Category: Vaccine

iStock

Patients who received one or more COVID-19 vaccine doses after acute coronary syndrome (ACS) had similar rates of all-cause death, heart attack, stroke, urgent coronary revascularization, major cardiovascular events, and hospitalization for chest pain, heart failure, and respiratory infections as their unvaccinated peers, according to a secondaryanalysis of a randomized clinical trial.

The research was published inJAMA Network Open.

An international team led by researchers from Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein in Sao Paulo, Brazil, analyzed results from the Vaccination Against Influenza to Prevent Cardiovascular Events After Acute Coronary Syndromes trial.

The trial evaluated the effectiveness of the influenza vaccine post-ACS from July 2019 to November 2020, while the secondary analysis compared the rate of cardiopulmonary events in patients who received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine in Brazil with that of unvaccinated participants. Patients were not randomized to the COVID vaccine in the secondary analysis.

In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, patients who received at least 1 COVID-19 vaccine dose after ACS had similar rates of the primary composite end point and MACE compared with unvaccinated patients.

Of 1,801 patients (median age, 56.7 years; 30.3% women), 16.2% had a history of heart attack, and 35.7% smoked. In total, 1,665 patients did not have cardiopulmonary events in the first 90 days, of whom 50.2% had received at least one COVID-19 vaccine dose. Most (63.9%) received at least one Oxford/AstraZeneca dose during follow-up.

In the 90-day event-free follow-up analysis of unvaccinated individuals, the rate of all-cause death, heart attack, stroke, urgent coronary revascularization, major cardiovascular events, and hospitalization for chest pain, heart failure, and respiratory infections per 100 patient-years was 9.37, versus 4.81 for vaccinated patients (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 0.41).

Vaccination didn't significantly lower the rate ofMACE (aHR, 0.32), all-cause death (aHR, 0.29), or cardiovascular death (aHR, 0.42).

"In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, patients who received at least 1 COVID-19 vaccine dose after ACS had similar rates of the primary composite end point and MACE compared with unvaccinated patients," the researchers wrote. "However, retrospective studies have demonstrated a short-term reduction in MACE risk after COVID-19 vaccination."

Read the original post:

Ocular inoculation with H5N1 proves fatal in ferrets - University of Minnesota Twin Cities

diego_cervo/iStock

A study yesterday in Emerging Infectious Diseases spotlights recent H1N1 flu cases with reduced susceptibility to oseltamivir (Tamiflu), the most common antiviral used to limit symptoms from seasonal flu.

The reduction in susceptibility has been seen in viruses collected from five continentswith most cases in Europefrom May 20203 to February 2024. The viruses showed a 13-fold reduced inhibition by oseltamivir while retaining normal susceptibility to other antiviral drugs, the authors said.

The detections were made as part of standard genetic sequencing of influenza viruses, and included 2,039 H1N1 viruses from the United States (1,274) and 38 other countries (765).

The viruses that lost susceptibility to Tamiflu had acquired a novel combination of neuraminidase mutations, NA-I223V + S247N. Overall detection frequency of these two mutations was low (0.67%). Of 101 viruses with this double mutation, 67 were found in Europe.

"The first dual mutant was collected from Canada in May 2023, and the latest were collected from 4 countries (France, the Netherlands, Spain, and the United Kingdom) during JanuaryFebruary 2024," the authors wrote.

The Netherlands had the most detections (30), followed by France (24), Bangladesh (11), Oman (9), and the United Kingdom (9). Hong Kong had 4 detections, followed by Niger (3), Australia (2), Spain (2), and the United States (2). One dual mutant each was detected in Canada, Ethiopia, Maldives, Norway, and Sweden.

Our study highlights the need to closely monitor evolution of dual mutants .

"Our study highlights the need to closely monitor evolution of dual mutants because additional changes may further affect susceptibility to antiviral drugs or provide a competitive advantage over circulating wild-type viruses," the authors concluded.

Read the original here:

Gavi launches vaccine programs for Ebola, meningitis, rabies, and hepatitis B - University of Minnesota Twin Cities

In April, 43-year-old Gareth Eve told the Mail about life after the shocking death of his wife Lisa Shaw, a BBC journalist. Lisa died in May 2021, aged just 44, after complications following the AstraZeneca vaccine led to blood clots on her brain.

Your response to Gareths article surprised us. We received dozens of letters and emails recounting experiences of ill health, or even bereavement, after having the jab developed by AstraZeneca.

The vaccine was credited with saving millions of lives. In 2022, Professor Sarah Gilbert, the scientist who co-created the vaccine, was presented with a damehood, while the pharmaceutical giants chief executive officer was knighted.

In April, Gareth Eve told the Mail about the shocking death of his wife Lisa Shaw. Complications following the AstraZeneca vaccine led to blood clots on her brain

Yet, in April this year, the company admitted for the first time that the jab wasnt entirely safe; that in very rare cases it can cause a type of blood clotting called thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) the condition that killed Lisa.

Figures from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) show 81 deaths now appear to have been linked to the adverse reaction from the vaccine. Hundreds of people have been left with lasting disabilities.

An AstraZeneca spokesperson said: Our sympathy goes out to anyone who has lost loved ones or reported health problems. Patient safety is our highest priority and regulatory authorities have clear and stringent standards to ensure the safe use of all medicines, including vaccines.

From the body of evidence in clinical trials and real-world data, the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine has continuously been shown to have an acceptable safety profile, and regulators around the world consistently state that the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks of extremely rare potential side effects.

We are incredibly proud of the role the AstraZeneca-Oxford vaccine played in ending the global pandemic. According to independent estimates, more than six million lives were saved in the first year of use alone and more than three billion doses were supplied globally.

Because of a loophole, Gareth and many others are unable to join legal action against AstraZeneca for compensation beyond the 120,000 already awarded by the Government.

Lawyers are reluctant to represent those given the vaccine after April 7, 2021 the date the company added a warning about the risk of thrombotic complications to the literature sent out to healthcare professionals.

Meanwhile, those who suffered complications before that date are waiting many months for claims to be assessed.

Here we share some harrowing stories from our readers who fear the vaccine caused deaths or lifelong serious health problems...

Leslie Bounds, 73, from Axminster, Devon, says:

My lovely son, Adam Bounds, died from vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia (VITT) 11 days after receiving the AstraZeneca jab.

He was 41, fit and healthy, with everything to live for a great job in finance, a lovely home in Bristol and a teenage son. He would still be with us if he had not done what he saw as his public duty to protect those who were more vulnerable to the virus than him and had the Covid vaccine.

He was visiting me at home in Devon when he became very unwell, with a severe headache and vomiting, before losing consciousness a terrifying thing for me, his father, to witness.

He was blue lighted by ambulance to Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital on May 30, 2021. Due to Covid restrictions, I couldnt go with him, and those hours waiting for news were some of the most stressful of my 73 years.

When a CT scan showed an acute right frontal-lobe haemorrhage that was causing compression of Adams brain stem he was transferred to Derriford Hospital, in Plymouth, for neurosurgery.

Sadly, the draining of the blood didnt have a significant impact on the swelling in his brain and, given what the neurosurgeon described as a negligible chance of survival and recovery, a decision was made to let my son go.

A post-mortem showed Adam had blood clots in his abdomen and kidney, which the coroner ruled were indicative of VITT.

It is three years since we lost Adam. He was the life and soul of every event and brought so much joy to our lives. As any parent who has had to bury a child will know, the pain doesnt get any easier.

Leslie Bounds says her son Adam, who died 11 days after receiving the AstraZeneca jab, 'would still be with us if he had not done what he saw as his public duty... and had the Covid vaccine'

Ive spent much of that time fighting for compensation for his son, Owen, who was just 16 when his father died.

A few months ago, he was finally awarded 120,000, which may sound a significant sum, but cant compensate him for the love and support I know Adam would have given Owen for years to come.

I was widowed 12 years ago, when Adams mum died from breast cancer and, hard though it is going through this bereavement without her, I take solace knowing that she was spared the pain of grieving our son.

Pam Fryer, 62, from Saltash, Cornwall, says:

Within days of having the AstraZeneca vaccine, on January 31, 2021, my husband had bleeds on his brain, which have left him a shadow of his former self.

Before the jab his first Mike was fit. He played golf and volunteered for a charity and, aged 79, had no underlying health conditions.

However, just hours after the vaccine, he had a nasty stomach upset and, within days, his co-ordination was so impaired he would trip over his own feet when he walked. He also developed a severe headache, coupled with pressure on the left side of his skull.

I was alarmed by his deterioration but, initially, Mike insisted it was just a mild reaction to the vaccine, which would wear off.

I contacted our GP, who didnt seem to take my concerns seriously. However, in June 2021, Mike was referred for an MRI scan, which showed bleeds on his brain were the cause of his symptoms.

It was then several months, possibly because of the backlog caused by the pandemic, before my husband saw a neurologist.

I told the consultant I believed the vaccine was to blame for the bleeds on Mikes brain and he agreed that was possible.

In April this year, the company admitted that the jab wasnt entirely safe and that in very rare cases it can cause a type of blood clotting

This he later confirmed in his letter to our GP, in which he wrote: His symptoms are likely due to stroke (cerebral haemorrhage). As their onset was soon after his AstraZeneca vaccination, a causal relation is possible.

I am in no doubt the vaccine was the cause. Mikes life has been wrecked his memory is so impaired he can no longer drive or be trusted to cook, for fear hell cause a fire.

The emotional impact on a man who ran his own business for decades and was still as sharp as a tack before the vaccine is even more upsetting to witness.

Hes been so down and frustrated about his situation that he now takes the natural serotonin booster, 5HTP, to lift his mood. It has impacted my life, too. Instead of enjoying old age together, Im now my husbands registered carer.

Two years later, I filled out a Yellow Card online where information about side-effects of drugs are recorded and applied for compensation. But we received a letter saying Mike didnt qualify. Weve appealed, but hes now 82 and his reassessment could take years. I believe the Government and the medical profession want us to put up and shut up.

They dont want to acknowledge, or take responsibility for, people like Mike, whose lives have been blighted by this vaccine.

Annie Bennett, 62, from Farnham, Surrey, says:

I was living near Alicante in Spain, where I had a second home, when I had the AstraZeneca vaccine, my first, in May 2021.

That night I felt feverish, which didnt concern me. However, three days later, I started getting terrible headaches, which werent eased by the paracetamol my GP recommended.

I went to see another doctor who prescribed steroids which provided temporary relief. Yet, 23 days after having the jab, I still felt so wretched headache, sickness, weakness in my body that I couldnt get out of bed.

A concerned neighbour drove me to A&E at the local hospital where they kept me in, running all sorts of scans and tests.

The following day, a trauma doctor came to see me and said: The good news is you dont have a tumour, but you do have a clot in your brain.

I was so shocked and alarmed. I explained that my symptoms had started soon after my AstraZeneca vaccine, which didnt seem to surprise him at all.

He prescribed blood thinners to dissolve the clot and they kept me in for monitoring for another five days. The discharge letter from the trauma doctor stated that I developed a clot in my brain following the AstraZeneca vaccine.

Although I kept taking the blood thinners, it took a long time for the clot to dissolve and I was very unwell for months afterwards. I felt dizzy, with constant headaches, and my vision and balance were too impaired for me to look at a screen, drive or even walk my dog. Perpetual diarrhoea meant I also lost more than three stone.

I came back to the UK in late 2022 I was struggling so much I needed to be close to my family and a scan showed that the clot had finally gone.

However, I still have chronic fatigue symptoms my legs are so weak that sometimes I struggle to climb stairs.

I made an appointment with my GP recently, who ran blood tests. Im still awaiting the results, but she suggested it might be the result of anxiety and wondered if Id considered counselling.

Insulted, I explained that Im a psychotherapist and know that what Im experiencing is physical. Ive consulted a lawyer who says I wont be able to claim compensation through the scheme here as I was living in Spain when I had the jab.

Ill explore other avenues, while living in hope that, at the age of 62, I can finally get back to my pre-vaccine health.

Tracy Ashdown, 58, from Welling, Kent, says:

Within a week of having his second AstraZeneca vaccine, in June 2021, my previously healthy son, Tyler, was treated for serious heart problems, aged 21.

Doctors told us he was too young to have received the AstraZeneca jabs. He was vaccinated earlier than others his age, most of whom were given Pfizer or Moderna vaccines, because he was caring for an elderly relative.

He had a very sore throat which left him unable to swallow in the days after the second vaccine.

A week later, he developed severe pains in his chest and arms and, when he collapsed, his girlfriend called an ambulance and the crew rushed him to Medway Maritime Hospital, believing he was having a heart attack.

Ill never forget my husband and I being woken in the middle of the night by a call from a medic telling us that Tyler was being blue lighted to St Thomas Hospital in London, where a cardiac team was waiting.

He was diagnosed with acute myocarditis inflammation of the heart muscle, which weakens the organ, meaning the rest of his body was deprived of blood.

We were told causes can include viral infections he was tested for Covid and didnt have it as well as reactions to medication.

The doctors wanted to know why Tyler, as he was so young, had received the AstraZeneca vaccine. They mentioned in his discharge letter that hed had a Covid jab a few days before, leading us to think this was the likely cause. He was in hospital for a week, wired up to machines, and given anti-inflammatories and beta blockers, to slow down the heart rate and lower blood pressure.

Three years on, Tyler, who works in a managerial position at my husbands drainage company, is nervous of too much exertion, living in fear of another attack.

What we believe was a reaction to his second AstraZeneca vaccine he had no adverse effects from the first has taken a significant toll on his life and we are now considering an application for compensation.

Within a week of having his second AstraZeneca vaccine in June 2021, Tyler was treated for serious heart problems, aged 21

Carolyn Ash, 62, from Knaresborough, North Yorkshire, says:

In 2021 I developed a rare and debilitating immune disease dermatomyositis which, having ruled out all other causes, my rheumatologist said may be linked to the AstraZeneca vaccine.

It started with a rash on my back, chest and neck, followed by weakness in my arms and thighs. It then spread to the inside of my throat, making eating impossible.

On New Years Day in 2022, I was so debilitated unable to swallow that my terrified daughter called 999 and I was rushed to hospital.

The most distressing and scary period of my life followed as I spent 11 weeks on steroids, being fed via a nasogastric tube, as doctors tried to figure out what was wrong with me.

I was on steroids for a year, lost my hair and developed more deep lesions on my chest and scalp, as well as shingles and pneumonia due to my low immunity.

Dermatomyositis a long-term inflammatory disorder which affects the skin and muscles was eventually diagnosed via a punch biopsy, where a small amount of skin tissue is taken and examined under a microscope.

I was told this disease is usually the result of an underlying condition, including cancer or a viral infection, so every part of my body was scanned and tested and none was found.

My rheumatologist later told me that she would expect to see no more than two people with dermatomyositis throughout her career, but I was one of eight people she was treating at the time, two of whom were on the ward with me at Harrogate District Hospital.

She said colleagues in other hospitals had also reported a dramatic hike in cases during the pandemic. I never contracted Covid, but had two AstraZeneca vaccines in 2021.

Carolyn Ash developed a rare and debilitating immune disease which her rheumatologist said may be linked to the AstraZeneca vaccine

In her letter to my GP, the rheumatologist said of me: She was wondering if this could be related to her Covid-19 vaccine. I have explained that this is not impossible via activation of the immune system.

I am in no doubt thats what caused it. I was a fit and healthy 60-year-old, who, when this disease developed, had only ever been to hospital to deliver my two children.

The damage it has wrought has left me with such lowered immunity that a common cold lasts for weeks.

I cant go in the sun, because of the risk to my highly sensitive skin, and I have constant nerve pain (neuralgia) in my legs.

I take daily medication naproxen and pregabalin for the neuralgia. Without it Im in excruciating pain and cannot walk very far.

I am registered disabled due to the dermatomyositis, though I am determined to stay independent.

I work in sales, mostly from home, because the commute would be too much every day.

I reported my reaction via the Yellow Card scheme, and noticed the number of people with dermatomyositis registering their details there has increased significantly over the past three years.

My claim for compensation was rejected on the grounds that the medical assessor found no direct causation between the vaccination and my condition.

I firmly believe otherwise and plan to appeal this decision.

Patricia Williams, 86, from Swansea, says:

I followed my doctors advice and got my second dose of the AstraZeneca Covid vaccine having been fine after the first back in March 2021.

Within hours I had a terrible headache which I couldnt shift and, two nights later, woke at 3am feeling very confused. My speech was slurred and my vision was affected, meaning I was unable to read the telephone number for my neighbour, Mike, who, as I have no children, is a huge support. I stumbled to his door and collapsed in his arms.

Mike immediately called an ambulance. I was terrified of going to hospital because I didnt want to catch Covid, but the paramedics insisted, telling me my blood pressure was so high 200 over 45 Id die without urgent medical care.

A scan at Morriston Hospital showed Id had a transient ischaemic attack (TIA), or mini stroke, where a blockage, usually a blood clot, leads to a lack of oxygen in the brain.

Patricia Williams had a mini stroke two days after receiving her second dose of the AstraZeneca Covid vaccine

A few weeks later, AstraZeneca added a warning that its Covid vaccine could, in rare cases, lead to blood clots.

I have no doubt thats what triggered my TIA. Ive suffered headaches ever since and had to have a pacemaker fitted.

Earlier this year I was told I have also developed atrial fibrillation (AF), a condition that causes an irregular and abnormally fast heart rate.

Prior to the vaccines, my life was great. At the ripe old age of 83 I went ballroom dancing three times a week, headed on cruise holidays and saw West End shows.

Now I struggle to get around or even look after myself properly, as my body is weak and I have little stamina.

I reported my reaction, via the Yellow Card scheme, and my application for compensation has been passed to an independent medical assessor.

More here:

My son died after the AstraZeneca vaccine gave him a blood clot - Daily Mail

As a co-leader of the team at the National Institutes of Health that developed technologies powering a number of Covid-19 vaccines, I often speak publicly about vaccine science, even though I no longer work for the government. After my talks, people often approach me, almost always thanking me for my work. There is no denying the millions of lives that Covid-19 vaccines saved. sometimes, though, they relate stories of vaccine injuries.

I still hold on to the story of one person who approached me in a crowded auditorium following one of my talks, asserting that the Covid-19 vaccine harmed her. She asked me what I was doing to investigate vaccine injury. I replied that the side effects of vaccines, as they emerge in clinical trials, are investigated, and there is continuous monitoring of vaccinated people by the Food and Drug Administration and the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

But I wonder: Is that enough? Has my own science contributed to ignoring people who feel they have been harmed and not heard? In that moment, did I really hear this woman, who believed a Covid-19 vaccine had harmed her?

There has been increased attention on people who report long-term negative effects of Covid-19 vaccines. They are not conspiracy theorists or vaccine skeptics. They are, among others, scientists who appreciate the enormous value of vaccines.

For some of them, tinnitus often reported as a ringing in the ears is common. This feels like a perfect metaphor for me: Scientists ought to be better listeners, hearing people out, and taking seriously personal stories of potentially vaccine-related harm. People who speak out about how they feel after getting a vaccine should not be dismissed or assumed to be anti-vaxxers.

For starters, they deserve empathy from their doctors and other health care providers, as well as from those who set and drive vaccine policy. Science owes them and ultimately all of us far more investment in research to validate or invalidate claims of vaccine-related harm. They must be fully investigated to prevent further vaccine-related injuries.

The Covid-19 vaccine is not the only shot for which injuries have been reported. Flu vaccines, which are updated every year, have also been linked to tinnitus and other vaccine side effects. But they generate only a small fraction of the controversy that Covid-19 vaccines did, and the rare injuries do not receive feature news coverage, though that doesnt mean they are any less important for people who are experiencing them.

Vaccine injuries long-term medical consequences from a shot are real phenomena worthy of investigation. When someone somewhere feels harmed, it is the duty of scientists and health care providers to heed these people and listen. Scientists need to better understand what happened and why, so that the next iteration of a vaccine can be better. But scientists arent trained to appreciate anecdotes.

People who feel they have been harmed by a vaccine do not need to have the science immediately explained to them. What they first need is to be heard, and then assured that science will follow.

This kind of work should be similar to research on rare diseases: Find the relatively small number of people who have a specific reaction to a vaccine, then understand what happened and why. But until that point is reached, it is essential to lead with an explanation that is fair and correct on how the probability of experiencing the side effect was far lower than the probability of getting severely ill from Covid-19 or any other vaccine-preventable illness.

For people reporting adverse effects from vaccines, scientists and others can do better at being compassionate, starting with: We hear you. There may be no way today to prove cause and effect with your particular vaccine injury. But we fully appreciate and empathize with what you are going through and owe you and the rest of the public more information about the relationship between the vaccine and the injury you experienced.

And then there are steps that I and others in the vaccine field everyone from researchers to vaccine regulators should take to:

There is a very low probability that I will ever again see the woman who told me about her vaccine injury. Although others may follow, her impact on me has been profound. I know that she represents thousands of other people in pain, and I and other vaccine scientists owe them all a good listen and advocacy on their behalf to learn more.

Kizzmekia S. Corbett-Helaire is an assistant professor of immunology and infectious diseases at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston and a Freeman Hrabowski Scholar at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. The views expressed here are hers alone and do not necessarily reflect those of the institutions she is affiliated with.

Read the original:

Vaccine side effects and injuries are worthy of scientific follow-up - STAT

The paper published by the respected British Medical Journal earlier this month was eye-opening, to say the least. It questioned why excess deaths in Western countries remained unusually elevated during the COVID-19 pandemic even after vaccines were introduced in 2021.

The implication seemed clear: Rather than reducing cases and deaths, the COVID vaccines had fueled the tragic tide.

That finding was picked up within 48 hours by the Telegraph, a conservative British daily. It leaped across the Atlantic Ocean to the New York Post, a part of the Murdoch media empire, one day later.

Various news outlets have claimed that this research implies a direct causal link between COVID-19 vaccination and mortality. This study does not establish any such link.

British Medical Journal

Since then, it has been widely spread on social media by the anti-vaccination camp. The repetitions have become increasingly febrile, with some tweets blaming the vaccines for tens of millions of deaths.

Heres what you need to know: There is no truth to this finding, or to the anti-vaccine camps interpretation of the BMJ paper.

Newsletter

Get the latest from Michael Hiltzik

Commentary on economics and more from a Pulitzer Prize winner.

Enter email address

Sign Me Up

You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.

The journal, which posted the paper on its Public Health webpage on June 3, has acknowledged that. In a public statement issued June 6, after the faulty interpretation began to spread worldwide, the journal observed: Various news outlets have claimed that this research implies a direct causal link between COVID-19 vaccination and mortality. This study does not establish any such link.

On the contrary, the journal wrote, Vaccines have, in fact, been instrumental in reducing the severe illness and death associated with COVID-19 infection.

Alas, the journals warning came too late. As I write, the Telegraphs June 4 tweet hawking its misleading story has received 1.5 million views on X (formerly-Twitter), but the BMJs warning notice, only 388,000 views.

These figures are proof positive of the old saw (attributed to Winston Churchill, among many others) that a lie can make it halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on.

Some researchers argue that the original paper, by a team of Dutch scientists, was so shoddy and inconsequential that it should not have been published at all.

Among the critics is Ariel Karlinsky, an Israeli economist and statistician whose data constituted the core of the Dutch paper. Karlinsky has written that the BMJ should retract the paper and open an inquiry into what happened there with editors and reviewers. The journal hasnt responded.

The use that anti-vaccine propagandists have made of the BMJ paper underscores the dangers of disinformation in public health today.

A recent study in Science analyzed the impact of what its authors labeled vaccine-skeptical published content on vaccine refusal. The authors examined anti-vaccine posts on Facebook during the first three months of the COVID vaccine rollout in early 2021.

They found that posts flagged by third-party fact-checkers as false received a relatively minimal 8.7 million views in that period. Posts that were not flagged by fact-checkers but nonetheless implied that vaccines were harmful to health many of which were from credible mainstream news outlets were viewed hundreds of millions of times.

The flagged posts were more likely to inspire vaccine resistance, the authors wrote. Although unflagged posts individually had less impact on vaccine sentiment, the volume of those posts was so immense that cumulatively they did more damage to vaccine rates.

A single vaccine-skeptical article in the Chicago Tribune headlined A healthy doctor died two weeks after getting a COVID vaccine; CDC is investigating why was viewed by more than 50 million users on Facebook, more than 20% of the platforms U.S. user base. That was more than six times the number of views than all flagged misinformation combined.

Its also true that articles that may be innocuous or inconclusive at their core can be distorted and magnified into explicitly anti-vaccine messages by being passed through the anti-vax network.

Something of the kind happened with the BMJ paper. Its language alluding to serious concerns about the impact of vaccines and containment measures such as lockdowns on excess deaths was transmogrified into the Telegrams headline stating that Covid vaccines may have helped fuel rise in excess deaths and similar language in the New York Post.

The anti-vaxx camp, in repeating these claims, did so after removing or minimizing most of the qualifying language. The headline on a report published by Robert F. Kennedy Jr.s anti-vaccine organization, Childrens Health Defense, stated that the COVID vaccines likely fueled rise in excess deaths, attributing that conclusion to mainstream media.

The CHD report cited a blog post by anti-vaxx crusader Meryl Nass, republishing the Telegraph article. The Nass post was headlined The Dam Has Broken, suggesting that major news sources were now accepting the dangers of the COVID vaccines.

Nass, by the way, is a Maine physician who has had her license suspended and been fined $10,000 for having prescribed ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, two medicines known to be useless in treating COVID-19, to patients.

Put it all together, and the evolution of the BMJ paper into a brief claiming that the COVID vaccines are harmful to health plays into the most extreme anti-vaccine disinformation in circulation such as the incredibly ignorant and dangerous recommendation by Joseph Ladapo, the anti-vaccine quack appointed as Florida surgeon general by Gov. Ron DeSantis, that no one under 65 take a COVID vaccine.

The medical and immunological communities have overwhelmingly concluded that the COVID-19 vaccines have massively reduced hospitalizations and death from the disease. A December 2022 report card by the Commonwealth Fund concluded that after two years of administration, the vaccines had prevented more than 18 million additional hospitalizations and more than 3 million additional deaths.

This is the progress placed at risk by the torrent of anti-vaccine propaganda purveyed by RFK Jr.s organization and other vaccination opponents.

That brings us back to the BMJ paper and its manifest flaws.

Excess deaths, the metric purportedly examined by the Dutch authors, is simply the number of deaths in a country during a given period over and above those that would have been expected under normal conditions, based on historical patterns.

In more than 40 Western countries during the three peak years of the pandemic, the authors reported, there were 1.033 million excess deaths in 2020, about 1.26 million in 2021 and 808,000 in 2022.

The authors expressed perplexity about why excess deaths actually rose in 2021, despite the arrival of the vaccines and the implementation of social anti-pandemic measures, and remained elevated the following year. Government leaders and policymakers, the authors wrote, need to thoroughly investigate underlying causes of persistent excess mortality.

The authors further commented that consensus is also lacking in the medical community regarding concerns that mRNA vaccines might cause more harm than initially forecasted. Thats a gross misrepresentation.

The consensus in the medical community is indisputably that the vaccines are safe and effective. Although they do cause occasional side effects (as do all vaccines), the health threats caused by COVID-19 itself are immeasurably more hazardous.

The truth is that the factors causing elevated excess mortality throughout the pandemic are not mysterious, but well-understood. Statistical data scientist Jeffrey S. Morris of the University of Pennsylvania put his finger on some of the most important.

One is that far more people were exposed to COVID-19 in 2021 than in 2020. By the end of 2020, according to the World Health Organization, there were about 10,000 cases and about 238 deaths per million population; one year later, there 35,186 cases and 683 deaths per million. Furthermore, the COVID variants that appeared in 2021 the Delta and Omicron waves were far more transmissible and virulent (causing more hospitalization and death) than the initial variants.

Also in 2021, many of the most stringent anti-pandemic measures implemented in 2020 school closings, lockdowns, business closures, mask mandates were getting lifted by local authorities. This raised the level of exposure to the virus in the general public.

As for the vaccines, the Dutch authors seemed to conjecture that vaccination happened as if with the turning of a switch in January 2021. Of course thats untrue.

Figures compiled by the independent statistical clearinghouse Our World in Data which were used by the Dutch researchers show that the vaccines were rolled out only gradually through 2021. By mid-year, only about 20% of the population of countries that submitted figures had received even a single dose; by the end of 2021, nearly 50% were still unvaccinated.

Even with a 100% effective vaccine, we would have seen high levels of morbidity and mortality from COVID-19 in 2021, leading to high number of excess deaths, Morris observes.

Statisticians have shown that the peaks and valleys of excess mortality during the pandemic coincide almost exactly with the emergence and peaks of Delta, Omicron and other variants of concern, indicating that excess deaths are almost certainly the result of COVID, not the COVID vaccines.

One other data point: As the British actuary Stuart McDonald points out, of the 47 countries surveyed by the Dutch researchers, the 10 with the lowest rates of excess deaths are those with the highest vaccine uptakes, such as Canada (83% vaccination rate in 2022 and only 5% excess deaths in 2020-22) and Germany (76% vaccinated and 6% excess deaths). By contrast, those with the lowest vaccination rates tended to have the most excess deaths, including North Macedonia (40% vaccinated at 28% excess deaths) and Albania (45% vaccinated, 24% excess deaths).

Is there a remedy for claptrap like the BMJ article? Sadly, very little. Qualified scientists and epidemiologists have risen up almost as one to expose the flaws of the BMJ paper. But the first line of defense against disinformation must be scientific journals themselves. In this case, if not for the first time, the BMJ has failed its responsibility for being a gatekeeper of sound science.

See the original post:

Hiltzik: The return of an anti-vax claim about the COVID vaccines - Los Angeles Times

The FDA approval of the Moderna RSV vaccine, mRNA 1345 (mRESVIA), was based from the results of thephase 3 ConquerRSV trial, which demonstrated an 83.7% efficacy against infection.

As there are now 3 FDA-approved RSV vaccines, Contagion has developed a new short series titled, Special Report: Clinical Insights on Moderna's RSV Vaccine. We have asked RSV vaccine investigators to provide more insights about these immunizations. Ann Falsey, MD, professor of Medicine at the University Of Rochester School Of Medicine, and her colleague, Edward Walsh, MD, professor of Medicine at the University Of Rochester School Of Medicine lead a peer-to-peer discussion on the impact these vaccines may have in preventing this respiratory illness.

In this second episode, Falsey and Walsh discuss the efficacy and mechanism of action of the various RSV vaccines.

Read the original post:

The Efficacy, Mechanism of Action for the RSV Vaccines - Contagionlive.com

"Vaccine-acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (VAIDS)" -- a term used to refer to a weakened immune system allegedly caused by mRNA vaccines -- is a "fictitious claim", infectious disease experts said, refuting social media posts that falsely linked an increase in HIV infections in the Philippines to the Covid-19 vaccines. UN data show HIV infections in the Southeast Asian country have been on the rise since the early 2010s, long before the coronavirus pandemic and the subsequent vaccine rollout.

"From 2022 but alarming if true.... 40 plus new cases per month," read the English-language caption of a Facebook poston April 11, 2024.

The post included a link to a December 2022 article by Philippine newspaper SunStar Davao,titled "396 new-HIV-Aids cases in Davao City recorded from January to September 2022".

The caption went on to claim that people vaccinated against Covid-19 were "testing positive for AIDS", referring to the condition as "VAIDS" or "vaccine acquired immune deficiency syndrome".

HIV infections have soared in the Philippines, with experts blaming the spread of online dating, poor sex education and conservative attitudes in the deeply religious country for fuelling the spread of the virus that causes the chronic disease AIDS.

Similar posts that falsely linked the spike to the Covid-19 vaccines were also sharedon Facebook here, here and here.

But there is no such thing as "VAIDS", a term referring to the weakening of the immune system that surfaced in a flood of misinformation about the Covid-19 vaccines. AFP has debunked similar false claims about the made-up condition here, here and here.

"The term VAIDS is a fictitious claim that Covid vaccines can cause a form of AIDS-like immunodeficiency called vaccine-acquired immune deficiency syndrome," said Dr Edsel Maurice Salvana, an infectious diseases expert at the University of the Philippines' Institute of Molecular Biology and Biotechnology.

Salvana told AFP on May 31, 2024 the Covid vaccines did not have an HIV component and could not cause any mutations that could lead to similar infections.

"None of these vaccines have been shown to be mutagenic, and there is no scientifically plausible scenario where it can create an HIV virus or cause AIDS," he said.

HIV cases were already on the rise across the Philippines, including in Davao city, since before the Covid-19 pandemic began in 2020, Salvana added.

While new infections globally fell 38 percent from 2010 to 2022,UNAIDS data show the Philippines saw a 418 percent increase, making it the fastest-growing HIV epidemic in the Asia-Pacific region and the fourth fastest in the world (archived link).

They also show the number of HIV cases in the country has been on the rise since the early 2010s, before the rollout of the Covid-19 vaccines.

Salvana added while there was a drop in the number of recorded AIDS cases during the pandemic due to decreased testing and less activity, these were eventually detected when pandemic restrictions in the country eased.

"There is no reason to believe that the rise in HIV cases is linked to the Covid vaccine because the increase in cases preceded the Covid vaccine rollout and the pandemic."

Dr Kris Claudette Trangia, the city's HIV/AIDS Program Coordinator at the Department of Health, told AFP on June 5, 2024 that there were1,030 new AIDS cases reported from January to December 2023 in Davao -- up from 836 cases in 2022.

"This increase in the number of reported cases can be attributed to people becoming more aware of the HIV-AIDS services offered in our health facilities, and the importance of getting tested and knowing your status," Trangia said.

Read the original:

Experts rubbish false claim linking Covid vaccines to HIV cases in southern Philippine city - Yahoo! Voices

By Jon Michael Raasch, Political Reporter In Washington, D.C., For Dailymail.Com 22:05 11 Jun 2024, updated 22:05 11 Jun 2024

A longtime FBI employee's Top Secret security clearance was revoked after his pro-Trump, pro-gun and personal concerns over COVID vaccines were revealed, says his attorney.

During the background check process to renew his clearance, friends and family confirmedthe 12-year FBI employee did support Trumpand attended a Second Amendment and the January 6 rally.

His security clearance was later revoked by the FBI, according to his lawyer Tristan Leavitt, who provided internal Department of Justice (DOJ) documents revealing the political questions DailyMail.com.

Leavitt, who has represented multiple government whistleblowers in the past, subsequently sent a letter to the DOJ's inspector general asking why such political questions were necessary for the security clearance - and whether that process has been tainted.

'Instead of limiting its investigation to legitimate issues, [the FBI's security division] acted as if support for President Trump, objecting to COVID-19 vaccinations, or lawfully attending a protest was the equivalent of being a member of Al Qaeda or the Chinese Communist Party,' Leavitt said.

The review allegedly came after the former employee told his bosses that he had been at the January 6 rally.

Leavitt runsEmpower Oversight, a nonprofit which specializes in whistleblower cases, and he told the outlet that the questions are tantamount to internal FBI political bias against conservatives.

He also claimed that the former FBI employee he represents did nothing illegal on January 6.

Further, memos revealed by Empower Oversight show that FBI Security Division workers conducted multiple interviews to ascertain the politics of the employee who self-disclosed his January 6 attendance.

Those memos show witnesses were asked whether the employee ever vocalized 'support for President Trump' and whether he voiced 'objections to Covid-19 vaccination.'

The documents also show some workers were asked whetherthe FBI employee 'attended the Richmond Lobby Day event,' which is a gun-rights event.

'The FBl's intentions are made clear by the questions it chose to put in black and white on a government document,' Leavitt said.

He called the revocation of his client's clearance 'shocking' and an'abuse of authority and a violation of our client's rights under the First Amendment,' in his letter to DOJ Inspector General Michael Horowitz.

Sources familiar with the matter told Just The News that multiple instances of politically motivated clearance reviews have occurred, indicating that Leavitt's client is not the only who has faced repercussions for his stances on Trump, vaccines and guns.

The letter to Horowitz details how the former FBI employee received positive performance reviews and monetary compensation for his work.

The witnesses who were interviewed for this former employee's clearance told investigators that though he expressed Republican views he did not pose a threat.

One investigator wrote down during an interview the former FBI employee: 'Very significantly supported [Trump], would listen to talk shows. Trump did not lose. Dems stole it. Militant point of view. Never implied would do anything aggressive/physical.'

Another investigator noted in a different witness interview that the former employee 'had right wing views' adding 'nothing extreme.'

Those interviews also noted the FBI employee was against masking and vaccines.

Though, at the time of these interviews in April 2022, mandatory vaccine requirements were facing legal hurdles - and the federal government at the time was not allowed to enforce such requirements on FBI employees.

And other interviews with witnesses revealed that though the former FBI employee was a 'gun nut' that 'went to all 2nd Amendment gatherings' he did not display a 'promotion of violence.'

'I write today to formally disclose to you on our client's behalf shocking documents in [the FBI Security Division's] investigative file that evidence an abuse of authority and a violation of our client's rights under the First Amendment,' Leavitt's letter said.

'The documents appear to demonstrate [the FBI Security Division's] political bias and abuse of the security clearance process to purge the FBI of employees who expressed disfavored political views or concerns about the COVID-19 vaccine requirement.'

Leavitt concluded his letter asking Horowitz to open an investigation into the matter, which would provide insight to the public on whether political preference and personal health decisions play a role in FBI agent's security clearance screenings.

See the rest here:

Do you support Trump? Do you have skepticism over the COVID vaccine? Have you been to a gun rights event? Insi - Daily Mail

The Food and Drug Administration on Friday expanded the approval for GSKs vaccine to protect against respiratory syncytial virus, or RSV, authorizing its use for at-risk adults as young as 50.

Arexvy, which was the first RSV vaccine approved, now becomes the first to be available to adults under the age of 60 who are not pregnant. Prior to this FDA decision, Arexvy was licensed for use in people 60 and older. Since the initial FDA approval, the vaccine has been licensed in more than 40 countries.

Todays approval reflects the importance of broadening the benefits of RSV immunization to adults aged 50-59 who are at increased risk, GSKs chief scientific officer, Tony Wood, said in a statement. For those with underlying medical conditions, RSV can have serious consequences, so we are proud to be the first to help protect them.

STAT+ Exclusive Story

Already have an account? Log in

Already have an account? Log in

Already have an account? Log in

Get unlimited access to award-winning journalism and exclusive events.

Read more here:

GSK's RSV vaccine receives expanded FDA approval - STAT

Thanks to respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) shot Arexvys new label expansion into a slightly younger pool of adults, GSK is more confident than ever that its vaccine will be able to conquer the competition.

June 7, the FDA approved Arexvy for RSV prevention in adults ages 50 to 59 who are at increased risk of developing RSV disease. The green light marks Arexvys first new approval since the vaccines original nod to prevent lower respiratory tract disease (LRTD) caused by RSV in adults ages 60 and older last May.

According to GSKs research, there are about 13 million people between the ages of 50 and 59 in the U.S. with underlying conditions that place them at higher risk of RSV disease, Len Friedland, M.D., vice president and director, scientific affairs and public health, vaccines at GSK, said in an interview.

Those chronic conditions include congestive heart disease, asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease as well as diabetes and chronic kidney disease, the executive explained.

Increasing age puts people at greater risk of developing severe outcomes from RSV, including hospitalizations and trips to the intensive care unit, Friedland said.

We estimate there are about 42,000 hospitalizations each year in adults 50 to 64 due to RSV, so theres tremendous opportunity to prevent morbidity and perhaps even mortality from RSV, Friedland said of the latest Arexvy approval.

With Arexvys label expansion locked down, the next milestone ahead for GSK is its meeting with the Centers for Disease Control and Preventions Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices scheduled for June 26, at which point the government's vaccine advisers will decide whether to widely endorse the companys vaccine in the new age range.

We see it as so important to build on whats happened in the pediatric space where vaccination has become part of routine practice, Friedland explained. To have that translate into the adult arena is really important.

GSKs Arexvy became the worlds first approved RSV vaccine last May, backed up by data showing the immunization was 82.6% effective at preventing RSV-related LRTD in older adults. Shortly thereafter, in June 2023, Pfizer won its own RSV nod in older adults with its vaccine Abrysvo, kicking off a fierce competition between the two companies.

Meanwhile, just last week, Moderna snagged a green light for the first FDA-approved mRNA shot in RSV, dubbed mRESVIA. The biotechs vaccine is also cleared to protect adults ages 60 and older from LRTD caused by RSV.

To hear Friedland tell it, Arexvys rollout has gone extremely well so far thanks to the high unmet medical need for an RSV vaccine at the time the shot debuted last summer.

More than 8 million people 60 years of age and older in the U.S. received a dose of Arexvy during the first RSV season after launch, the executive said.

Between Arexvywhich currently controls more than 60% of the marketand Pfizers rival RSV shot Abrysvo, roughly 22% of U.S. adults ages 60 and over received an RSV vaccine last year, which Friedland hailed as a great start.

Looking ahead, GSK will continue to attempt to expand Arexvys reach: The company is currently studying the shot in people 18 and older at increased risk of RSVboth those who are immunocompromised with solid organ transplants as well as those who have any of the underlying comorbidities covered in todays approvalFriedland pointed out.

GSK expects to have data on those populations in the second half of 2024, at which point the company will follow up with the FDA, he said.

As for the recent approval of Modernas RSV vaccine mRESVIA, I think its great, Friedland said.

We want there to be innovation, and we want there to be options, and we want there to be choices, he said. Now, its our job to gather and continue to generate the evidence that speaks to the value of Arexvy.

We believe that we have the market-leading vaccine, and our goal is to keep it that way, Friedland stressed.

Over the first three months of 2023, Arexvy maintained its market lead against rival Abrysvo. In the first quarter, Arexvy generated 182 million pounds sterling ($227 million) versus Abrysvo's sales of $145 million.

Cumulatively since launch, Arexvy hasgenerated 1.2 billion pounds ($1.5 billion) while Abrysvo has managed to take home $1.03 billion.

Read more:

GSK's Arexvy has expanded its label into adults ages 50-59 - FiercePharma