A second booster for people <50

Biden administration is indifferent to data

WaPo is reporting the Biden administration plans to push a second booster through for healthy people <50; Here is how the European CDC judges the evidence for that claim

ECDC @ECDC_EU

There is no clear evidence to support giving a 2nd booster dose to people <60 years of age not at higher risk of severe disease. Neither is there clear evidence to support giving them to healthcare workers unless they are at high risk. ecdc.europa.eu/en/covid-19 #COVID19

ecdc.europa.euCOVID-19See all information on COVID-19, situation updates, risk assessments, questions and answers, latest evidence, surveillance and laboratory guidance and how to protect yourself and others.

I would have no objection to offering a second booster to people <50 if someone proved to me that giving this shot offered a benefit to recipients or the community.

Unfortunately, when it comes to community benefit, no amount of vaccination is able to stop spread, and the virus will keep circulating, so there is no benefit to others with time.

When it comes to personal benefit, the surgeon general offers these data, but of course they are flawed. People who rush to get the 4th dose are different than those that don’t. There is no assurance that is the 4th dose effect rather than the types of unique individuals who are desperate for it.

Vinay Prasad, MD MPH 🎙️📷 @VPrasadMDMPH

If this effect size were real, then it would be worth discussing But Dr. Adams ignores that people who rush to get 4th dose are different than those who do not rush, so how much is confounding vs. a real effect? The European CDC is not persuaded https://t.co/r3iziQ3BxL

Jerome Adams @JeromeAdamsMD

BA.5 cases already bad, and getting worse. Hospitalizations are increasing. If eligible for a booster (1st or second), please consider getting it ASAP. The data are compelling that doing so matters…👇🏽 https://t.co/SOXsSIkVvt

Moreover, the ECDC rejects this claim, based on other datasets that stratify by age, but all of these analyses are likely too optimisitc. We need randomized data.

Paul Offit says it best in WaPo

Instead, the white house disregards these analyses and pushes this dose. The worry of course is that need to be seen as offering something for political rather than medical reasons. They need to limit cases right at the moment of the midterm elections.

The other concern is that clearly Pfizer has excess product, and this move will help them unload that supply. Are they merely working in Pfizer’s best interest? When the terms end for people like Marks-Walensky-Jha will they end up working for Pfizer? Serving on the board of directors?

The final concern is that they continue to play fast and loose with the FDA’s credibility. They are spending it like monopoly money. Unfortunately, the massive decline in public acceptance of other vaccines, which is in progress, will be, in part, attributable to their actions.

Ironically Biden has done what we feared Trump would. Interfere repeatedly in vaccine authorization, possibly for political rather than public health reasons.