I absolutely love your emails and so appreciate the time you take to share them. They are logical, fact based, and laymen friendly. I have shared them with so m any other people, whether they are on the same page as I am or not. You lay things out so well, those that may lean towards disinformation should have a hard time supporting their theories. Thank you so much for what you’re doing!
So incredibly helpful and "on target" vs the propaganda (with pseudo non real science "explanations") being circulated by the anti vaxx crowd. Unfortunately that crowd will either not encounter the data (or explanation) or will dismiss it "as a product of the mainstream health consensus, beholden to the pharma companies... produced by people afraid of bucking the consensus for (whatever reason)...."
Thank you for taking the time to bring this literature to those of us who don't study this literature rigorously. As you say, there area lots of people who are anxious about issues you addressed: effects on pregnancy and reproductive health. We can't fully answer questions about long term effects until the data emerge. And some people, needing answers where there are none, have a tendency to believe stories that sound convincing. That's why it is so important that you continue disseminating the data as it trickles in. In the end, facts will prevail.
It's a little ironic that, just as the high mortality rate of Covid-19 is largely due to people unwittingly transmitting it to others who then fall ill, just so the disinformation transmitted through these myths is impeding the acceptance of measures to mitigate the pandemic. It shows how vulnerable we all are to lack of knowledge.
I want to disagree with "There are only two possible ways a vaccine could impact fertility long-term". The unknown ways have a way of presenting themselves to the astonishment of those who said they weren't possible. The long term effects of thalidomide weren't known until the babies were born. The long term effects of the vaccines on the reproductive system of children receiving them will not be known for years.
Yeah, other than that incontrovertible fact that generations of humans have been vaccinated for a broad cross section of viruses without any evidence, ever, of any such "long term impact", and other than the fact that there is not any reasonble biological connection between what the vaccine does and male/female fertility. But other than that, Richard, you are right, we should avoid taking vaccines that clearly and indisputably save lives today (in the real world) to protect ourselves against some future eventuality that has no basis in vaccination history or biology.
These are not in any way similar to the vaccines you refer to. And "not any reasonble biological connection"? Do you know the biodistribution of the mRNA vaccines? Do you know where the generated (possibly malformed ) spike proteins go? Do you know the long term effects of IM PEG? Do you have any information regarding the vaccines effect on prepubescent children? I did not say avoid taking these "vaccines", I said I did not agree with her statement.
PSPS - and you hit the vaxx-skeptic trifecta with the "these vaccines are different than any prior vaccines" comment. As if using a new method in tricking the human immune system to generate the appropriate response is somehow some trip into "new science" that is "not understood". mRNA research has been underway for literally decades, and finally found the funding and the perfect foe -- COVID-19.
The research was underway for decades, however the first human trials for rabies, zika, etc. did not start until 2013, most trials produced lack-luster results with questionable safety.
Richard - you might consider the relative (global, focused) resources deployed vs zika and vs covid before heading down the "lack luster results" path.
Richard -- I do not. Why do you? Experts whom I trust (such as the head of Johns Hopkins' virology and epidemiology dept) indicate that these psedo-scientific "explanations" are, quite frankly, nonsense. So, why are so sure about your science? It is just this kind of effort to throw doubt and obfuscation into our serious public health discussion that is the most pernicious, because those susceptible to these "arguments" find further excuse to believe in the anti-vaxx message. Not that they need much encouragement.
No. Questioning is fine (matter of fact, required). But intentionally avoiding facts and obfuscating / conflating issues and utilizing "science words" (that are irrelevant) to steer people away from what needs to be done to deal with a public health emergency -- now that is just wrong.
PS -- just as the last refuge of the (failing) hedge fund manager is to sell out of the money puts/calls, the last refuge of the vaxx skeptic is the "what about the long term impacts" gambit. We've been through blood clots, myocarditis, then fertility (see above), and after billions (literally) of covid vaccinations (with just about all data indicating excellent efficacy with de minimus adverse reactions -- more dangerous to drive to get the vaxx than to take it), it is increasingly a stretch to be a skeptic (if one follows the data). So where to go, Richard? The ole "potential long term impact"...
Thank you for your explanation on the immune response. I hadn't gotten a concise explanation as to why we see effects within the first two months, generally. That makes so much sense, and I'll keep this post in my back pocket for explanation to others! Thanks so much for your work!
The menses study says that the ~15% of women who had two doses in one cycle had the biggest effect. ~10% of those women had a clinically significant change in the cycle length (8 days or more), which was ~2.5X more than the unvaccinated group.
So my question about the fertility study is, would it be able to detect an effect on fertility among women with clinically significant changes in their cycle length? The fraction of women who had two doses in one cycle and then had clinically significant changes in cycle length would be 10% * 15% = 1.5%. Since difference in fertility rates of 2% were not considered significant, I assume the answer is no, we do not have enough evidence to say whether or not getting two doses in one cycle affects fertility. Is that correct?
Cycles are nominally 28 days. That's a mean. The tails of the curve are where this can happen, and for instance, while my Moderna doses were supposed to be 4 weeks apart, my followup was scheduled at 24 days by the clinician. No, I'm not menstruating... but you can see how the timing might work.
Hello. I am sorry, this is off topic but I do not know how else to message you. Would you please offer a discussion of a recent CDC report (link below) comparing the various types of immunity during the delta wave? In particular, how well (or not) do you think hybrid immunity might work in reverse (vaccination followed by infection)?
Also what is your take on this recent lead for a pan-cornavirus vaccine: targeting the transcription-replication complex of the virus rather than the spike protein?
I absolutely love your emails and so appreciate the time you take to share them. They are logical, fact based, and laymen friendly. I have shared them with so m any other people, whether they are on the same page as I am or not. You lay things out so well, those that may lean towards disinformation should have a hard time supporting their theories. Thank you so much for what you’re doing!
So incredibly helpful and "on target" vs the propaganda (with pseudo non real science "explanations") being circulated by the anti vaxx crowd. Unfortunately that crowd will either not encounter the data (or explanation) or will dismiss it "as a product of the mainstream health consensus, beholden to the pharma companies... produced by people afraid of bucking the consensus for (whatever reason)...."
Thank you for taking the time to bring this literature to those of us who don't study this literature rigorously. As you say, there area lots of people who are anxious about issues you addressed: effects on pregnancy and reproductive health. We can't fully answer questions about long term effects until the data emerge. And some people, needing answers where there are none, have a tendency to believe stories that sound convincing. That's why it is so important that you continue disseminating the data as it trickles in. In the end, facts will prevail.
It's a little ironic that, just as the high mortality rate of Covid-19 is largely due to people unwittingly transmitting it to others who then fall ill, just so the disinformation transmitted through these myths is impeding the acceptance of measures to mitigate the pandemic. It shows how vulnerable we all are to lack of knowledge.
I want to disagree with "There are only two possible ways a vaccine could impact fertility long-term". The unknown ways have a way of presenting themselves to the astonishment of those who said they weren't possible. The long term effects of thalidomide weren't known until the babies were born. The long term effects of the vaccines on the reproductive system of children receiving them will not be known for years.
Yeah, other than that incontrovertible fact that generations of humans have been vaccinated for a broad cross section of viruses without any evidence, ever, of any such "long term impact", and other than the fact that there is not any reasonble biological connection between what the vaccine does and male/female fertility. But other than that, Richard, you are right, we should avoid taking vaccines that clearly and indisputably save lives today (in the real world) to protect ourselves against some future eventuality that has no basis in vaccination history or biology.
These are not in any way similar to the vaccines you refer to. And "not any reasonble biological connection"? Do you know the biodistribution of the mRNA vaccines? Do you know where the generated (possibly malformed ) spike proteins go? Do you know the long term effects of IM PEG? Do you have any information regarding the vaccines effect on prepubescent children? I did not say avoid taking these "vaccines", I said I did not agree with her statement.
PSPS - and you hit the vaxx-skeptic trifecta with the "these vaccines are different than any prior vaccines" comment. As if using a new method in tricking the human immune system to generate the appropriate response is somehow some trip into "new science" that is "not understood". mRNA research has been underway for literally decades, and finally found the funding and the perfect foe -- COVID-19.
The research was underway for decades, however the first human trials for rabies, zika, etc. did not start until 2013, most trials produced lack-luster results with questionable safety.
Richard - you might consider the relative (global, focused) resources deployed vs zika and vs covid before heading down the "lack luster results" path.
data? sources?
Richard -- I do not. Why do you? Experts whom I trust (such as the head of Johns Hopkins' virology and epidemiology dept) indicate that these psedo-scientific "explanations" are, quite frankly, nonsense. So, why are so sure about your science? It is just this kind of effort to throw doubt and obfuscation into our serious public health discussion that is the most pernicious, because those susceptible to these "arguments" find further excuse to believe in the anti-vaxx message. Not that they need much encouragement.
"those who are susceptible"? You mean people who question?
No. Questioning is fine (matter of fact, required). But intentionally avoiding facts and obfuscating / conflating issues and utilizing "science words" (that are irrelevant) to steer people away from what needs to be done to deal with a public health emergency -- now that is just wrong.
"science words" are irrelevant? We are done here.
and I ask again -- why do you feel qualified to opine on the science?
PS -- just as the last refuge of the (failing) hedge fund manager is to sell out of the money puts/calls, the last refuge of the vaxx skeptic is the "what about the long term impacts" gambit. We've been through blood clots, myocarditis, then fertility (see above), and after billions (literally) of covid vaccinations (with just about all data indicating excellent efficacy with de minimus adverse reactions -- more dangerous to drive to get the vaxx than to take it), it is increasingly a stretch to be a skeptic (if one follows the data). So where to go, Richard? The ole "potential long term impact"...
The MMR vaccine can preserve male fertility: Mumps infection post-puberty commonly causes orchitis, which rarely can leave the young man infertile.
Thank you for your explanation on the immune response. I hadn't gotten a concise explanation as to why we see effects within the first two months, generally. That makes so much sense, and I'll keep this post in my back pocket for explanation to others! Thanks so much for your work!
The menses study says that the ~15% of women who had two doses in one cycle had the biggest effect. ~10% of those women had a clinically significant change in the cycle length (8 days or more), which was ~2.5X more than the unvaccinated group.
So my question about the fertility study is, would it be able to detect an effect on fertility among women with clinically significant changes in their cycle length? The fraction of women who had two doses in one cycle and then had clinically significant changes in cycle length would be 10% * 15% = 1.5%. Since difference in fertility rates of 2% were not considered significant, I assume the answer is no, we do not have enough evidence to say whether or not getting two doses in one cycle affects fertility. Is that correct?
How would a women receive 2 doses in one and the same cycle? Think about it….
Cycles are nominally 28 days. That's a mean. The tails of the curve are where this can happen, and for instance, while my Moderna doses were supposed to be 4 weeks apart, my followup was scheduled at 24 days by the clinician. No, I'm not menstruating... but you can see how the timing might work.
So, an example of not following the minimum manufacture recommendations; Moderna = 4 weeks (28 days); PfizerBioNTech 3 weeks (21 days).
Awesome info!
Hello. I am sorry, this is off topic but I do not know how else to message you. Would you please offer a discussion of a recent CDC report (link below) comparing the various types of immunity during the delta wave? In particular, how well (or not) do you think hybrid immunity might work in reverse (vaccination followed by infection)?
https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/prior-covid-infection-more-protective-than-vaccination-during-delta-surge-us-2022-01-19/
Also what is your take on this recent lead for a pan-cornavirus vaccine: targeting the transcription-replication complex of the virus rather than the spike protein?
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-03110-4