Wasn’t sure where this belonged, but I’m a vaccine supporter but am really getting tired of the contradictions and reversals from news outlets and the CDC recommendations that may not actually be based on science (CDC said massless among vacc’ed ok, then reversed it, etc., then said 10-day quarantine, then cut it in half suddenly, etc.). I understand that we don’t know everything yet and our knowledge changes, but I don’t feel like enough research is actually being cited to give us real answers.
Particularly concerning to me is the pushing for boosters, starting with recommending one 6-12 months after vaccination, but now companies are rolling out additional boosters (some saying even before 6 months!) rather than showing us longterm studies of the original vaccine’s effectiveness 18 months out from the original trials, and working toward a longer lasting vaccine rather than boosters that have little research support and that the FDA seems to be rubber-stamping extremely quickly.
News outlets also regularly publish articles that contradict each other about each brand of vaccine’s effectiveness or the length of booster’s effectiveness. I also notice pharma proposing overly-rosy figures about how long they think their booster or vaccine will be effective, then reported by news outlets, which then have to backtrack (although they do not acknowledge this change and do not track their own statement changes) and post the updated length of effectiveness.
I’m no conspiracy theorist by any means, but I think the FDA is giving drug companies a bit more benefit of the doubt than they deserve when it comes to boosters and their effectiveness (not the vaccines, though, which have likely saved lives). I’m leery of companies pushing multiple boosters with questionable efficacy just because they say we need it without much data.
This article about a doctor’s concerns over a 2nd Moderna booster captures some of my concern well:
Moderna announced people may need a second booster to increase protection. But is a fourth shot the right approach? Doctors we spoke with said no.
abc7news.com
I don’t think it’s helpful to have federal recommendations for boosters with extremely limited effectiveness in terms of duration. I’m starting to wonder about the driving reason for additional boosters (ie a 2nd booster).
Per NPR:
FDA shortens the wait time between Moderna vaccine and booster to 5 months
The Moderna vaccine’s effectiveness only lasted 5 months, down from the earlier reports and speculation put out by news media (remember the days when they thought it could last a year or more?).
Are we really going to be pushing the country to get up to 2-3 boosters/vaccines this year?
In sum, I myself have seen many contradictions in the news about Covid, the vaccines, and the boosters (recently I saw an article that said mRNA vaccines were more effective, then days later saw an article that the Non-mRNA vaccines—the traditional type—are more effectvie). If I’m getting overwhelmed by the contradictions, I’m sure the rest of America is probably also getting fatigued by the back and forth statements, and I’m guessing this is contributing to anti-vaxxers’ arguments (someone posted Fauci’s contradictory recommendations side by side, for example). Pharma, news outlets, and the CDC need to stop saying things based on speculation that they then have to reverse later, and we could do this if (longer term) research was behind all of the statements rather than speculations and using very short-term trials. I also wonder if economic/political pressures play into recommendations at times rather than safety, even at the highest levels (look at state or county guidance and how they handle mask recommendations, for example). It’s complicated, certainly, and also frustrating to watch play out.
