That’s the opposite of what it says on the CDC’s website:
COVID-19 vaccines available in the United States are effective at protecting people from getting seriously ill, being hospitalized, and dying. As with other vaccine-preventable diseases, you are best protected from COVID-19 when you stay up to date with the recommended vaccinations.
As of September 12, 2023, the 2023–2024 updated Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines were recommended by CDC for use in the United States.
The 2023–2024 updated COVID-19 vaccines more closely targets the XBB lineage of the Omicron variant and could restore protection against severe COVID-19 that may have decreased over time. We anticipate the updated vaccines will be better at fighting currently circulating variants.
I was vaccinated in January, and living with an unvaccinated person who contracted Omicron in February. She was ill for ten days. I did not contract it.
It doesn’t explicitly forbid younger people from getting another dose now after having one last autumn. (I don’t think that’s how the CDC operates.) However, it does give advice, and pharmacies make policy based on that advice. The result is that at least some pharmacies are denying an update dose unless the customer is 65+ or immunocompromised, or didn’t get one last autumn.
I was surprised to learn this, so I checked for myself. The pharmacists I spoke to confirmed it. That was roughly 2-3 weeks ago, so I suppose something might have changed very recently, but I have no reason to think so.
Hm… I wonder if that could have anything to do with last autumn’s doses no longer being effective and the public health officials still not approving another dose for most people under 65.
You then cited a page that stresses the importance of vaccinations for the elderly and immunocompromised. My link is CDC efficacy conformation of Omicron, the current virulent strain, by the vaccine available last fall.
Please, find me a quote on that page that suggests lower efficacy for those under 65. It does not state or suggest an age minimum.
The page I linked was about efficacy of the vaccine against the Omicron variant. That is the vaccine I received, as well as the variant to which I was exposed. It’s absolutely applicable to what you wrote, as I’m under 65 and not immunocompromised.
Pharmacies do not have a right to refuse unless supply is constrained and you are not part of the priority group. You were either duped by the pharmacist, or they were low on supply at the time.
Your information is incorrect, and you should stop spreading it.
Please, find me a quote on that page that suggests lower efficacy for those under 65.
I have no idea how you interpreted what I wrote to mean that.
When I mentioned last autumn’s doses no longer being effective, I was simply referring to the fact that protection from these vaccines drops drastically over time. All the data I’ve seen shows it to be a small fraction of what it once was by the time 6 months have passed. I am not suggesting that this is somehow different for people of a certain age.
Edit: Data from one such study. That one would have been easy for you to find, had you actually tried, since it was circulated by various medical research outlets and reported by Time Magazine: “After six months, the overall effectiveness of the vaccines dropped further to 14%, and to 9% after nine months.”
Pharmacies do not have a right to refuse unless supply is constrained and you are not part of the priority group. You were either duped by the pharmacist, or they were low on supply at the time.
The priority group is age 65+ or immunocompromised, as I have already stated. All the pharmacies I spoke to said that supply was short. As a result, doses are being denied, just as I said.
Regardless, your information is incorrect, and you should stop spreading it.
No, it isn’t, but your combative misinterpretation of my words is tiresome, and you should consider trying to understand rather than looking for a fight and slinging false accusations of misinformation. Goodbye.
Now it’s “data that you’ve seen” not “multiple pharmacists?” Stop spreading misinformation.
I’d gladly entertain a conversation regarding opinions if the topic wasn’t directly misinforming people on public health. This topic is not subjective to opinion. Either back up your claims with credible sources or stop commenting against the direction of the CDC.
Problem is that insurance companies follow requirements, not recommendations. So once the requirements and funding are gone the coverage is removed. Recommendations then take time to be considered for implementation based on if they are going to save the company money. But that needs to be proven to executives with data. And since many states no longer track COVID cases due to political biases and there’s no longer funding to pay for the expensive vaccines or the research to provide that data, and with most large corporation executives being right leaning and the current political right being against vaccines, many are choosing not to cover it, except for people over 65 which is the at risk group. Just like it was always recommended that everyone get the HPV vaccine, but it wasn’t until recently that it was covered for adults. It’s all about cost vs risk since our healthcare system uses an insurance model instead of a public service model.
So, if your insurance will cover it, definitely get it. If not, it’s pretty expensive and the government is no longer picking up the bill. I just had COVID from traveling and that was my first time. Likely mostly because I didn’t have the booster this time.
Good to know. Wish I knew about that month ago. I was told at the time that it wasn’t covered and that’s it. Guess everyone should get it before August.
Pharmacists are overworked and under-supported in the US. The last thing they want is to be troubleshooting insurance coverage while their orders pile up. It’s best to do the research on your own, call the place in advance, and make an appointment.
So, word of mouth? I don’t mean to be argumentative, but as a person who is concerned for their health, I really doubt your “pharmacist friends.” It does sound a bit antivax, don’t you think?
No one is being denied a vaccine. You could get it a dozen times if you want. What sounds antivax is that the vaccine “isn’t working” because “my pharmacist friend” told me.
Some people can’t get it because they don’t have insurance and it is pretty expensive. So a family of four could wind up spending several hundreds of dollars if they can’t afford the vaccine and there is no public support for it, or they don’t know where to get help to pay for it in the United States.
removed by mod
That’s the opposite of what it says on the CDC’s website:
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/stay-up-to-date.html#:~:text=COVID-19 vaccines available in,%2C being hospitalized%2C and dying.
I was vaccinated in January, and living with an unvaccinated person who contracted Omicron in February. She was ill for ten days. I did not contract it.
No, it is not.
Also, that page you linked is from last year. Here is a more recent one that calls out the age minimum:
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2024/s-0228-covid.html
It doesn’t explicitly forbid younger people from getting another dose now after having one last autumn. (I don’t think that’s how the CDC operates.) However, it does give advice, and pharmacies make policy based on that advice. The result is that at least some pharmacies are denying an update dose unless the customer is 65+ or immunocompromised, or didn’t get one last autumn.
I was surprised to learn this, so I checked for myself. The pharmacists I spoke to confirmed it. That was roughly 2-3 weeks ago, so I suppose something might have changed very recently, but I have no reason to think so.
Great! But that has no bearing on what I wrote.
You initially commented:
You then cited a page that stresses the importance of vaccinations for the elderly and immunocompromised. My link is CDC efficacy conformation of Omicron, the current virulent strain, by the vaccine available last fall.
Please, find me a quote on that page that suggests lower efficacy for those under 65. It does not state or suggest an age minimum.
The page I linked was about efficacy of the vaccine against the Omicron variant. That is the vaccine I received, as well as the variant to which I was exposed. It’s absolutely applicable to what you wrote, as I’m under 65 and not immunocompromised.
Pharmacies do not have a right to refuse unless supply is constrained and you are not part of the priority group. You were either duped by the pharmacist, or they were low on supply at the time.
Your information is incorrect, and you should stop spreading it.
I have no idea how you interpreted what I wrote to mean that.
When I mentioned last autumn’s doses no longer being effective, I was simply referring to the fact that protection from these vaccines drops drastically over time. All the data I’ve seen shows it to be a small fraction of what it once was by the time 6 months have passed. I am not suggesting that this is somehow different for people of a certain age.
Edit: Data from one such study. That one would have been easy for you to find, had you actually tried, since it was circulated by various medical research outlets and reported by Time Magazine: “After six months, the overall effectiveness of the vaccines dropped further to 14%, and to 9% after nine months.”
The priority group is age 65+ or immunocompromised, as I have already stated. All the pharmacies I spoke to said that supply was short. As a result, doses are being denied, just as I said.
No, it isn’t, but your combative misinterpretation of my words is tiresome, and you should consider trying to understand rather than looking for a fight and slinging false accusations of misinformation. Goodbye.
Now it’s “data that you’ve seen” not “multiple pharmacists?” Stop spreading misinformation.
I’d gladly entertain a conversation regarding opinions if the topic wasn’t directly misinforming people on public health. This topic is not subjective to opinion. Either back up your claims with credible sources or stop commenting against the direction of the CDC.
Problem is that insurance companies follow requirements, not recommendations. So once the requirements and funding are gone the coverage is removed. Recommendations then take time to be considered for implementation based on if they are going to save the company money. But that needs to be proven to executives with data. And since many states no longer track COVID cases due to political biases and there’s no longer funding to pay for the expensive vaccines or the research to provide that data, and with most large corporation executives being right leaning and the current political right being against vaccines, many are choosing not to cover it, except for people over 65 which is the at risk group. Just like it was always recommended that everyone get the HPV vaccine, but it wasn’t until recently that it was covered for adults. It’s all about cost vs risk since our healthcare system uses an insurance model instead of a public service model.
So, if your insurance will cover it, definitely get it. If not, it’s pretty expensive and the government is no longer picking up the bill. I just had COVID from traveling and that was my first time. Likely mostly because I didn’t have the booster this time.
The COVID-19 vaccine is free. If it’s not covered by your health insurance, it’s subsidized by the Federal Bridge Access Program.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/programs/bridge/index.html
Good to know. Wish I knew about that month ago. I was told at the time that it wasn’t covered and that’s it. Guess everyone should get it before August.
Pharmacists are overworked and under-supported in the US. The last thing they want is to be troubleshooting insurance coverage while their orders pile up. It’s best to do the research on your own, call the place in advance, and make an appointment.
Where did you hear that?
Multiple pharmacists, who are following CDC recommendations.
So, word of mouth? I don’t mean to be argumentative, but as a person who is concerned for their health, I really doubt your “pharmacist friends.” It does sound a bit antivax, don’t you think?
Word directly from the mouths of the people in charge of administering vaccines.
No. I don’t know why you would think that people who actively seek a new dose of vaccine (but are denied) are in any way antivax.
No one is being denied a vaccine. You could get it a dozen times if you want. What sounds antivax is that the vaccine “isn’t working” because “my pharmacist friend” told me.
Hard data, not hearsay, please.
deleted by creator
Or, people simply don’t care anymore.
COVID became just another flu for most people, it’s been a big deal three or four years ago, today hardly anyone cares.
The “real” flu is also dangerous and the vaccine is available and has hardly any side effects, yet somehow barely anyone takes it.
Both things can be true.
Some people can’t get it because they don’t have insurance and it is pretty expensive. So a family of four could wind up spending several hundreds of dollars if they can’t afford the vaccine and there is no public support for it, or they don’t know where to get help to pay for it in the United States.
The vaccine is free. If it’s not covered by your health insurance, it’s subsidized by the Federal Bridge Access Program.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/programs/bridge/index.html
I’ve got it free on my insurance, but I have read of stories where people haven’t been able to get vaccinated.
Otherwise the CDC program providing free access ends in August 2024.
deleted by creator