Age is the strongest predictor of COVID-19 severe disease and death. Even though those aged 65+ are the leaders in vaccination rates, they continue to lead hospitalizations in the U.S. and across the globe. But… why? An onslaught of scientific information can tell us why this may be the case. I worked with
Professor Jetelina — Thank you for this and for your other posts. You're a stellar, an absolutely stellar, public health communicator. This from a former senior consultant to CDC and national foundations and a former state senior public health official.
I have been looking for this well laid out data for a long time and a simple explanation of how the immunization system works and possibly why older people are so much at risk- including on the CDC website. I've found it so difficult to put together that I'd pretty much given up. Thank you very, very much, Katelynn.
Thanks. My wife and I are both in our early 70s and got mild cases of COVID-19 (despite being completely up to date on vaccinations) as a result of letting our guard down and not keeping our masks on during sit down dinners on a recent river cruise. Lesson learned. Mine was VERY mild (basically a head cold) while my wife basically spent an entire week on the couch reading because she didn't have energy for much more. We both recovered without resorting to the ER, but we are now very cautious. Masks everywhere in public enclosed spaces.
Of course, folks like us would be a lot better off if other people would do the same, but we have apparently become a nation of sociopaths that regards the elderly and otherwise immunocompromised as annoyances. Saving our lives is apparently not worth the horrible oppression of keeping vaccinations up to date and wearing masks. The national attitude now seems to be (to borrow a phrase from the Brits) "I'm alright Jack."
I'm going to say around a month. When we got the booster wasn't the issue. The issue was that we went on a river cruise and didn't keep our masks on during dinner. One of the people at our table had been feeling unwell for days but assumed it was a cold, didn't test, and didn't wear a mask. Our entire table wound up sick.
A month after getting boosted seems like it would be the best time to get sick if you're going to - your antibodies were presumably peaking. My daughters both got covid last year - maybe it's a coincidence, but the one who'd been boosted 5 weeks earlier had a very mild case while the one who had not had a booster for many months got very ill (fever 103.8 for days, low oxygen, positive on rapid tests for > 15 days).
My wife and I are both 65+ and have heart problems. We got our 2nd COVID-19 booster in February. Should we get our 3rd booster now or wait for the promised new version this Fall?
p.s. Thanks for your layman’s language information; you’ve been most helpful for those of us older folks in our community.
This is a very good overview of immunologic senescence. Still, I am surprised that the role of the innate immune system was not discussed. We see senescence in this important arm of our immunity as well.
I want to take this opportunity to thank YLE for her outstanding work throughout the pandemic.
The innate system is that arm of the immune system that simply recognizes "you" from "not you" and then purges your body of whatever isn't you. It's not specific to any one particular pathogen.
I would very much appreciate your addressing an issue or two to those of us who have solid organ transplants and are thus severely immunocompromised. We are a neglected group of between 2 and three percent of the population, and it would be wonderful to get your take on how we should address safety and the possibility of travel.
Thank you, Dr Jetelina, for explaining the different components of the immune system and how they work.
When you say "older people vaccinated with one booster dose have 4 times the risk of dying compared to people with two booster doses" - for how long after the second booster does this hold true - weeks or years? The supporting chart shows only 4 weeks of benefit.
When the CDC makes statements like this without specifying a timeframe, they are implying the benefit lasts indefinitely, when in fact it probably lasts only a month or two at best before waning. Also, is it possible that people who get two boosters are more likely to mask on airplanes and avoid indoor dining (i.e., the second booster doesn't deserve all the credit)?
The CDC has recently admitted that sometimes their communications to the public are confusing. But when the CDC omits an important caveat such as "the benefit only lasts X weeks," they are feeding us a narrative that is only half-true in an attempt to encourage/manipulate the public in to doing what the CDC deems to be the desired action, which removes fully informed personal choice. The result, unfortunately, is an erosion of public trust in the CDC.
Baydog, you make some excellent points. I liked especially your conjecture on the likely correlation between booster status and other infection-avoidant behavior. But isnt it possible that informational sins of omission by the agency don't necessarily imply a conscious intention to deceive or manipulate?
Yes, it's possible, and it's not my intention to unfairly characterize the motives of the CDC. They have an extremely difficult job and are tasked with making decisions despite imperfect information. Yet it seems there have been too many instances of "informational sins of omission" (nice phrase!) not to wonder whether the public is being told enough so that as individuals we can make fully informed choices:
* The virus isn't airborne, and the public doesn't need to buy/wear masks;
* The vaccines prevent infection and transmission (Dr Birx recently stated that she knew this wasn't true, and that the current CDC knowingly overplayed their hand);
* The vaccines are "safe and effective." I am not an anti-vaxer; I am vaxed and double boosted. Yet even the FDA acknowledges there are at least four "potential reactions" to vaccines (see page 3 on link below): pulmonary embolism, acute myocardial infarction, immune thrombocytopenia, and disseminated intravascular coagulation;
* There are only "three" vaccines for which the FDA has granted EUA (page 3 link below) - does this mean J&J no longer has EUA? (For those unlucky enough to get J&J, the path towards full vaccination was beyond confusing);
* The CDC appears to have recently deleted the statement that the "mRNA and the spike protein do not last long in the body" from their website. Should we be worried about this? Should we avoid mRNA vaccines in the future? Why isn't mainstream media asking questions? My worst fear is that the mRNA vaccines are some type of ticking time bomb waiting to detonate inside millions of us;
* Why did the CDC switch to a covid map that's based on hospitalizations and not transmission levels so that individuals can easily make fully informed decisions about when and how to protect themselves?
* For people who are exposed, the CDC now states there's no need to quarantine but at the same time the FDA tells us we should test 3 times (instead of twice) spaced 48 hours apart. In my mind, these two statements are at odds with one another. I've read enough anecdotes to wonder whether it's possible that the vaccines and boosters cause us to test negative longer during the onset of infection, and if true, are our vaccines/boosters actually increasing transmission?
* People with covid should isolate for only 5 days, when in fact infectiousness lasts at least 8-10 days, with peak occurring at 4-5 days. This is the advice one would give if their goal were to maximize infections (perhaps because the vaccines were underperforming);
* Natural immunity doesn't count and people who are unvaccinated must lose their jobs (i.e. vaccine mandates);
* For people who experience Paxlovid rebound, they can leave isolation 2 days after testing negative. I don't know if this is formal guidance from the CDC, yet it seems to be what President Biden did after his rebound infection. Is this how Jill Biden caught covid?
* Paxlovid rebound happens only 2% of the time - we all know the true number is much higher, but is it 10% or 50%?
* If you experience Paxlovid rebound, you will only experience mild symptoms and there's no need for a second course of Paxlovid. So why did Fauci take two courses? And why did the FDA recently order Pfizer to conduct studies on the impact of taking a second course? Does it ever happen that people who take Paxlovid still end up in the hospital or dead from covid? And, importantly, does a second course help prevent long covid?
* Why have certain states legalized early treatments when our federal agencies ignore or disavow the same treatments? Who is correct?
* Why don't we seem to borrow lessons learned from other countries in terms of early treatments and/or treatments for long covid? (We do seem to rely on Israel and the UK, both of which have nationalized healthcare, for data, which is a good thing);
Thanks for such a comprehensive expansion! I can't blithely dismiss any of your points. But looking at the very real human fallibility of people and their institutions, hasn't it been the case that this epidemic has been a learning experience for all of us, from the WHO to the FDA to CDC and on down to the states? We've all been playing catch-up from the start and had to revise our guesstimates as more data came in. On the job training for most. So I don't really fault inaccuracies unless they were demonstrably done in bad faith. What is dangerous is the level of distrust and cynicism that says things like "I'll never trust what (fill in the blank) says again." Unfortunately that really is a case of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good as well as throwing out the proverbial baby with the bathwater!
Very well said! Thank you. From my perspective, I don’t believe anyone has operated in bad faith. The two main problems I see are:
1) guidance is not always meaningful in terms of informing personal decisions. Example is switching national Covid hot spot map to hospitalizations and away from transmission. This switch undermines personal choice, and creates confusion over when to step up precautions, which contributes to spread.
2) the CDC seems incapable of admitting that some earlier guidance has proven to be faulty. Instead, they go silent (we don’t hear much about vaccine mandates any more) or double down on bad advice (5 day isolation).
There seems to be an attitude that the masses need to be managed as opposed to respecting an individual’s right to make fully informed choices. I think, unfortunately, this is why so many have tuned out and are back to wishful pre-pandemic living. Even if you aren’t a medical doctor of Harvard PhD, people are smart enough to understand when their choices are being unnecessarily limited or when things they’re being told don’t add up.
My understanding is there a line of defense before the antibodies that are COVID focused. What Omicron was able to do was bypass this. Age is a simple / convenient proxy for the estimating the current level of immune system effectiveness in a person. Frankly, it is the lazy way out of thoughtful data collection. Why do some 65 year old have little problem with COVID and some struggle – even with the same vaccine pattern. Second, what is the value of a booster for old variants of COVID to handle new variants. This is an open question and begs we push old stuff simply because we don’t have anything else and pharm company’s have an investment. I am not saying this is true, but it is a common and reasonable question. Third, if a person gets another booster (say they 3rd or 4th) how long does it last and does it reduce the value of future vaccines. There is some investigation that says this is true.
The recommendation at the end for old folks (I fit this at 68), is vaccinate. I would suggest the better recommendation is avoid situations where COVID could spread. To start, remask on airplanes, spend funds to improve ventilation, and put in policies that enable folks that are sick to have paid time off. Again, saying vaccinate without these other clear actions provides ammunition to folks opposed to vaccination – that vaccination is just “path of easy non action”. Again I am vaccinated and find MRNA technology fascinating. Failing to understand how a message is received is what got CDC into a jam.
We should offer masked only flights as an option, with a discount. If anyone is caught not masking, the airline can keep an open tab and charge their credit card an appropriate penalty. Money from those penalties can then be used to pay for improved ventilation etc
I'd appreciate any (detailed) information you can provide about how to improve ventilation in our home. It sounds like a subject you may be very knowledgeable about. We have to have various people come in for repairs, etc. that can't be deferred and get quite anxious about those "visits".
While you await a possible reply from Mr. Fordyce, I can recommend to you a CNN article to read from April of this year. It has a lot of good, practical information in it on ventilation, as well as several links that will expand on it further.
Of course, talking with your HVAC professional may turn out to be at least as helpful as the CNN article, but the latter may prepare you to have a more informed discussion with the former. Some of them are quite knowledgeable.
Ok, can we also have real talk about the fact that simply being male adds about 4 years of "age" and use that to inform policy?
Also, I really wish we didn't have these arbitrary cutoffs based on the accident of our decimal number system (which in turn is simply due to having 5 fingers). There is nothing sacred about the numbers 65 or 50. Older is older. There are no magic phase changes, we just happen to sort data into arbitrary buckets.
Age is clearly a factor. Actuarial tables, showing the probability of dying in a given year, would be a sound way to prioritize vaccinations and boosters. We should have a dynamic scheduling/rescheduling system where you can go ahead and schedule a booster (if you're five months from the last one) and if someone else comes along and wants your spot at least 48 hours before your appointment, you get rescheduled. Less than half of American adults have had their first boosters, slightly more than 10% of Americans over 50 have had their 4th shots, tens of millions of doses have gone in the garbage, we know that boosting confers breadth to antibody responses, and yet we are stuck on this idea that we are all supposed to "wait our turn." It's stupid and cruel, and if I'd stuck to the script I would have gotten Covid long ago.
Thank you for sharing the ongoing insight! As a 60plus person, I'm wondering about "staying up to date" on boosters. It seems you've said that 2 boosters are up to date. It's been 5 months since my second booster and I'm planning to travel and be in large populations from airports to concert halls. Is a 3rd booster recommended?
I can't answer your question because I'm not YLE but I can't begin to describe the peace of mind that comes from taking a Labcorp spike antibody test and finding out that I'm >25000 u/mL
If my understanding of the literature is correct, it means I'm loaded with antibodies, and thanks to the dark magick of affinity maturation, enough of those antibodies are probably enough to neutralize Omicron and its subvariants with 90% probability.
But that number will keep changing. I got tested 4 wks after the bivalent and was >25k. But 5 months later (this month), the number is 17,709. What does that mean? Nobody really knows.
I have two questions about boosters for older people. First, do you know, theoretically, how long the second booster (4th shot) lasts? Second, for immunocompromised people who have recently gotten their 5th shot, can they get the new booster when it comes out, or do they have to wait 4 months?
Very good summary. I wonder if data are available for immunocompromised elderly, such chemo patients in their 70s. (Like my wife, who has had to discontinue chemo due to low neutrophils that stubbornly won’t rebound). If data are available, it would be great if you could do a piece focused on this population, who are the ones we most need to protect.
Question for health care professionals: would you write a note getting someone out of, say, work, school or jury duty if they scored low on a spike antibody test?
Although I am now over 65, can I take any comfort in always having excellent immunity, very rarely catching colds and flu, and I haven't been sick at all since before 2019? And how would I find out? It would be so helpful in determining my COVID risk calculation.
Professor Jetelina — Thank you for this and for your other posts. You're a stellar, an absolutely stellar, public health communicator. This from a former senior consultant to CDC and national foundations and a former state senior public health official.
I have been looking for this well laid out data for a long time and a simple explanation of how the immunization system works and possibly why older people are so much at risk- including on the CDC website. I've found it so difficult to put together that I'd pretty much given up. Thank you very, very much, Katelynn.
Thanks. My wife and I are both in our early 70s and got mild cases of COVID-19 (despite being completely up to date on vaccinations) as a result of letting our guard down and not keeping our masks on during sit down dinners on a recent river cruise. Lesson learned. Mine was VERY mild (basically a head cold) while my wife basically spent an entire week on the couch reading because she didn't have energy for much more. We both recovered without resorting to the ER, but we are now very cautious. Masks everywhere in public enclosed spaces.
Of course, folks like us would be a lot better off if other people would do the same, but we have apparently become a nation of sociopaths that regards the elderly and otherwise immunocompromised as annoyances. Saving our lives is apparently not worth the horrible oppression of keeping vaccinations up to date and wearing masks. The national attitude now seems to be (to borrow a phrase from the Brits) "I'm alright Jack."
Share your views of the general population. A little more vulgar way of putting their attitude: "Screw you, I've got mine."
So glad to hear your infection was mild! How soon after being boosted did you and your wife get sick?
I'm going to say around a month. When we got the booster wasn't the issue. The issue was that we went on a river cruise and didn't keep our masks on during dinner. One of the people at our table had been feeling unwell for days but assumed it was a cold, didn't test, and didn't wear a mask. Our entire table wound up sick.
A month after getting boosted seems like it would be the best time to get sick if you're going to - your antibodies were presumably peaking. My daughters both got covid last year - maybe it's a coincidence, but the one who'd been boosted 5 weeks earlier had a very mild case while the one who had not had a booster for many months got very ill (fever 103.8 for days, low oxygen, positive on rapid tests for > 15 days).
Thank you. Excellent and very useful information presented. You deserve a national audience.
My wife and I are both 65+ and have heart problems. We got our 2nd COVID-19 booster in February. Should we get our 3rd booster now or wait for the promised new version this Fall?
p.s. Thanks for your layman’s language information; you’ve been most helpful for those of us older folks in our community.
This is a very good overview of immunologic senescence. Still, I am surprised that the role of the innate immune system was not discussed. We see senescence in this important arm of our immunity as well.
I want to take this opportunity to thank YLE for her outstanding work throughout the pandemic.
what is the "innate immune system"?
The innate system is that arm of the immune system that simply recognizes "you" from "not you" and then purges your body of whatever isn't you. It's not specific to any one particular pathogen.
Got it thx. Wish it was all-powerful
It can be quite powerful. My understanding is that any live attenuated replication competent vaccine will give it a boost that lasts for a few weeks.
You can always simply do an online search for your quoted phrase.
In doing so, for example, this was one of the first links that appeared.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innate_immune_system
Thx, I am too lazy I guess or less habituated to using online search. Great link - thanks agai.
I read a while back that herpes viruses such as CMV could be driving immunosenescence.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5186782/
I would very much appreciate your addressing an issue or two to those of us who have solid organ transplants and are thus severely immunocompromised. We are a neglected group of between 2 and three percent of the population, and it would be wonderful to get your take on how we should address safety and the possibility of travel.
I would appreciate any updates you have about immunocompromised organ transplant recipients also. Thanks!
If T cells rapidly decline at 40, why is the 2nd booster recommendation for 50+ ?
Thank you, Dr Jetelina, for explaining the different components of the immune system and how they work.
When you say "older people vaccinated with one booster dose have 4 times the risk of dying compared to people with two booster doses" - for how long after the second booster does this hold true - weeks or years? The supporting chart shows only 4 weeks of benefit.
When the CDC makes statements like this without specifying a timeframe, they are implying the benefit lasts indefinitely, when in fact it probably lasts only a month or two at best before waning. Also, is it possible that people who get two boosters are more likely to mask on airplanes and avoid indoor dining (i.e., the second booster doesn't deserve all the credit)?
The CDC has recently admitted that sometimes their communications to the public are confusing. But when the CDC omits an important caveat such as "the benefit only lasts X weeks," they are feeding us a narrative that is only half-true in an attempt to encourage/manipulate the public in to doing what the CDC deems to be the desired action, which removes fully informed personal choice. The result, unfortunately, is an erosion of public trust in the CDC.
Baydog, you make some excellent points. I liked especially your conjecture on the likely correlation between booster status and other infection-avoidant behavior. But isnt it possible that informational sins of omission by the agency don't necessarily imply a conscious intention to deceive or manipulate?
Yes, it's possible, and it's not my intention to unfairly characterize the motives of the CDC. They have an extremely difficult job and are tasked with making decisions despite imperfect information. Yet it seems there have been too many instances of "informational sins of omission" (nice phrase!) not to wonder whether the public is being told enough so that as individuals we can make fully informed choices:
* The virus isn't airborne, and the public doesn't need to buy/wear masks;
* The vaccines prevent infection and transmission (Dr Birx recently stated that she knew this wasn't true, and that the current CDC knowingly overplayed their hand);
* The vaccines are "safe and effective." I am not an anti-vaxer; I am vaxed and double boosted. Yet even the FDA acknowledges there are at least four "potential reactions" to vaccines (see page 3 on link below): pulmonary embolism, acute myocardial infarction, immune thrombocytopenia, and disseminated intravascular coagulation;
* There are only "three" vaccines for which the FDA has granted EUA (page 3 link below) - does this mean J&J no longer has EUA? (For those unlucky enough to get J&J, the path towards full vaccination was beyond confusing);
* The CDC appears to have recently deleted the statement that the "mRNA and the spike protein do not last long in the body" from their website. Should we be worried about this? Should we avoid mRNA vaccines in the future? Why isn't mainstream media asking questions? My worst fear is that the mRNA vaccines are some type of ticking time bomb waiting to detonate inside millions of us;
* Why did the CDC switch to a covid map that's based on hospitalizations and not transmission levels so that individuals can easily make fully informed decisions about when and how to protect themselves?
* For people who are exposed, the CDC now states there's no need to quarantine but at the same time the FDA tells us we should test 3 times (instead of twice) spaced 48 hours apart. In my mind, these two statements are at odds with one another. I've read enough anecdotes to wonder whether it's possible that the vaccines and boosters cause us to test negative longer during the onset of infection, and if true, are our vaccines/boosters actually increasing transmission?
* People with covid should isolate for only 5 days, when in fact infectiousness lasts at least 8-10 days, with peak occurring at 4-5 days. This is the advice one would give if their goal were to maximize infections (perhaps because the vaccines were underperforming);
* Natural immunity doesn't count and people who are unvaccinated must lose their jobs (i.e. vaccine mandates);
* For people who experience Paxlovid rebound, they can leave isolation 2 days after testing negative. I don't know if this is formal guidance from the CDC, yet it seems to be what President Biden did after his rebound infection. Is this how Jill Biden caught covid?
* Paxlovid rebound happens only 2% of the time - we all know the true number is much higher, but is it 10% or 50%?
* If you experience Paxlovid rebound, you will only experience mild symptoms and there's no need for a second course of Paxlovid. So why did Fauci take two courses? And why did the FDA recently order Pfizer to conduct studies on the impact of taking a second course? Does it ever happen that people who take Paxlovid still end up in the hospital or dead from covid? And, importantly, does a second course help prevent long covid?
* Why have certain states legalized early treatments when our federal agencies ignore or disavow the same treatments? Who is correct?
* Why don't we seem to borrow lessons learned from other countries in terms of early treatments and/or treatments for long covid? (We do seem to rely on Israel and the UK, both of which have nationalized healthcare, for data, which is a good thing);
Link to FDA's Work to Combat Covid Effectiveness:
https://www.fda.gov/media/160998/download
Thanks for such a comprehensive expansion! I can't blithely dismiss any of your points. But looking at the very real human fallibility of people and their institutions, hasn't it been the case that this epidemic has been a learning experience for all of us, from the WHO to the FDA to CDC and on down to the states? We've all been playing catch-up from the start and had to revise our guesstimates as more data came in. On the job training for most. So I don't really fault inaccuracies unless they were demonstrably done in bad faith. What is dangerous is the level of distrust and cynicism that says things like "I'll never trust what (fill in the blank) says again." Unfortunately that really is a case of letting the perfect be the enemy of the good as well as throwing out the proverbial baby with the bathwater!
Very well said! Thank you. From my perspective, I don’t believe anyone has operated in bad faith. The two main problems I see are:
1) guidance is not always meaningful in terms of informing personal decisions. Example is switching national Covid hot spot map to hospitalizations and away from transmission. This switch undermines personal choice, and creates confusion over when to step up precautions, which contributes to spread.
2) the CDC seems incapable of admitting that some earlier guidance has proven to be faulty. Instead, they go silent (we don’t hear much about vaccine mandates any more) or double down on bad advice (5 day isolation).
There seems to be an attitude that the masses need to be managed as opposed to respecting an individual’s right to make fully informed choices. I think, unfortunately, this is why so many have tuned out and are back to wishful pre-pandemic living. Even if you aren’t a medical doctor of Harvard PhD, people are smart enough to understand when their choices are being unnecessarily limited or when things they’re being told don’t add up.
Thank you very helpful.
My understanding is there a line of defense before the antibodies that are COVID focused. What Omicron was able to do was bypass this. Age is a simple / convenient proxy for the estimating the current level of immune system effectiveness in a person. Frankly, it is the lazy way out of thoughtful data collection. Why do some 65 year old have little problem with COVID and some struggle – even with the same vaccine pattern. Second, what is the value of a booster for old variants of COVID to handle new variants. This is an open question and begs we push old stuff simply because we don’t have anything else and pharm company’s have an investment. I am not saying this is true, but it is a common and reasonable question. Third, if a person gets another booster (say they 3rd or 4th) how long does it last and does it reduce the value of future vaccines. There is some investigation that says this is true.
The recommendation at the end for old folks (I fit this at 68), is vaccinate. I would suggest the better recommendation is avoid situations where COVID could spread. To start, remask on airplanes, spend funds to improve ventilation, and put in policies that enable folks that are sick to have paid time off. Again, saying vaccinate without these other clear actions provides ammunition to folks opposed to vaccination – that vaccination is just “path of easy non action”. Again I am vaccinated and find MRNA technology fascinating. Failing to understand how a message is received is what got CDC into a jam.
We should offer masked only flights as an option, with a discount. If anyone is caught not masking, the airline can keep an open tab and charge their credit card an appropriate penalty. Money from those penalties can then be used to pay for improved ventilation etc
I'd appreciate any (detailed) information you can provide about how to improve ventilation in our home. It sounds like a subject you may be very knowledgeable about. We have to have various people come in for repairs, etc. that can't be deferred and get quite anxious about those "visits".
While you await a possible reply from Mr. Fordyce, I can recommend to you a CNN article to read from April of this year. It has a lot of good, practical information in it on ventilation, as well as several links that will expand on it further.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/10/health/covid-19-ventilation-matters-wellness/index.html
Of course, talking with your HVAC professional may turn out to be at least as helpful as the CNN article, but the latter may prepare you to have a more informed discussion with the former. Some of them are quite knowledgeable.
Thank you very much.
Thank you. One of the best benefits of this site is the ability to learn from highly informed people like your self.
Ok, can we also have real talk about the fact that simply being male adds about 4 years of "age" and use that to inform policy?
Also, I really wish we didn't have these arbitrary cutoffs based on the accident of our decimal number system (which in turn is simply due to having 5 fingers). There is nothing sacred about the numbers 65 or 50. Older is older. There are no magic phase changes, we just happen to sort data into arbitrary buckets.
Age is clearly a factor. Actuarial tables, showing the probability of dying in a given year, would be a sound way to prioritize vaccinations and boosters. We should have a dynamic scheduling/rescheduling system where you can go ahead and schedule a booster (if you're five months from the last one) and if someone else comes along and wants your spot at least 48 hours before your appointment, you get rescheduled. Less than half of American adults have had their first boosters, slightly more than 10% of Americans over 50 have had their 4th shots, tens of millions of doses have gone in the garbage, we know that boosting confers breadth to antibody responses, and yet we are stuck on this idea that we are all supposed to "wait our turn." It's stupid and cruel, and if I'd stuck to the script I would have gotten Covid long ago.
Thank you for sharing the ongoing insight! As a 60plus person, I'm wondering about "staying up to date" on boosters. It seems you've said that 2 boosters are up to date. It's been 5 months since my second booster and I'm planning to travel and be in large populations from airports to concert halls. Is a 3rd booster recommended?
I can't answer your question because I'm not YLE but I can't begin to describe the peace of mind that comes from taking a Labcorp spike antibody test and finding out that I'm >25000 u/mL
what is the Labcorp spike test and what does that result mean?
If my understanding of the literature is correct, it means I'm loaded with antibodies, and thanks to the dark magick of affinity maturation, enough of those antibodies are probably enough to neutralize Omicron and its subvariants with 90% probability.
thanks, guess you're very lucky
I'm lucky that I was in the early wave of vaccinations, and that I wasn't shy about self advocating for boosters.
But that number will keep changing. I got tested 4 wks after the bivalent and was >25k. But 5 months later (this month), the number is 17,709. What does that mean? Nobody really knows.
How many boosters have you had?
Thanks, Katelyn!
I have two questions about boosters for older people. First, do you know, theoretically, how long the second booster (4th shot) lasts? Second, for immunocompromised people who have recently gotten their 5th shot, can they get the new booster when it comes out, or do they have to wait 4 months?
You're the best!
Very good summary. I wonder if data are available for immunocompromised elderly, such chemo patients in their 70s. (Like my wife, who has had to discontinue chemo due to low neutrophils that stubbornly won’t rebound). If data are available, it would be great if you could do a piece focused on this population, who are the ones we most need to protect.
Question for health care professionals: would you write a note getting someone out of, say, work, school or jury duty if they scored low on a spike antibody test?
Although I am now over 65, can I take any comfort in always having excellent immunity, very rarely catching colds and flu, and I haven't been sick at all since before 2019? And how would I find out? It would be so helpful in determining my COVID risk calculation.
You could take repeated spike antibody tests from Labcorp to get a sense of the rate at which your antibodies are waning.
Where would I get such tests, and how much do they cost?