Look at that first graph. What possible mechanism could lead to the *primary series* (you know the one from early 2021) suddenly gaining 3x more efficiency versus unvaccinated people, from one month to the next in summer 2022? We are supposed the believe the original vaccine series had long since worn off, requiring 2+ boosters to stay "up to date", but yet those first two shots just magically just keep achieving something like 5x protection against one outcome (death) but no other outcomes all those months later?
I know your overall point is that CDC is (wildly) *choosing to* highlight the weaknesses of the vaccines to make their more immediate case about the necessity of a bivalent booster. And I agree this calls into the question their honesty and judgement during earlier phases. But even now I still don't think they are being quite honest enough. That first chart serves to maintain the very last piece of narrative they will never let go of, that the insane pressure and firings and vac-passes and norm-breaking of the original campaign was justified because it "saved lives." And perhaps it did, some, for a while, but not like that wholly implausible chart.
Question for you - what happened to the J&J vaccine? It seems like it's never discussed in any of these follow-up conversations. When we discuss initial course, it's only the two-shot regimen of Moderna / Pfizer. At the very least, it would seem to be an important comparison point (along with "unvaccinated") in the first graph above.
I got that version of the vaccine when required by my employer because it seemed the most "traditional" of the options available. Not to get too conspiratorial, but it sort of seems that we're broadly pretending like that third option doesn't in favor of the two, more novel mRNA options, which I can't help but feel a little unsettled by.
Approving Vaccines Under Pressure (Part 1)
Thank you so much for covering this.
Look at that first graph. What possible mechanism could lead to the *primary series* (you know the one from early 2021) suddenly gaining 3x more efficiency versus unvaccinated people, from one month to the next in summer 2022? We are supposed the believe the original vaccine series had long since worn off, requiring 2+ boosters to stay "up to date", but yet those first two shots just magically just keep achieving something like 5x protection against one outcome (death) but no other outcomes all those months later?
I know your overall point is that CDC is (wildly) *choosing to* highlight the weaknesses of the vaccines to make their more immediate case about the necessity of a bivalent booster. And I agree this calls into the question their honesty and judgement during earlier phases. But even now I still don't think they are being quite honest enough. That first chart serves to maintain the very last piece of narrative they will never let go of, that the insane pressure and firings and vac-passes and norm-breaking of the original campaign was justified because it "saved lives." And perhaps it did, some, for a while, but not like that wholly implausible chart.
Question for you - what happened to the J&J vaccine? It seems like it's never discussed in any of these follow-up conversations. When we discuss initial course, it's only the two-shot regimen of Moderna / Pfizer. At the very least, it would seem to be an important comparison point (along with "unvaccinated") in the first graph above.
I got that version of the vaccine when required by my employer because it seemed the most "traditional" of the options available. Not to get too conspiratorial, but it sort of seems that we're broadly pretending like that third option doesn't in favor of the two, more novel mRNA options, which I can't help but feel a little unsettled by.
Do you know how long it takes the flu shot efficacy to go to zero in a year where they guess right?