The Navy has agreed to a settlement with a group of current and former service members who were denied religious exemptions from the coronavirus vaccine.
First Liberty Institute and Hacker Stephens LLP, which is representing 4,300 sailors and Navy SEALs in the case, announced the settlement on Wednesday.
As a part of the settlement agreement, the Navy agrees to re-review the personnel records of all Class Members to ensure that the U.S. Navy has permanently removed records indicating administrative separation processing or proceedings, formal counseling, and non-judicial punishment actions taken against the Class Member solely on the basis of non-compliance with the COVID-19 Mandate and adverse information related to non-compliance with the COVID-19 Mandate, according to a release from First Liberty Institute.
The Navy has also agreed to post a statement affirming its respect for religious service members, provide more training for commanders who review these requests, and pay $1.5 million in attorneys fees.
This has been a long and difficult journey, but the Navy SEALs never gave up, Danielle Runyan, chairwoman of the Military Practice Group and senior counsel at First Liberty Institute, said.We are thrilled that those members of the Navy who were guided by their conscience and steadfast in their faith will not be penalized in their Navy careers.
The case centers on the militarys mandate to get the coronavirus vaccine, which was ultimately rescinded, though not before thousands of U.S. service members were discharged due to their refusal to get the vaccination. A majority of the service members who sought religious exemptions were denied, which prompted several legal challenges, including the one settled on Wednesday.
The suit, initially filed in November 2021, began with 35 Navy SEALs, and the firm ultimately expanded the case into a class action on behalf of about 4,300 Navy SEALs and sailors.
Runyan told the Washington Examiner that the case could set a precedent for future situations regarding religious freedom.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
Weve never had a class action situation against the military in the history of the military, and here we are. And because of that, the case law that we achieved, if people need to pursue relief in defense of their religious liberty rights going forward, they can rely on this, she said.
A Navy spokesperson directed the Washington Examiner to the Department of Justice.
State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington Washington D.C. West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Puerto Rico US Virgin Islands Armed Forces Americas Armed Forces Pacific Armed Forces Europe Northern Mariana Islands Marshall Islands American Samoa Federated States of Micronesia Guam Palau Alberta, Canada British Columbia, Canada Manitoba, Canada New Brunswick, Canada Newfoundland, Canada Nova Scotia, Canada Northwest Territories, Canada Nunavut, Canada Ontario, Canada Prince Edward Island, Canada Quebec, Canada Saskatchewan, Canada Yukon Territory, Canada
Zip Code
Country United States of America US Virgin Islands United States Minor Outlying Islands Canada Mexico, United Mexican States Bahamas, Commonwealth of the Cuba, Republic of Dominican Republic Haiti, Republic of Jamaica Afghanistan Albania, People's Socialist Republic of Algeria, People's Democratic Republic of American Samoa Andorra, Principality of Angola, Republic of Anguilla Antarctica (the territory South of 60 deg S) Antigua and Barbuda Argentina, Argentine Republic Armenia Aruba Australia, Commonwealth of Austria, Republic of Azerbaijan, Republic of Bahrain, Kingdom of Bangladesh, People's Republic of Barbados Belarus Belgium, Kingdom of Belize Benin, People's Republic of Bermuda Bhutan, Kingdom of Bolivia, Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana, Republic of Bouvet Island (Bouvetoya) Brazil, Federative Republic of British Indian Ocean Territory (Chagos Archipelago) British Virgin Islands Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria, People's Republic of Burkina Faso Burundi, Republic of Cambodia, Kingdom of Cameroon, United Republic of Cape Verde, Republic of Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad, Republic of Chile, Republic of China, People's Republic of Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia, Republic of Comoros, Union of the Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo, People's Republic of Cook Islands Costa Rica, Republic of Cote D'Ivoire, Ivory Coast, Republic of the Cyprus, Republic of Czech Republic Denmark, Kingdom of Djibouti, Republic of Dominica, Commonwealth of Ecuador, Republic of Egypt, Arab Republic of El Salvador, Republic of Equatorial Guinea, Republic of Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Faeroe Islands Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Fiji, Republic of the Fiji Islands Finland, Republic of France, French Republic French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon, Gabonese Republic Gambia, Republic of the Georgia Germany Ghana, Republic of Gibraltar Greece, Hellenic Republic Greenland Grenada Guadaloupe Guam Guatemala, Republic of Guinea, Revolutionary People's Rep'c of Guinea-Bissau, Republic of Guyana, Republic of Heard and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras, Republic of Hong Kong, Special Administrative Region of China Hrvatska (Croatia) Hungary, Hungarian People's Republic Iceland, Republic of India, Republic of Indonesia, Republic of Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq, Republic of Ireland Israel, State of Italy, Italian Republic Japan Jordan, Hashemite Kingdom of Kazakhstan, Republic of Kenya, Republic of Kiribati, Republic of Korea, Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait, State of Kyrgyz Republic Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon, Lebanese Republic Lesotho, Kingdom of Liberia, Republic of Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein, Principality of Lithuania Luxembourg, Grand Duchy of Macao, Special Administrative Region of China Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar, Republic of Malawi, Republic of Malaysia Maldives, Republic of Mali, Republic of Malta, Republic of Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania, Islamic Republic of Mauritius Mayotte Micronesia, Federated States of Moldova, Republic of Monaco, Principality of Mongolia, Mongolian People's Republic Montserrat Morocco, Kingdom of Mozambique, People's Republic of Myanmar Namibia Nauru, Republic of Nepal, Kingdom of Netherlands Antilles Netherlands, Kingdom of the New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua, Republic of Niger, Republic of the Nigeria, Federal Republic of Niue, Republic of Norfolk Island Northern Mariana Islands Norway, Kingdom of Oman, Sultanate of Pakistan, Islamic Republic of Palau Palestinian Territory, Occupied Panama, Republic of Papua New Guinea Paraguay, Republic of Peru, Republic of Philippines, Republic of the Pitcairn Island Poland, Polish People's Republic Portugal, Portuguese Republic Puerto Rico Qatar, State of Reunion Romania, Socialist Republic of Russian Federation Rwanda, Rwandese Republic Samoa, Independent State of San Marino, Republic of Sao Tome and Principe, Democratic Republic of Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of Senegal, Republic of Serbia and Montenegro Seychelles, Republic of Sierra Leone, Republic of Singapore, Republic of Slovakia (Slovak Republic) Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia, Somali Republic South Africa, Republic of South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands Spain, Spanish State Sri Lanka, Democratic Socialist Republic of St. Helena St. Kitts and Nevis St. Lucia St. Pierre and Miquelon St. Vincent and the Grenadines Sudan, Democratic Republic of the Suriname, Republic of Svalbard & Jan Mayen Islands Swaziland, Kingdom of Sweden, Kingdom of Switzerland, Swiss Confederation Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan, Province of China Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand, Kingdom of Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of Togo, Togolese Republic Tokelau (Tokelau Islands) Tonga, Kingdom of Trinidad and Tobago, Republic of Tunisia, Republic of Turkey, Republic of Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda, Republic of Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom of Great Britain & N. Ireland Uruguay, Eastern Republic of Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Viet Nam, Socialist Republic of Wallis and Futuna Islands Western Sahara Yemen Zambia, Republic of Zimbabwe
Vaccinations have provided significant protection for the public against infectious diseases. However, there was a modest decrease in support in 2023 nationwide for vaccine requirements for children to attend public schools.
In addition, the presidential candidacy of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a leading critic of childhood vaccination, has given him a prominent platform in which to amplify his views. This includes an extensive interview on the Joe Rogan Experience, a podcast with over 14 million subscribers. Notably, former President Donald Trump has said he is opposed to mandatory school COVID-19 vaccinations, and in a phone call Trump apparently wasnt aware was being recorded, he appeared to endorse Kennedys views toward vaccines.
I am a biochemist and molecular biologist studying the roles microbes play in health and disease. I also teach medical students and am interested in how the public understands science.
Here are some facts about vaccines that skeptics like Kennedy get wrong:
Public health data from 1974 to the present conclude that vaccines have saved at least 154 million lives worldwide over the past 50 years. Vaccines are also constantly monitored for safety in the U.S.
Nevertheless, the false claim that vaccines cause autism persists despite study after study of large populations throughout the world showing no causal link between them.
Claims about the dangers of vaccines often come from misrepresenting scientific research papers. Kennedy cites a 2005 report allegedly showing massive brain inflammation in monkeys in response to vaccination, when in fact the authors of that study state that there were no serious medical complications. A separate 2003 study that Kennedy claimed showed a 1,135% increase in autism in vaccinated versus unvaccinated children actually found no consistent significant association between vaccines and neurodevelopmental outcomes.
Kennedy also claims that a 2002 vaccine study included a control group of children 6 months of age and younger who were fed mercury-contaminated tuna sandwiches. This claim is false.
Kennedy is co-counsel with a law firm that is suing the pharmaceutical company Merck based in part on the unfounded assertion that the aluminum in one of its vaccines causes neurological disease. Aluminum is added to many vaccines as an adjuvant to strengthen the bodys immune response to the vaccine, thereby enhancing the bodys defense against the targeted microbe.
The law firms claim is based on a 2020 report showing that brain tissue from some patients with Alzheimers disease, autism and multiple sclerosis have elevated levels of aluminum. The authors of that study do not assert that vaccines are the source of the aluminum, and vaccines are unlikely to be the culprit.
Notably, the brain samples analyzed in that study were from 47- to 105-year-old patients. Most people are exposed to aluminum primarily through their diets, and aluminum is eliminated from the body within days. Therefore, aluminum exposure from childhood vaccines is not expected to persist in those patients.
Clinical trials for vaccines and other drugs are blinded, randomized and placebo-controlled studies. For a vaccine trial, this means that participants are randomly divided into one group that receives the vaccine and a second group that receives a placebo saline solution. The researchers carrying out the study, and sometimes the participants, do not know who has received the vaccine or the placebo until the study has finished. This eliminates bias.
Results are published in the public domain. For example, vaccine trial data for COVID-19, human papilloma virus and rotavirus is available for anyone to access.
Kennedys lawsuit against Merck contradicts his insistence that vaccine manufacturers are fully immune from litigation.
His claim is based on an incorrect interpretation of the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, or VICP. VICP is a no-fault federal program created to reduce frivolous lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers, which threaten to cause vaccine shortages and a resurgence of vaccine-preventable disease.
A person claiming injury from a vaccine can petition the U.S. Court of Federal Claims through the VICP for monetary compensation. If the VICP petition is denied, the claimant can then sue the vaccine manufacturer.
The majority of cases resolved under the VICP end in a negotiated settlement between parties without establishing that a vaccine was the cause of the claimed injury. Kennedy and his law firm have incorrectly used the payouts under the VICP to assert that vaccines are unsafe.
The VICP gets the vaccine manufacturer off the hook only if it has complied with all requirements of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and exercised due care. It does not protect the vaccine maker from claims of fraud or withholding information regarding the safety or efficacy of the vaccine during its development or after approval.
Kennedy asserts that populations with adequate nutrition do not need vaccines to avoid infectious diseases. While it is clear that improvements in nutrition, sanitation, water treatment, food safety and public health measures have played important roles in reducing deaths and severe complications from infectious diseases, these factors do not eliminate the need for vaccines.
After World War II, the U.S. was a wealthy nation with substantial health-related infrastructure. Yet, Americans reported an average of 1 million cases per year of now-preventable infectious diseases.
Vaccines introduced or expanded in the 1950s and 1960s against diseases like diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, measles, polio, mumps, rubella and Haemophilus influenza type B have resulted in the near or complete eradication of those diseases.
Its easy to forget why many infectious diseases are rarely encountered today. The success of vaccines does not always tell its own story. It must be retold again and again to counter misinformation.
Breadcrumb Trail Links
Health care workers will be required to report their immunization status for major diseases like COVID-19, flu and chicken pox.
Published Jul 26, 2024 Last updated 1day ago 5 minute read
You can save this article by registering for free here. Or sign-in if you have an account.
More than two thousand B.C. health-care workers who lost their jobs because they refused a COVID-19 vaccine will now be allowed to return to work, after the B.C. government announced it was ending the public health emergency.
Dr.BonnieHenry, the provincial health officer, made the announcement Friday morning in Victoria along with Health Minister Adrian Dix.
Advertisement 2
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY
Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.
SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES
Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.
REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
or
Article content
Henry said they were rescinding the public health emergency and lifting all the remaining orders, including the vaccine mandate that was brought in in 2021 for health-care workers.
We have reached the point in this journey that weve been on where I am confident that we can now lift the requirements of the public health emergency effective immediately, she said.
She acknowledged the decision would make some people anxious and encouraged all British Columbians to continue to get vaccinated against the illness.
Dix also announced a provincial regulation requiring all health workers to report their immunization status for all high priority pathogens of relevance. That means doctors, nurses and other health professionals will be required to report their vaccination status for COVID, influenza, measles, mumps, rubella, hepatitis B, whooping cough and chickenpox.
The requirement will be phased in, beginning with the collection of immunity status records of all new hires and health-care workers terminated due to noncompliance with previous orders.
While immunization will not be a requirement of employment, in the event of an outbreak health-care workers who are not immunized may be the subject of other action to ensure the safety of them, their coworkers and patients, said Dix.
Sunrise
Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion.
By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.
Thanks for signing up!
A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.
The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox.
We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again
Article content
Advertisement 3
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
He said that action during an outbreak could include masking, modified duties or exclusion from work.
Henry said this new requirement is an important step to keep vaccinerates high and the continued protection of health-care workers.
The data show that having that vaccine mandate in our health-care system made a huge difference in protecting people and in the confidence in our system, in our health care, said Henry.
With the understanding of how important immunization has been in getting us through this worst crisis that weve ever faced is an opportunity to focus on all of the vaccine preventable diseases that we know can have a horrendous disruptive effect.
Some B.C. mayors had been calling on the province to end the vaccine mandate for health workers because of the critical understaffing at hospitals and closure of some emergency rooms. This was a call supported by both Opposition Leader Kevin Falcon and Conservative Leader John Rustad.
Dix dismissed suggestions that Fridays announcement was political, saying the decision was made looking at the data for COVID infection.
Advertisement 4
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Henry said the decision was made looking at a variety of data from testing infection rates, outbreaks and to the number of people in ICU.
We look at the vulnerability in certain populations, particularly people who are more likely to have severe disease from COVID-19, and we look at the evolution of the virus, she said, adding the dominant strain is a relatively stable variant of Omicron.
Henry has previously said that health-care workers who dont believe in the effectiveness of vaccines should think about a different career and on Friday stood by that statement.
Immunization is one of the most important global public health measures that we have that has increased life expectancy, protected children, protected vulnerable people in our health-care system. And we all know that if youre in a hospital, you dont have a choice of who is caring for you. You dont have a choice of whos coming in to do tests on you, she said, adding that she believes its morally the right thing to do to protect vulnerable people in their care.
The provincial public health order required the about 190,000 health-care workers in hospitals, long-term care homes and community health centres in B.C. to be vaccinated for COVID. The B.C. Public Service Agency also required its 30,000 employees to be vaccinated.
Advertisement 5
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Almost 2,500 health-care workers were terminated for not getting a vaccination to work in B.C.s hospital system, and almost half of them worked in the Interior and Northern health authorities, according to B.C. government data released in 2022.
Earlier this year, a court case from 15 health-care workers challenging the mandate was dismissed in B.C. Supreme Court. They had unsuccessfully argued the continuation of the mandate was an unreasonable exercise of the powers of the health officer.
Falcon, who is also the leader of B.C. United, has been pushing the government to scrap the vaccine mandate for more than two years, asking Premier David Eby and Dix to provide the science to back up their decision.
Ive emphasized the fact that we were the only jurisdiction in North America still punishing these critically needed workers all to no avail, he said. So, what changed? Did some new science magically appear? Or is a looming election the only reason theyve shifted direction? You can decide for yourself, but the damage to our health-care system and the impact on the fired workers will take much longer to heal. Thats what happens when ideology trumps evidence.
Advertisement 6
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below.
Article content
Falcon then called for Dix to be fired.
Rustad called the delay in removing vaccine mandates for health-care workers a failure of leadership.
In a statement Friday, he said B.C. was the only province in the country still enforcing what he called outdated restrictions.
The NDPs delayed response to lift these mandates is a clear example of their failure to listen to the concerns of our health-care workers, said Rustad.
Some vaccine status information was previously collected by health authorities but it now will be collected through a provincial registry to ensure reporting is consistent throughout B.C., the government said.
The government says reporting vaccination status aligns with health-care workers ethical and moral duties to take science-based measures, such as vaccination, to reduce the risk of harm to people in their care.
With files from Susan Lazaruk and Katie DeRosa
ticrawford@postmedia.com
Recommended from Editorial
B.C. nurses, doctors fired over vaccine refusal lose court bid to toss health orders
COVID-19: About 2,500 B.C. health care workers lost jobs over refusal to vaccinate
B.C. Liberal leader calls on province to end vaccine mandates
Article content
Share this article in your social network
The U.S. currently uses three COVID-19 vaccines: Pfizer, Moderna, and Novavax. All are safe and effective against the coronavirus, especially in preventing hospitalization and death.
However, you may wonder which of these vaccines is best for you. The answer depends on many factors, including your age and overall health. Keep reading to learn more.
The following summary shows the latest vaccination guidelines for the three currently approved COVID-19 vaccines in the United States. Data is based on the 2023 to 2024 guidelines by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
Note that the 2024 to 2025 guidelines are expected to come out in the fall of 2024 and may differ.
Learn more: How the different types of COVID-19 vaccines work
When COVID-19 vaccines were first introduced, the general rule of thumb was that the best vaccine was the one that you could get now.
However, at the beginning of 2022, the CDC updated its vaccine recommendations to state that the two mRNA vaccines Pfizer and Moderna were preferred over the Johnson & Johnson (J&J) vaccine.
The J&J vaccine has since been discontinued. In 2023, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) authorized a protein subunit vaccine called Novavax.
Today, the CDC recommends any of these three COVID-19 vaccines if you follow the recommended dosing and schedule.
So, which is better?
MRNA vaccines tell your body how to make the necessary protein to fight a virus.
Clinical trials for the two mRNA vaccines found that both Pfizer and Moderna were safe and had similar effectiveness: 95% for Pfizer and 94.1% for Moderna.
The similar effectiveness of these vaccines also extends into a real-world setting.
A 2022 study examined vaccine effectiveness in U.S. veterans vaccinated between January and May 2021. While the two vaccines were comparable, the Moderna vaccine prevented symptomatic infection and hospitalization slightly more effectively than the Pfizer vaccine.
Note that the effectiveness between the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines might vary depending on the coronavirus variant.
For example, a 2022 study of the Pfizer vaccine against the Omicron variant found that vaccine effectiveness was 67.2% in the 2 to 4 weeks after a booster but declined to 45.7% after 10 or more weeks.
Another 2022 study of the Moderna vaccine against the Omicron variant found that vaccine effectiveness was 71.6% in the 14 to 60 days after a booster but declined to 47.4% after 60 days.
That said, the FDA now approves updated versions of these vaccines annually to target newer virus variants.
Protein subunit vaccines are a direct injection of a modified protein that stimulates the immune system to make antibodies and T cells to fight a virus.
A 2023 study compared the effectiveness of mRNA and protein subunit vaccines. Researchers found that all the newer vaccines are at least 90% effective regardless of how they work.
However, a 2023 study suggests that Novavax may cause fewer side effects than mRNA vaccines.
Some research suggests that mixing mRNA and protein subunit vaccines might result in a better immune response and, therefore, better protectiveness. For example, a 2023 animal study in mice examined mixing mRNA and protein subunit vaccines against influenza strains and found good effectiveness.
However, the CDC only recommends mixing vaccines in specific circumstances:
As with adults, there isnt a clear answer as to which vaccine is better for your child.
The CDC recommends that everyone 5 years old and older be vaccinated against COVID-19. Currently, the Pfizer and Modera vaccines are recommended for children over 6 months old, whereas Novavax is intended for only those over 12 years old.
Research shows that the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines are generally safe for children. Lower doses have been deemed safe for children ages 6 months to 5 years.
While children have a higher chance of developing myocarditis related to mRNA vaccines, this risk is now considered low. Its also lower than the risk of getting the condition from COVID-19 itself for most age groups. Extending the time between doses to 8 weeks helps improve immune response and reduce this risk.
A 2023 clinical study also found that Novavax caused mostly mild adolescent reactions. Reactions were only slightly stronger after the second dose. The efficacy was 79.5%.
However, since Novavax is relatively new, this clinical trial is still ongoing, and the data may change.
One 2023 study in Australia found that COVID-19 vaccines were highly effective in preventing deaths among older Australians during the peak of the Omicron variant outbreak in 2022. However, after 6 months of receiving the booster, effectiveness dropped to around 50%.
This highlights the importance of getting additional boosters in this age group, especially those released to target newer virus variants.
Multiple studies confirm the effectiveness of vaccination in older adults.
When it comes to which is best, a 2023 study comparing Pfizer and Moderna vaccines in older adults found that the Moderna vaccine was associated with slightly fewer side effects than Pfizer in this age group.
A 2024 study compared mRNA and protein subunit vaccines in Taiwan. Researchers found that in people over 65 years old who were given three vaccine doses, both vaccine types provided comparable protection against death. The effectiveness rates against death were:
Therefore, which vaccine is preferable to someone in this age group might ultimately be based on personal preference.
People who are immunocompromised have an increased risk of severe illness or death due to COVID-19. This includes people who:
As with adults and children, the CDC now recommends any of the three vaccine options for immunocompromised people so long as the specific recommendations on age and number of doses are followed.
A 2021 study examined the effectiveness of two mRNA vaccine doses in immunocompromised people. It found that the Pfizer vaccine was 71% effective, and the Moderna vaccine was 81% effective. However, this difference isnt considered statistically significant.
That said, a 2022 meta-analysis of 82 studies found that antibody response rates in immunocompromised people may be lower than in those who are not immunocompromised. This means immunocompromised people usually need more doses to develop enough antibodies against the coronavirus.
However, this study did not examine the Novavax vaccine.
A 2022 review article also states that an additional dose may raise antibody response rates from 41% to 67%. However, researchers also note there may be significant variation between different groups of immunocompromised people.
A 2023 randomized placebo trial with adults 18 to 84 years old found that Novavax was generally 82.7% effective. Its efficacy was 100% for severe disease. That said, the study didnt examine efficacy in immunocompromised participants.
The COVID-19 vaccine schedule for immunocompromised people differs slightly from the schedule for the larger population. The table below shows the CDCs current vaccine recommendations for immunocompromised individuals.
To be protected from COVID-19, its important to stay current on your COVID-19 vaccines. But what exactly does this mean?
According to the CDC, youre up to date on your COVID-19 vaccines when youve received both your primary vaccine series and your booster dose.
If youve received only your primary vaccine series, you are considered fully vaccinated but not current.
Note that if you have a compromised immune system, your doctor may also recommend taking pemivibart (Pemgarda).
The FDA recently authorized this monoclonal antibody medication in 2024 to help people who may not be able to build enough of an immune response from a vaccine.
Overall, receiving any of the currently available COVID-19 vaccines is better than not getting vaccinated. This is because all of the COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective at protecting you from serious illness and death due to COVID-19.
What brand and type of vaccine you prefer largely depends on your age and preferences. Be sure to talk with your doctor if you have any questions or concerns about COVID-19 vaccination.
The new recombinant shingles vaccine Shingrix is associated with a reduced risk of dementia compared to an earlier shingles vaccine, according to a major new study published in Nature Medicine.It is also more protective than vaccines against other infections.
A study of more than 200,000 people by researchers at the University of Oxford funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Oxford Health Biomedical Research Centre (OH BRC) found at least a 17% reduction in dementia diagnoses in the six years after the new recombinant shingles vaccination, equating to 164 or more additional days lived without dementia.
The benefit was seen in both sexes but was greater in women, and the findings suggest that the recombinant shingles vaccine may have additional value in terms of protection against dementia.
Shingles is a painful and serious condition afflicting many elderly people. It is caused by the Herpes zoster virus that can flare up in people who previously had chicken pox. After the introduction of a vaccine against shingles (Zostavax) in 2006, several studies have suggested that the risk of dementia might be lower in people who had received the vaccine, although results were not conclusive. In many countries, including the UK and USA, Zostavax has now been withdrawn and replaced by a much more effective vaccine (Shingrix). In the UK, Shingrix is being offered by the NHS to all elderly people and certain other groups.
In the new study, researchers at the University of Oxford and NIHR OH BRC used the USA TriNetX electronic health records network. In the USA, there was a switchover between Zostavax and Shingrix in October 2017. This allowed the researchers to compare the risk of dementia in the six years following Shingrix compared to otherwise similar people who had received Zostavax. More than 100,000 people were in each group. Shingrix was also compared to people who had received vaccines against other infections (flu and tetanus, diphtheria, and pertussis).
Shingrix was associated with 17% lower risk of dementia than Zostavax, and 23-27% less than with the other vaccines. This equates to 5-9 more months lived without dementia for those who had been given the Shingrix vaccine compared to the other vaccines. The beneficial effects were present in both sexes but greater in women than in men.
Various additional analyses showed that these findings are robust but the researchers say further research is needed before any suggestion is made that the shingles vaccine should be used to help prevent or delay dementia onset.
Dr Maxime Taquet, NIHR Academic Clinical Lecturer in the Department of Psychiatry at Oxford, who led the study said: 'The size and nature of this study makes these findings convincing, and should motivate further research. They support the hypothesis that vaccination against shingles might prevent dementia. If validated in clinical trials, these findings could have significant implications for older adults, health services, and public health.'
John Todd, Professor of Precision Medicine at the University of Oxfords Nuffield Department of Medicine, said: 'A key question is, how does the vaccine produce its apparent benefit in protecting against dementia? One possibility is that infection with the Herpes zoster virus might increase the risk of dementia, and therefore by inhibiting the virus the vaccine could reduce this risk. Alternatively, the vaccine also contains chemicals which might have separate beneficial effects on brain health.'
Paul Harrison, Professor of Psychiatry and OH BRC Theme lead for Molecular Targets, who supervised the study, said: 'The findings are intriguing and encouraging. Anything that might reduce the risk of dementia is to be welcomed, given the large and increasing number of people affected by it.'
The paper The recombinant shingles vaccine is associated with a lower risk of dementia is published in Nature Medicine.
County health officials are reminding parents and guardians to put vaccines on their childs back-to-school list.
As kids across the County head back to the classroom, now is a great time to revisit immunization records.
California requires some vaccines for children to attend school fromTK through 12th grade.
They include DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis/whooping cough), Hepatitis B, MMR (measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine), chickenpox, polio and more.
This exciting time for families is a good opportunity to get the kids up to date on their vaccines, said Kelly Motadel, M.D., M.P.H, County Child Health Officer. Parents are encouraged to schedule well-child checkups with a healthcare provider to make sure their children are on track with milestones and ready for a healthy and fun school year.
While the HPV vaccine is not one that is required for schools, it is an important vaccination for boys and girls ages 9 to 13 that helps prevent six types of cancers in adulthood.
The HPV vaccine is safe, effective and will protect your kids later in their lives, Dr. Motadel explained. I really encourage parents and caregivers to ask their childs doctor about getting them the HPV vaccine. Doing it now can prevent 90% of future cancers caused by HPV.
August also is a good time for everyone to revisit vaccine records because it isNational Immunization Awareness Month. This annual observance highlights the importance of getting recommended vaccines throughout your life.
More information about school vaccines and where to get them is available on theCounty websiteor by calling 211.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, mRNA vaccines came to the rescue, developed in record time and saving lives worldwide. Researchers in the Precision Vaccines Program at Boston Childrens Hospital have developed two novel technologies that could make these and future mRNA vaccines more potent and longer-lasting at smaller doses and with fewer side effects.
The mRNA COVID-19 vaccines currently used instruct cells to make the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. This helps the immune system recognize the virus and quickly make antibodies against it. However, these vaccines offer only short-lived immune protection, requiring frequent boosters, and work poorly in people over 60. They also induce an inflammatory reaction throughout the body, causing side effects.
The lab of David Dowling, PhD, sought something better. In current mRNA vaccines, delivery is not controlled, Dowling says. Immunomodulation is kind of random and not built into the vaccine. We wanted to solve both of those problems through rational design.
Dowlings lab has long studied a naturally occurring immune protein called interleukin-12 (IL-12). In 2012, the lab showed that IL-12 potently activates dendritic cells, crucial first responders in the immune system. Dendritic cells can activate helper and killer T cells, and can provide a supportive environment to develop effective B-cell responses and antibody production.
To optimize the immune response, the new study harnessed a specific IL-12, IL-12p70. Byron Brook, PhD, of the Precision Vaccine Program, co-led the work with Valerie Duval, PhD, of the biotechnology company Combined Therapeutics, Inc.
The current BioNTech/Pfizer mRNA vaccine against COVID-19, they found, doesnt induce production of IL-12p70 in human cells. So, as described in Science Translational Medicine, they designed an mRNA that explicitly directs cells to make it.
We wanted to give the signal needed to optimize the immune response, says Dowling.
They designed the mRNA so it could stand alone, or be used as an adjuvant to turbocharge other vaccines. When they gave it to mice as an adjuvant to the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine, the animals produced large amounts of IL-12p70 in addition to the spike protein. The adjuvant boosted multiple elements of the immune response not just antibody production, but also cytokine production and immune cell activity each important for protection from SARS-CoV-2. Moreover, in aged mice, the immune response with the adjuvant reached levels similar to those in young adult mice.
The adjuvant-vaccine combination also produced more long-lasting immunity than the current vaccine alone. Animals receiving the adjuvant showed signs of amplified immunity even one year later. Though more research is needed, the adjuvant could reduce the need for frequent vaccine boosters in humans.
The new mRNA incorporates a second technology a so-called Multi-Organ Protection (MOP) sequence designed to reduce side effects.
With the MOP system you get controlled distribution just to muscle cells, where the vaccine is injected, says Dowling. This is unconventional and a step forward.
Although the mRNA does travel to cells throughout the body, the MOP sequence ensures that it acts only on muscle tissue, which the team found when they tested it in mice. In other tissue types, like vital organs, MOP binds to microRNAs inside the cells, signaling them to recycle the mRNA so they cant use it to make IL-12p70. MOPwas compatible with mRNA encoding the SARS-CoV-2 spike antigen and amplified the effects of the IL-12p70 mRNA, inducing immunity in both mice and hamsters.
Finally, because of the potency of boosting IL-12p70 production, very low doses of the BioNTech/Pfizer mRNA vaccine were needed to stimulate a strong immune response. This could help ensure theres enough vaccine supply should it be needed quickly.
Our technology gives the ability to reduce the vaccine dose but get the same level of immune response, says Brook. This is whats needed for mRNA vaccines to be used more widely.
The team believes the technology could be adapted for other mRNA vaccines in development, such as flu vaccines. Alternatively, their mRNA could be given as an adjuvant together with any existing vaccine. Theyve moved on to testing it in primates, whose immune systems more closely resemble those of humans, with the ultimate goal of starting a Phase 1 clinical trial.
Brook and Dowling are inventors on a pending patent application on the technology. Several co-investigators are employees of Combined Therapeutics, which was a major sponsor of the research together with the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. See the paper for further disclosures and acknowledgments.
Learn more about the Precision Vaccines Program.
As previously mentioned, we analyzed the bands associated with the humoral and cellular immunological responses generated on newborns by vaccinated mothers, establishing a relationship between the immunity induced in mothers and their children.
According to the data obtained in this research, the VV vaccine was the most frequently used in mothers' immunization against SARS-CoV-2. The Ministry of Health of the government of Mexico declared that 150 million 345 thousand 255 vaccines against COVID-19 were applied in the country from December 24, 2020, to October 24, 2022, corresponding 54.78 million doses (36.44%) to the AstraZeneca brand (VV vaccine), being the most applied vaccine against COVID-19 in Mexico19, which is concordant with the data obtained herein.
On the other hand, the height and weight of the infants were as expected, like those data reported by other studies on Mexican people20.
Moreover, as mentioned in the results section, some differences between the saliva samples of the mothers and their children were observed. It is essential to note that most of the knowledge of salivary composition has been driven in adults, and very little is known about saliva in newborns. However, Hyyppa et al., among other authors, declared that salivary total protein content is significantly higher among adults than in children21. And it has been reported that neonatal salivary amylase concentrations are moderately low but rise to adult levels by one year22,23,24, which is concordant with the spectra obtained herein where the absorption bands related to proteins (amide I and amide II) are under-expressed in saliva newborns compared to the mothers.
On the other hand, the band associated with carbohydrates showed shifts, indicating the hydrolysis and metabolism during fermentation25. Gothefors et al. stated that the saliva of newborns has a very high lactoperoxidase activity, and it is known that pancreatic amylase does not contribute substantially to starch or glucose polymer digestion in newborns. Salivary amylase and mucosal -glucosidases appear adequate for glucose polymer digestion26.
Concerning the analysis of the humoral immune response, maternal immunization is a critical way to protect infants younger than six months of age from COVID-19. The vaccine produces SARS-CoV-2 specific antibodies in maternal circulation, which are transferred across the placenta barrier. It is well known that IgG is the only isotype actively transported from mother to child. However, several studies have demonstrated the presence of IgA in umbilical cord blood and fetal tissues, suggesting that the IgA detected in neonatal blood is exclusively of fetal origin27. Nevertheless, the effect of maternal COVID19 vaccines before pregnancy on infants has not been deeply studied. Yang et al. declared that maternal SARS-CoV-2 IgG antibodies produced from inactivated COVID-19 vaccine before pregnancy can be transferred to newborns by the placenta, which has been helpful for infants28. In this regard, it was observed that the mothers that received the VV and mRNA vaccines BP could generate a greater content of IgG and IgA in their children, noticing that this content decreased according to the time of vaccination during pregnancy (Fig.3). Nonetheless, the analysis of the integrated areas did not show statistical significance for IgG and IgA in the VV vaccine. However, the mRNA vaccines showed statistical significance in the immunoglobins and cytokine analyzed (Fig.4).
In the same way, the spectra of the saliva samples of the mothers evidenced that the band attributed to IgG showed that for VV and mRNA vaccines, the BP subgroup depicted a higher absorbance compared to the subgroups that received the vaccine during pregnancy (Fig.6), showing statistical significance only the mRNA vaccine in the analysis of the integrated areas (Fig.7). The above is probably because, during pregnancy, significant adaptations occur in the maternal immune system to avoid detrimental immune responses against the fetus. Moreover, some authors have reported reduced circulating B in the third trimester because of the elevated estrogens on lymphopoiesis. However, some studies suggest that total IgG levels remain stable during pregnancy, while others show a decrease in late pregnancy. In the same way, some evidence, mainly from the 1960s-1970s, supports no significant change in IgA levels during pregnancy; other data suggest more dynamic changes to occur during pregnancy29.
Moreover, some authors have stated that human infants receive most maternal immunoglobulins, predominantly IgG, via the placenta. IgG antibodies are usually passively transferred across the placenta from mother to fetus from the second trimester of pregnancy30. The IgG levels in the fetal circulation are relatively low (510% of maternal levels) between weeks 17 and 22, reaching 50% of maternal levels by week 32)31. Herein, we demonstrated that passive immunity is also activated from the first trimester of pregnancy, showing even a more significant amount of IgG in the mother's vaccinated newborns employing the mRNA vaccine (Fig.4).
It has been reported that the pathogenesis of COVID-19 involves both humoral and cellular immunological responses, and it is supposed that COVID-19 vaccines also elicited effective cell immune response, specifically IFN-, which is secreted by SARS-CoV-2-specific T-helper 1 and T-cytotoxic cells, reason by which in this research we also decided to analyze IFN-32.
The results of the band related to IFN- in the BP subgroup in newborns depicted a lower absorbance in the VV vaccine compared to the groups that received the vaccination during pregnancy. On the contrary, in the mRNA group, the higher absorbance was observed in the BP subgroup, decreasing after that in the subgroups that received the vaccination during pregnancy (Fig.3), showing statistical significance (Fig.4).
It has been reported that the numbers of T cells during pregnancy are lower than before pregnancy and that the percentage of IFN--producing CD4+cells is lower in the third trimester29, concordant with the results observed in the mRNA group.
For all those mentioned above, we can state that both vaccines (mRNA and VV) generated a more significant immune response in the newborns and their mothers when they applied BP compared to the vaccines used during pregnancy, showing statistical significance with the mRNA vaccine. However, when comparing the vaccine's humoral immune response BP, we observed no differences in the newborn's response, but their mother's mRNA vaccine generated a more significant humoral immune response. It has been reported that mRNA vaccines in a homologous regimen induce strong antibody responses to SARS-CoV-2 compared to other vaccine platforms. In contrast, viral vector and inactivated vaccines show satisfactory immunogenicity in a heterologous regimen, especially in combination with mRNA vaccines33. However, it is essential to mention that the patients included in this study only received one dose in the last year. Moreover, Rijkers reported that mRNA vaccines induced a potent humoral response. Upon influenza mRNA vaccination of non-human primates, germinal centers were observed in the draining lymph nodes, and antigen-specific follicular helper T cells were detected, being an ideal niche conducive to B cell activation, antibody isotype switching, and affinity maturation, leading to long-lived memory B cells and plasma cells34.
Analyzing all these results, we can state that the VV vaccine generated a greater humoral and cellular immune response than the mRNA vaccine in the mothers when it was applied in the STP; in the same way, the newborns of these mothers evidenced more significant amounts of IgA and IFN-. On the contrary, in the mothers, the mRNA vaccines showed a greater humoral immune response (IgG and IgA) when the vaccine was applied BP, compared to the VV vaccine, evidencing statistical significance (Fig.8).
About the cellular and humoral immune response correlation between newborns and their mothers, it was observed that the two vaccines (VV and mRNA) exhibited a positive correlation regarding IgG when the vaccine was administrated BP, which has been previously explained by the IgG passively transferred across the placenta from mother to fetus30,35. Moreover, Palmeira et al. reported that IgG is the only antibody class that significantly crosses the human placenta, which might depend on different factors, one of them the maternal levels of total IgG and specific antibodies, being the total IgG concentrations in cord sera lower than in their mothers36, which was also seen in this research.
It is essential to mention that BP in the VV group, a positive correlation was observed between newborns and mothers in IgG, IgA, and IFN-; the above might be explained once VV vaccines induce both innate and adaptive immune responses, recapitulating the natural infection process of specific pathogens, triggering classical acute inflammation and immune detection through the natural production of PAMPs37.
In the same way, a strong positive correlation was observed between newborns and their mothers on IgG and IgA when the mRNA vaccine was administrated at the STP. About this, Konje et al. have stated that the transplacental transfer of antibodies starts in the second trimester38. Similarly, Kugelman et al. declared that mRNA vaccination in the third trimester was associated with a strong maternal humoral IgG response that crossed the placenta and approached maternal titers in the newborn39, which might explain the results obtained herein.
Fouda et al. reported that maternal IgG can be detected in cord blood as early as 810weeks of gestation. However, only small amounts of maternal IgG are transferred in the first trimester ( 10%), reaching 50% of the maternal IgG in infant cord blood by the 30weeks of gestation, possibly due to an increase in the surface area of IgG uptake from maternal blood with higher gestational age40.
So, despite the VV vaccine being evidenced to produce a significant humoral and cellular immune response in newborns and their mothers when they received the vaccine at the STP, compared with the mRNA vaccine, no correlation was observed between newborns and their mothers. However, a moderate positive correlation was observed when BP applied this vaccine.
Moreover, even though the mRNA vaccine showed a more significant humoral immunity generation in newborns and their mothers when it was administrated BP, compared with the VV vaccine, it only showed statistical significance in the mothers. However, IgG showed a moderate positive correlation between the newborns and their mothers.
Finally, as mentioned before, in the correlation between cellular and humoral response on newborns and their mothers, only the mRNA vaccine group evidenced a strong correlation in mothers between IFN- and IgG when it was applied at the FTP, noticing no correlation or moderate correlation at the others moments of application or with the VV vaccine (Table 5). Some authors have indicated a difference between humoral and cellular responses41. Moreover, some authors, such as Menges et al., reported heterogeneity of antibody and T cell immune responses after SARS-CoV-2 infection. Indicating that the relationship between antibody and T-cell responses showed a weak to moderate positive correlation early after infection, which decreased over time42.
PITTSBURGH (KDKA) -- Aircraft will drop rabies vaccination baits across Allegheny County next month as part of a massive effort to eventually eradicate the raccoon variant of the virus from the country.
The vaccination program is spearheaded by the United States Department of Agriculture's Wildlife Services, which the Allegheny County Health Department partners with annually. This year, volunteers will distribute baits containing the vaccine from Aug. 1 through Aug. 30, both by hand and by air.
The health department says residents may see aircraft slowly moving over the same area multiple times over a short period of time, which could be alarming to people who don't know about the program. The county has asked local municipalities to help them alert residents.
Raccoon rabies can be found throughout the state, and the disease is almost always fatal to both people and animals, the health department says. The goal is to eventually push the westward boundary of raccoon rabies all the way to the East Coast, basically eradicating raccoon rabies from the United States.
If you find a bait, don't do anything, the health department says.
However, if it's still intact and is out in the open where it's likely to come in contact with pets or kids, put on gloves and toss it into an area with more cover.
While the exposure risk to humans is very slight, the health department says people should be aware and encourage their kids to leave them alone.
If you touch a bait or the liquid vaccine inside, make sure to wash the area thoroughly with soap and water.
If the bait is still intact, place it in an area of thick ground cover. But if the bait is leaking the vaccine, the health department says to thoroughly wash the affected area with soap and water.
It's not possible to get rabies from the vaccine, the health department says.
If you or your child are exposed to the vaccine or need advice, you can call the Pennsylvania Public Health Information Line at 1-877-PA HEALTH or the Allegheny County Health Department at 412-350-4046.
People are asked to keep their pets inside or keep their dogs on leashes to allow the raccoons to eat the baits.
But if a pet does eat the bait and vaccine, the health department says not to worry. The vaccine isn't harmful to wild animals or pets.
This vaccine also can't be used to vaccinate your cat or dog against rabies. A veterinarian should do that, the health department says, adding that regular pet vaccination is "essential" to protect them against rabies.
Madeline Bartos is a digital web producer for CBS Pittsburgh who has worked with KDKA since 2019.
