comment by PomegranatePlanet in A study in the US has found, compared to unvaccinated people, protection from the risk of dying from COVID during the six-month omicron wave for folks who had two doses of an mRNA vaccine was 42% for 40- to 59-year-olds; 27% for 60- to 79-year-olds; and 46% for people 80 and older. by Wagamaga

Do you have any data on the estimated reduction in transmission?

21

PomegranatePlanet t1_j8dq15w wrote

The article stated that the study did not consider any data related to reduction in transmission.

My comment is that, due to that limitation, it is too simplistic to make such a broad recommendation. A better study is needed.

18

JurassicCotyledon t1_j8dsao5 wrote

Sure, I agree. But I’m wondering if you know of any data that suggests an estimated reduction in transmission rates associated with these vaccines.

2

Generallyawkward1 t1_j8e0tx8 wrote

That’s the real question. Id wager they are stil ongoing, as it’s still too soon to get a broad scope of it, especially with the different variants and weather change.

5

JurassicCotyledon t1_j8e1fys wrote

Agreed. Another big question is the comparable impact of vaccine immunity alone reducing transmission, compared to natural immunity from previous exposure. Nearly everyone has been exposed at this point, vaccinated or not. And we don’t have a very effective means at identifying a control group.

1

shiruken t1_j8ecsld wrote

This is a little tricky since the OP's study was conducted over a long period of time prior to the existence of the bivalent boosters designed for the Omicron variant, which partially evaded the immunity conferred by the original vaccines and/or infection with earlier strains of SARS-CoV-2.

The CDC publishes a tracker that is updated monthly showing the rates of COVID-19 cases and deaths by vaccination status. In December 2022, people aged 5+ who were vaccinated with an updated (bivalent) booster had 3.1x lower risk of testing positive for COVID-19 compared to unvaccinated people. People aged 5+ who were vaccinated without the updated booster only had 2.4x lower risk compared to unvaccinated.

A recent peer-reviewed study by the CDC found that the bivalent boosters from both Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna were 48% effective against symptomatic infection from the current predominant omicron subvariant. Note that this effectiveness was calculated relative to fully vaccinated individuals without the bivalent booster dose, so the effectiveness relative to unvaccinated individuals would be even higher (but was beyond the scope of the study).

For more information about vaccine effectiveness, see this comprehensive list maintained by the CDC.

13

williamwchuang t1_j8dsch8 wrote

Check the various statistics reported by the state health departments in the U.S.

10

IzTea_1X t1_j8ebd59 wrote

Is it not true that the pfizer vaccine doesnt reduce transmission?

5

JurassicCotyledon t1_j8ecai4 wrote

From what I’ve read, not effectively. That’s why I’m wondering if anyone has specific data on that, and isolated to identify the transmission rate reduction incurred purely by the vaccine, versus from previous infection.

Pfizer didn’t even test for transmission blocking during their trial prior to the mass vaccine rollout.

8

nexusgmail t1_j8gsia8 wrote

They were actually pretty effective at preventing symptomatic infections prior to Delta and Omicron.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-health-coronavirus-pfizer-vaccine-tra-idUKKBN2AQ1A7

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00127-7/fulltext

4

JurassicCotyledon t1_j8guqwj wrote

Does being asymptomatic mean you cannot transmit the virus to others?

And they will continue to mutate and evade the narrow and short lasting immunity offered by these vaccines.

3

troyan2 t1_j8ei1ku wrote

Pfizer and Albert Bourla are criminals that need to be put to jail for life

0

neuronexmachina t1_j8elwcz wrote

How would you ethically test for the effectiveness of a vaccine in blocking transmission?

−1

JurassicCotyledon t1_j8epczm wrote

Animal models.

Double blind placebo controlled trial involving people in roles involving frequent contact.

Similar model for phase 3 but using larger groups in broader community.

The important thing is to have put forth an effort to do so, and to collect this data in the long term without muddying the water by unblinding the control groups. This has not been the case here from what I’ve seen. It’s not going to be perfect, obviously in times of emergency especially, but that doesn’t change the facts at hand.

But on the subject of ethics, would it be ethical to tell people to get vaccinated with a brand new technology, and claim “you’re doing your part” by reducing transmission, if you have no data to support that claim to begin with?

2

Quixote1111 t1_j8f9fdd wrote

It seems to me like a bit of a no-brainer that someone that has COVID and doesn't even realize it because they have no symptoms what-so-ever (vaccinated) would not spread the virus nearly as much as someone that is half dead with the virus running rampant through their system and they are coughing up a lung, spewing particles everywhere they go (unvaccinated). Sure there are exceptional cases, but I'm talking on a broad scale.

I'm no expert though, just going on common sense.

I'm triple-vaxxed (in my 40s) and I'm pretty sure I've had COVID at some point and didn't even know it. My elderly mom got it too and barely missed a beat (also vaccinated 3 or 4 times). She lives with my dad (nearly 80) and he did not catch it. I understand this is not scientific data, but it speaks to me about the effectiveness of the vaccines and their ability to reduce transmission.

5