- Joined
- Aug 9, 2012
- Messages
- 33,198
- Reaction score
- 217,493
This isn't encouraging. I'm glad it's still preventing the most serious illness, but was it overrated to begin with? Or, is it actually losing effectiveness? Is Delta breaking through more than we thought? Any ideas?
Israel on Monday said the Pfizer/BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine was still very effective in preventing serious illness, while also reporting a decrease in preventing infections and symptomatic illness. The observation coincided with the ending of social distancing requirements and the spread of a new Delta variant.
The vaccine effectiveness of preventing infection and symptomatic disease fell to 64% since June 6, the Health Ministry said, Reuters reported. The good news is the vaccine was 93% effective in preventing serious illness from the coronavirus, including hospitalizations.
Pfizer vaccine protection against infection declines to 64% in Israel
This article (about the newer Lambda variant) has some ideas.
It seems to say that the neutralising antibodies created by the vaccines can build up a natural resistance in our bodies as well. And these play a part in our ongoing protection. So when the neutralising antibodies wane, the built-up natural resistance is still there.
Vaccines that are better at promoting this are the ones that contain a strand of the genetic code (Pfizer contains one strand, Astra Zeneca contains a double strand).
The Lambda coronavirus variant has arrived in Australia. Here's what we know so far
At least, that is how I understand what Infectious Disease and Vaccines Specialist from the University of Qld, Paul Griffin, says.
I am guessing that when the neutralising antibodies wane, we might catch the virus. But due to our now-built-up natural resistance, we can usually avoid hospitalisation and death.
Last edited: