Great explanation but "everyone will need to be vaccinated against this new variant"? I can't help but thing that there may be a few among us who'd have concerns about trying to vaccinate our way out of a crisis caused by variants driven by the vaccinations. Perhaps, should such a variant arrive, someone might put in a call to Geert Van Den Bosch, given he warned about this problem back in early 2021?
Not sure that you understood this piece. There are no surprises from an immunology perspective. This concern has always been present, but has also been a less likely scenario given the usual natural evolution of these types of viruses. GVB is an outlier veterinarian virologist who has been shown to have significant flaws in his argument, and appears to be an unserious scientist. https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/covid-19-critical-thinking-pseudoscience/doomsday-prophecy-dr-geert-vanden-bossche
I am not sure there was anything to be confused about in the original article, so happy for you to elaborate here, but I am confused by your comment… You say that ‘the concern [for the induction of vaccine-escape variants] has always been present’ and that Van Den Bosche is an ‘unserious scientist’ on the basis that he has worked on veterinary vaccines. However, the article you link to below is from March 2021 and specifically claims that Van Den Bosche’s warning about the vaccines inducing this problem is ‘misguided’ and should be ignored and is backed up by comments from Dr Paul Offit. This directly ties into my point that, given that the scenario that Van Den Bosche predicted would occur did indeed occur (in exactly the way he said it would) and the premises pushed by the article/Dr Offit at the time (that we can overcome the antigenic fixation with updated formulas and that there is no concern with escape variants) have been falsified so emphatically, at what point do we consider that maybe, just maybe, what we’re doing is failing and at what point do we consider speaking to the people who understood this from the start?
I was unclear. Variants which evolve to elude specific antibodies induced by vaccines is a known and expected part of viral evolution. Example:flu (very different virus, but same principle). VDB’s premise was NOT that. His flawed premise re vaccine-induced/caused viral genomic variant creation in vivo which forms the basis of viral variant creation. The virus evolves throughout a population when it infects them, thus creating many more trillions of replication cycles in which to attempt to achieve new variant creation which can succeed at transmission onward. His article makes this very specific distinction/refutation. Vaccines dont create variants. Infections do.
I see a number of problems with this idea that "vaccines don't create variants", not least because you say yourself that vaccine-induced mutations are a "known and expected part of viral evolution". I agree that this is an inevitable effect of non-sterilizing vaccines (yes, an oxymoron), but this was something that VBD, but this was something that VBD knew in 2021 while Offit & Co poo-pooed these concerns (until now). Thus, its also accurate to say that "VDB's premise was NOT that", when you yourself link to the article which recognises that this was VDB's exact premise. And everything he said would happen has happened, in the order he said it would and in the timeline he said it would.
This isn't to say that been so emphatically correct on everything so far guarantees he will be right on everything else going forward, but I do think there are flaws in any rationale that concludes we should listen to the people who were so spectacularly wrong and ignore the people who were right, or that we should do more of the thing that caused the problems in the first place.
I will exit this discussion now. It does not appear that you are understanding the argument, the difference clearly described by Dr Offitt, and I suspect, you have a bias which is affecting your ability to acknowledge the difference. perhaps if you read the article again, you will understand the difference. I am on the side of evidence, with the scientific principles that my position is based on the best available data, and is always subject to improvement with better information. This is not a dogma for me, or a fan-girling of "mavericks" as it is for so many. I'm afraid that many let their contrarian biases get in the way of sound analysis of the best available data, and those with less expertise also fall into the trap of the Dunning-Kruger effect. When you are less expert, you can easily be influenced by "maverick" pseudo experts who are attractive to your biases. Best to you.
I'm sorry you feel this way, as I'm very aware of the divide on the issue of jabs etc and how many conversations end like this (accusations of bias, dogma, fan-girling, Dunning-Kruger effect, etc). I do think it would be valuable to consider the following questions:
- is it dogmatic to say that VDB was right on this, when everything he said would come to pass did? or biased to say that Dr Offit told us that this was nothing to worry about in 2021 and has now changed his mind, when this is exactly what happened?
- what conclusions would you form if someone a) said that vaccines don't cause viral mutation in the same comments that states that it is well-known that vaccines cause viral mutations, then b) claimed that Dr Offit was always concerned about mutations and that VDB's premise was NOT that of vaccine-escape variants, before linking to an article that emphatically confirms the opposite then c) rather than providing a response, instead threw out accusations that it's me that's subject to stupidity and bias?
I think there's always going to be discussion and disagreement when we're dealing with novel issues (which naturally involve unknowns) and even more so when concerns have been politicised, but denying reality (and, indeed, your own points) if they don't suit your position is a major hindrance to any discussion.
It really is astounding how the immune system works on a cellular level, and that anything as magical as consciousness can emerge from the billions and trillions of small pieces. Although not a video directly related to T cell activity against covid, this sort of video showing an actual T cell in action killing a cancer cell is humbling and awe inspiring:
Important bite-sized bit of immunology--I don't have a science background but I was able to predict the content because I've been listening to This Week in Virology since lockdown struck. This is info I've tried to share with people in daily life, but I lack the right ethos to be fully persuasive. I hope you'll make another one of those short videos with Vincent Racaniello on this topic. Thank you for doing what you do.
Good reminder about how hard our T cells work to keep us healthy. One of the few doctors I followed during the pandemic that kept me well informed and feeling less anxious about the virus.
"For otherwise healthy young people, T cells continued to protect against severe disease; these cells weren’t fooled by the omicron variants. Only the antibodies were fooled."
What are your thoughts about the risks today of older people - 65+ -who are fully vaccinated (all boosters and bivalent) Are we still where we were, except for Paxlovid? How much help do fully vaccinated older people get from the T-cells to stave off serious disease and death. This is an important question since there are over 50 million people over 65. Further question, what about those who aren't "otherwise healthy", but have such issues as heart problems and/or obesity.
Great explanation but "everyone will need to be vaccinated against this new variant"? I can't help but thing that there may be a few among us who'd have concerns about trying to vaccinate our way out of a crisis caused by variants driven by the vaccinations. Perhaps, should such a variant arrive, someone might put in a call to Geert Van Den Bosch, given he warned about this problem back in early 2021?
Exactly
Not sure that you understood this piece. There are no surprises from an immunology perspective. This concern has always been present, but has also been a less likely scenario given the usual natural evolution of these types of viruses. GVB is an outlier veterinarian virologist who has been shown to have significant flaws in his argument, and appears to be an unserious scientist. https://www.mcgill.ca/oss/article/covid-19-critical-thinking-pseudoscience/doomsday-prophecy-dr-geert-vanden-bossche
I am not sure there was anything to be confused about in the original article, so happy for you to elaborate here, but I am confused by your comment… You say that ‘the concern [for the induction of vaccine-escape variants] has always been present’ and that Van Den Bosche is an ‘unserious scientist’ on the basis that he has worked on veterinary vaccines. However, the article you link to below is from March 2021 and specifically claims that Van Den Bosche’s warning about the vaccines inducing this problem is ‘misguided’ and should be ignored and is backed up by comments from Dr Paul Offit. This directly ties into my point that, given that the scenario that Van Den Bosche predicted would occur did indeed occur (in exactly the way he said it would) and the premises pushed by the article/Dr Offit at the time (that we can overcome the antigenic fixation with updated formulas and that there is no concern with escape variants) have been falsified so emphatically, at what point do we consider that maybe, just maybe, what we’re doing is failing and at what point do we consider speaking to the people who understood this from the start?
I was unclear. Variants which evolve to elude specific antibodies induced by vaccines is a known and expected part of viral evolution. Example:flu (very different virus, but same principle). VDB’s premise was NOT that. His flawed premise re vaccine-induced/caused viral genomic variant creation in vivo which forms the basis of viral variant creation. The virus evolves throughout a population when it infects them, thus creating many more trillions of replication cycles in which to attempt to achieve new variant creation which can succeed at transmission onward. His article makes this very specific distinction/refutation. Vaccines dont create variants. Infections do.
I see a number of problems with this idea that "vaccines don't create variants", not least because you say yourself that vaccine-induced mutations are a "known and expected part of viral evolution". I agree that this is an inevitable effect of non-sterilizing vaccines (yes, an oxymoron), but this was something that VBD, but this was something that VBD knew in 2021 while Offit & Co poo-pooed these concerns (until now). Thus, its also accurate to say that "VDB's premise was NOT that", when you yourself link to the article which recognises that this was VDB's exact premise. And everything he said would happen has happened, in the order he said it would and in the timeline he said it would.
This isn't to say that been so emphatically correct on everything so far guarantees he will be right on everything else going forward, but I do think there are flaws in any rationale that concludes we should listen to the people who were so spectacularly wrong and ignore the people who were right, or that we should do more of the thing that caused the problems in the first place.
I will exit this discussion now. It does not appear that you are understanding the argument, the difference clearly described by Dr Offitt, and I suspect, you have a bias which is affecting your ability to acknowledge the difference. perhaps if you read the article again, you will understand the difference. I am on the side of evidence, with the scientific principles that my position is based on the best available data, and is always subject to improvement with better information. This is not a dogma for me, or a fan-girling of "mavericks" as it is for so many. I'm afraid that many let their contrarian biases get in the way of sound analysis of the best available data, and those with less expertise also fall into the trap of the Dunning-Kruger effect. When you are less expert, you can easily be influenced by "maverick" pseudo experts who are attractive to your biases. Best to you.
I'm sorry you feel this way, as I'm very aware of the divide on the issue of jabs etc and how many conversations end like this (accusations of bias, dogma, fan-girling, Dunning-Kruger effect, etc). I do think it would be valuable to consider the following questions:
- is it dogmatic to say that VDB was right on this, when everything he said would come to pass did? or biased to say that Dr Offit told us that this was nothing to worry about in 2021 and has now changed his mind, when this is exactly what happened?
- what conclusions would you form if someone a) said that vaccines don't cause viral mutation in the same comments that states that it is well-known that vaccines cause viral mutations, then b) claimed that Dr Offit was always concerned about mutations and that VDB's premise was NOT that of vaccine-escape variants, before linking to an article that emphatically confirms the opposite then c) rather than providing a response, instead threw out accusations that it's me that's subject to stupidity and bias?
I think there's always going to be discussion and disagreement when we're dealing with novel issues (which naturally involve unknowns) and even more so when concerns have been politicised, but denying reality (and, indeed, your own points) if they don't suit your position is a major hindrance to any discussion.
It really is astounding how the immune system works on a cellular level, and that anything as magical as consciousness can emerge from the billions and trillions of small pieces. Although not a video directly related to T cell activity against covid, this sort of video showing an actual T cell in action killing a cancer cell is humbling and awe inspiring:
https://youtu.be/xzdSdPNffDE
Dr. Offit - thank you for sharing your wisdom. Would love to know your thoughts on PASC risk. Are Dr. Ely's concerns valid in your estimation:
https://archive.ph/2023.05.26-191622/https://www.bostonglobe.com/2023/05/26/opinion/long-covid-turns-three-americans-play-disability-roulette/
T-cell epitopes are not new or news. Sorry natural immunity, we thought you were misinformation. Turns out you were malinformation.
The Sunday Times (London) has a story today about the origin of covid. It’s behind a paywall.
How do we increas our T cells?
How do we increase our T. Ells?
Important bite-sized bit of immunology--I don't have a science background but I was able to predict the content because I've been listening to This Week in Virology since lockdown struck. This is info I've tried to share with people in daily life, but I lack the right ethos to be fully persuasive. I hope you'll make another one of those short videos with Vincent Racaniello on this topic. Thank you for doing what you do.
Good reminder about how hard our T cells work to keep us healthy. One of the few doctors I followed during the pandemic that kept me well informed and feeling less anxious about the virus.
"For otherwise healthy young people, T cells continued to protect against severe disease; these cells weren’t fooled by the omicron variants. Only the antibodies were fooled."
What are your thoughts about the risks today of older people - 65+ -who are fully vaccinated (all boosters and bivalent) Are we still where we were, except for Paxlovid? How much help do fully vaccinated older people get from the T-cells to stave off serious disease and death. This is an important question since there are over 50 million people over 65. Further question, what about those who aren't "otherwise healthy", but have such issues as heart problems and/or obesity.
Excellent article. Thanks Dr Offit!
Excellent synopsis. Thank you!!!
Very reassuring to hear, thank you very much! BW Lumi