I have to say, because Covid has become so politicized from the very beginning in the US, and with an election this year with so much outside of Covid on the line, I wonder if the decision to not highlight it, talk about it, and especially publicly push for a return to reasonable mitigation is a simple choice being made by the current administration not to risk something that could throw the election.
As a political observer, I understand the decision (if that is, in fact, what’s even happening). But as a person who values her health, I am infuriated at the same time. It is so frustrating to have come to this point in the US where you can’t even talk about returning to masking in congregate indoor settings without kicking off a complete fire storm of disinformation, political risk and denialism.
I guess the question would be, why can’t the current administration kind of quietly invest in picking up the pace on the alternate inhaled vaccines you reference?
Another question would be what happens when these new inhaled vaccines do become available if the uptake on them is not sufficient to do what needs to be done? In other words, if, due to the politicization of Covid generally, only 60% of people take the new vaccines, are we right back where we are today? Or, as I am hoping, will those who take these new inhaled vaccines be able to truly move on without the constant diligence of avoiding infection?
Agree that the administration is avoiding Covid because of its political ramifications, but that's not acceptable. Our leaders need to lay the groundwork for how the virus continues to evolve and what is being done to finally get our arms around it. A far better strategy of confronting it, rather than dodging the problem. Otherwise, your concern for who will take oral/nasal vaccines is well founded.
I agree with all of the above. "Infuriates" just about says it.
If it turns out that the inhalable mucosal vaccines confer a much higher level of protection, perhaps those of us who get them should be able to feel a lot safer and gain some degree of freedom from our isolation, even if the uptake is low. Is this a realistic hope? Currently the only real self-defense option is total isolation and masking, which makes dinner invites difficult. We tried serial testing with house guests and that failed. My wife was infected while our guest was still testing negative. (She seems to have had a total recovery thanks to Paxlovid and repeated vaccinations. I never tested positive, which is a mystery to me.) Better tests would help, hence my interest in RT-LAMP, even if they are pricey.
I’ll have to look up what an RT-lamp is. That’s a new one for me, and I read a lot about this stuff!
As far as I know, I still remain uninfected. And as you hint, that has been through pure diligence. I am really lucky that I have a job that I love that allows me to work remotely. I am not blind to that privilege, you know? Other people don’t have those kind of options. I also never dropped my mask when going into the grocery store or the convenience store or the doctors office. Heck, I even hacked a RediMask to be nose only for a dental cleaning appointment and conditioned myself for several days prior to the appointment to breathe only through my nose. :-)
That said, risk evaluation in every situation is exhausting. I don’t miss dining in restaurants, I don’t miss going to the movie theater with everything that’s available to stream. I do miss not having to think about everything I’m doing before I do it, and I do miss not having to worry about when I occasionally have to go into the company office for some kind of meeting or event. I work in IT, and luckily all of the clients in the territory that my team covers also work remotely, so we take all of our meetings over video conference. But there was always a huge value to walking around a client location and seeing what was on their whiteboard or overhearing conversations. I’d like to be able to do that again without being worried!
Additionally, I’m a musician. I’ve only done one gig indoors since 2019, and that was mid October of last year. I rushed out to get my updated booster at the very beginning of October, as soon as I could, and I built myself a corsi-rosenthal box (four 10 x 10 square HEPA filters arranged vertically with a 10 inch box fan on top and a 10 x 10 piece of cardboard on the bottom to essentially clean the air by blowing cleaned air up into my face) . As a singer, I just cannot do it with a mask on. It affects our sound system, and it affects my breathing with even the most comfortable mask.
I am so hopeful that the mucosal and nasal vaccines are protective of the individual who takes it, and do not rely on some threshold percentage of individuals who have taken it for it to be effective, if that makes sense. Oh and one other thing, anytime I’m in a potential exposure Situation, I use Enovid both before and after the event or meeting or whatever where I may be or possibly have been exposed. I know none of that is 100%, but as my mother would say, it’s better than a sharp stick in the eye. :-) Stay safe out there!
Thanks Rena. RT-LAMP is Reverse Transcriptase Loop AMPlification. It is akin to PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) in that it amplifies the original available template, using a DNA Polymerase enzyme to make copies. If those copies can also be copied then the amplification becomes exponential (2-4-8-16...) I will leave the details to Dr Topol (are you paying attention Dr Topol?) I did thousands and thousands of PCR reactions in my time as a molecular biology technician and I find the mechanism of RT-LAMP frightfully complex by comparison. It is possible to make this reaction available to the public in kits because unlike PCR, RT-LAMP does not require cycling through temperature cycles. You run them on your kitchen table. PCR has to cycle through three temperatures repeatedly (typically about 35 times) and we use a "thermocycler" which is not an appliance you have in your kitchen. Lucira tests run about $50 each, Metrix are about $25 each. What I want to know is if they are likely to detect the virus before someone becomes contagious. Correct me if I am wrong (Dr Topol?) but I understand that PCR does in fact have this sensitivity. The threshold of detection by Rapid Antigen Tests (RATs) and the threshold of transmission seem to be very close (Dr Topol- your opinion?). I suspect we got 'caught' because the latest variants are contagious at a lower level of virus exposure. Just a hypothesis. So maybe a more sensitive test with a multiple testing regime would help. Not practical for everyday use but for the rare occasion it might be worth the money. I am hoping our Good Professor will weigh in on this. ((:
Thank you once again for so clearly explaining what we are facing. I would appreciate additional illumination of the risks of repeated infections, even if mild, with regard to long covid. It might convince some people to be less casual in taking precautions.
When I spotted your article in the LA Times, I hoped you might elucidate further here, and lo, you have! Thank you so much. I have questions on the wastewater data that have been puzzling me for some time, and wonder whether you might have a thought on this. That is, it appears that there have been no reports of wastewater data from NYC to the CDC for several weeks, and even the latest reports from NYC to NYS appear to be from December 12. This gives rise to the following questions:
First, on the CDC site, the NE region appears to be trending down, but as NYC data is not included, would that not skew the data, render the trend line unreliable, and likely underestimate the level of risk?
Second, and I realize this is likely not within your scope, particularly as you are in CA, but if you are aware of any way to obtain an explanation on why NYC is not submitting data to CDC, or apparently even collecting it post 12/12/23, that would be most welcome. (I have asked pertinent public officials and also sent an email to the CDC address given on the wastewater site, to no avail.)
Third, for those of us who are older and at higher risk (though recognizing that those of us who are fully vaxed are not at as high a risk as others in our cohort), isn’t the least we should be able to expect from the CDC is accurate, clear information including setting forth with as much clarity as possible problems with the wastewater data, particularly potential underestimates of risk, related to issues like those I note here, so that we can make the best judgments possible about our own personal risk?
Hard to know what is going on with the NYC wastewater data (and other data) and what you've pointed out is of concern. I wasn't aware of this issue until reading your post and wish I knew more for what is behind it.
I am very disappointed in how the CDC handled the JN.1 wave for which we were forewarned many months ago, but there was so little to aggressively get people especially the vulnerable, in prep and boosted mode.
Hi, Dr. Topol: please don’t feel the need to respond on this, just FYI: while this is way out of my pay grade re reading charts and stats, if I understand the CDC notes correctly, the CDC trend lines go back only 15 days. NYC is well out of that window (latest data still are currently 12/12/23), so this would seem to mean the NYC data are always too late to be picked up in the 15 day timeline, and therefore are always left out of the NE trendline calculation, too.
If this is correct, it suggests a couple things: 1) NYC needs to become more up to date 2) CDC needs to better note this problem, and also, why not give a longer trendline, so older submissions can be picked up?
As an example of the effect of using a longer trendline, there is an online magazine in NYC, The City, that is pulling data from NYC samples and includes a 90 day trend line, which as of 12/12/23 was going straight up. Also, this is what the site shows from 12/12 data as compared with a week earlier:
1,306 ↑34%
patients hospitalized with COVID
↑372%
rise in COVID levels found in wastewater
Given that, to not have more current data, particularly over the holidays, is nothing short of irresponsible, IMO.
Same issue down here in Northern Virginia. I don’t go through the CDC website, because the Virginia Department of health has its own website to report wastewater surveillance data. Yet it has always been at Best two weeks in arrears. Right now, they are showing wastewater surveillance data posted on December 17 for the week of December 9 through December 16, 20 days from the date we are currently experiencing, January 6.
I know that when the Covid emergency officially ended in May 2023, states, counties in municipalities were relieved of reporting a whole bunch of stuff as it related to Covid. But I’ve always thought the CDC wastewater surveillance network reported on all kinds of things Regardless of what is or is not required?
But I share your concern as well. Partial data is not reliable data upon which to trend and draw predictive conclusions. And if the data set is incomplete, that should be clearly highlighted and the potential impact on the reliability of the results that are present should be clearly called out.
I wonder if I will live long enough to see something like a Harvard business review study on all the things that have been misled from the start of the pandemic right up until present day?
Thanks, Rena. Your observation here is so well stated: “Partial data is not reliable data upon which to trend and draw predictive conclusions. And if the data set is incomplete, that should be clearly highlighted and the potential impact on the reliability of the results that are present should be clearly called out.” (NYS, btw, has its own website, too, and for NYC, the last reported data is from 12/12. In other parts of the state, from the small sample I checked, while the latest date vary county to county, mostly they are from late December, so I think consistent with what you’re seeing in VA. It seems here that the entirety of NYC has just gone dark, as if no wastewater samples have been collected since 12/12, so we are really flying blind. Also, since NYC is so large, I have to think this skews the trendline for the NE region, too.)
Your voice on Covid is important. Vax and relaxed friends who generally minimize Covid sat up and took notice of your opinion piece in the LA times. Please continue to post on X and Substack information about Covid.
Thank you for your work. Actual useful information is still coming in from Dr. Osterholm, Katelyn Jetelina and yourself. Casual conversations with people about conditions lead me to believe that an inhalable vaccine would be much more popular. I will try writing my electeds again and hope they listen in this election year.
Thanks for the update, as always. My thoughts about why we’re where we are:
“it’s inevitable. Everyone will get Covid eventually, so why bother with masks and other measures?” Although it’s practically impossible to permanently avoid Covid, that doesn’t mean limiting the number of infections, which carry short- and long-term risks, isn’t worth it. I finally got Covid for the first time despite being extremely careful, but I’m not about to let my guard down. Unfortunately, the number of people masking in congregate settings is minimal, and see little to no messaging about this.
“Covid is no worse than a cold. It goes away after a few days.” To some extent, the term “tested positive” contributes to this, as it minimizes Covid’s significance. This seems to be unique in the realm of infectious disease. How often do you hear someone saying they tested positive for, say, bacterial pneumonia, TB, or influenza? Sadly, this attitude also ignores the continued loss of life, including people who are suffering and dying from the effects of long Covid.
“Vaccination is harmful.” Anti-vaxxers like RFK, Jr. are bad enough, but statements about mRNA vaccines from Florida Surgeon General Ladapo may be even worse, since they come from the government. As best as I can tell, Ladapo is grossly misstating the facts, and his stance has been denounced by experts, which he is not. But he will be listened to.
“We have bigger problems to deal with.” The world is indeed facing many significant issues, but as you noted, that we haven’t had to deal with a much more potent strain of SARS-CoV-2 is largely a matter of luck. Will it take a return to the early days of the pandemic, when hospitals were overrun and refrigerated trucks were needed for bodies, to get everyone’s attention?
Thank you so much, Dr. Topol. As a long hauler with an immunocompromised husband, it can feel so isolating to be someone continuing to speak up. I shared your post with our school administrator here in San Diego imploring them to ask families to test to return to school, encourage masking, and to improve IAQ. No luck. We built CR boxes for every classroom in August and it was a fight. Reading the facts help me feel less alone.
I appreciate your voice and I'm grateful to be a subscriber. Thank you for all of your hard work; I point people to your writing often, and they're always grateful. You are awesome. :)
Dr. Topol, I still haven't had Covid and neither has my husband, but I think we're the only ones! He's on an immune suppressing drug, so we've always been careful, and have always been vaccinated whenever it was recommended. I think it's been six so far, but I've lost track. So you can see I'm by no means anti-vaxx, but I did read a comment to a Medpage article recently by an MD that caused me to do some research on Pubmed. I found the article below in the Journal "Vaccines" that suggested that repeated mRNA vaccinations may lead to increased IgG4 antibodies, which could lead to tolerance to the spike protein, autoimmune disease and possibly cancer in susceptible individuals. I'm wondering if we should switch to an adenovirus based vaccine? Given today's political polarization, I fear that any negative information about vaccines might get "canceled." I hope to hear what you think on the topic in a future post.
I have to say, because Covid has become so politicized from the very beginning in the US, and with an election this year with so much outside of Covid on the line, I wonder if the decision to not highlight it, talk about it, and especially publicly push for a return to reasonable mitigation is a simple choice being made by the current administration not to risk something that could throw the election.
As a political observer, I understand the decision (if that is, in fact, what’s even happening). But as a person who values her health, I am infuriated at the same time. It is so frustrating to have come to this point in the US where you can’t even talk about returning to masking in congregate indoor settings without kicking off a complete fire storm of disinformation, political risk and denialism.
I guess the question would be, why can’t the current administration kind of quietly invest in picking up the pace on the alternate inhaled vaccines you reference?
Another question would be what happens when these new inhaled vaccines do become available if the uptake on them is not sufficient to do what needs to be done? In other words, if, due to the politicization of Covid generally, only 60% of people take the new vaccines, are we right back where we are today? Or, as I am hoping, will those who take these new inhaled vaccines be able to truly move on without the constant diligence of avoiding infection?
Agree that the administration is avoiding Covid because of its political ramifications, but that's not acceptable. Our leaders need to lay the groundwork for how the virus continues to evolve and what is being done to finally get our arms around it. A far better strategy of confronting it, rather than dodging the problem. Otherwise, your concern for who will take oral/nasal vaccines is well founded.
I agree with all of the above. "Infuriates" just about says it.
If it turns out that the inhalable mucosal vaccines confer a much higher level of protection, perhaps those of us who get them should be able to feel a lot safer and gain some degree of freedom from our isolation, even if the uptake is low. Is this a realistic hope? Currently the only real self-defense option is total isolation and masking, which makes dinner invites difficult. We tried serial testing with house guests and that failed. My wife was infected while our guest was still testing negative. (She seems to have had a total recovery thanks to Paxlovid and repeated vaccinations. I never tested positive, which is a mystery to me.) Better tests would help, hence my interest in RT-LAMP, even if they are pricey.
I’ll have to look up what an RT-lamp is. That’s a new one for me, and I read a lot about this stuff!
As far as I know, I still remain uninfected. And as you hint, that has been through pure diligence. I am really lucky that I have a job that I love that allows me to work remotely. I am not blind to that privilege, you know? Other people don’t have those kind of options. I also never dropped my mask when going into the grocery store or the convenience store or the doctors office. Heck, I even hacked a RediMask to be nose only for a dental cleaning appointment and conditioned myself for several days prior to the appointment to breathe only through my nose. :-)
That said, risk evaluation in every situation is exhausting. I don’t miss dining in restaurants, I don’t miss going to the movie theater with everything that’s available to stream. I do miss not having to think about everything I’m doing before I do it, and I do miss not having to worry about when I occasionally have to go into the company office for some kind of meeting or event. I work in IT, and luckily all of the clients in the territory that my team covers also work remotely, so we take all of our meetings over video conference. But there was always a huge value to walking around a client location and seeing what was on their whiteboard or overhearing conversations. I’d like to be able to do that again without being worried!
Additionally, I’m a musician. I’ve only done one gig indoors since 2019, and that was mid October of last year. I rushed out to get my updated booster at the very beginning of October, as soon as I could, and I built myself a corsi-rosenthal box (four 10 x 10 square HEPA filters arranged vertically with a 10 inch box fan on top and a 10 x 10 piece of cardboard on the bottom to essentially clean the air by blowing cleaned air up into my face) . As a singer, I just cannot do it with a mask on. It affects our sound system, and it affects my breathing with even the most comfortable mask.
I am so hopeful that the mucosal and nasal vaccines are protective of the individual who takes it, and do not rely on some threshold percentage of individuals who have taken it for it to be effective, if that makes sense. Oh and one other thing, anytime I’m in a potential exposure Situation, I use Enovid both before and after the event or meeting or whatever where I may be or possibly have been exposed. I know none of that is 100%, but as my mother would say, it’s better than a sharp stick in the eye. :-) Stay safe out there!
Thanks Rena. RT-LAMP is Reverse Transcriptase Loop AMPlification. It is akin to PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) in that it amplifies the original available template, using a DNA Polymerase enzyme to make copies. If those copies can also be copied then the amplification becomes exponential (2-4-8-16...) I will leave the details to Dr Topol (are you paying attention Dr Topol?) I did thousands and thousands of PCR reactions in my time as a molecular biology technician and I find the mechanism of RT-LAMP frightfully complex by comparison. It is possible to make this reaction available to the public in kits because unlike PCR, RT-LAMP does not require cycling through temperature cycles. You run them on your kitchen table. PCR has to cycle through three temperatures repeatedly (typically about 35 times) and we use a "thermocycler" which is not an appliance you have in your kitchen. Lucira tests run about $50 each, Metrix are about $25 each. What I want to know is if they are likely to detect the virus before someone becomes contagious. Correct me if I am wrong (Dr Topol?) but I understand that PCR does in fact have this sensitivity. The threshold of detection by Rapid Antigen Tests (RATs) and the threshold of transmission seem to be very close (Dr Topol- your opinion?). I suspect we got 'caught' because the latest variants are contagious at a lower level of virus exposure. Just a hypothesis. So maybe a more sensitive test with a multiple testing regime would help. Not practical for everyday use but for the rare occasion it might be worth the money. I am hoping our Good Professor will weigh in on this. ((:
Thank you once again for so clearly explaining what we are facing. I would appreciate additional illumination of the risks of repeated infections, even if mild, with regard to long covid. It might convince some people to be less casual in taking precautions.
Thanks, Pamela. I should have added your point as I have in the past that repeat infections are a liability for Long Covid
When I spotted your article in the LA Times, I hoped you might elucidate further here, and lo, you have! Thank you so much. I have questions on the wastewater data that have been puzzling me for some time, and wonder whether you might have a thought on this. That is, it appears that there have been no reports of wastewater data from NYC to the CDC for several weeks, and even the latest reports from NYC to NYS appear to be from December 12. This gives rise to the following questions:
First, on the CDC site, the NE region appears to be trending down, but as NYC data is not included, would that not skew the data, render the trend line unreliable, and likely underestimate the level of risk?
Second, and I realize this is likely not within your scope, particularly as you are in CA, but if you are aware of any way to obtain an explanation on why NYC is not submitting data to CDC, or apparently even collecting it post 12/12/23, that would be most welcome. (I have asked pertinent public officials and also sent an email to the CDC address given on the wastewater site, to no avail.)
Third, for those of us who are older and at higher risk (though recognizing that those of us who are fully vaxed are not at as high a risk as others in our cohort), isn’t the least we should be able to expect from the CDC is accurate, clear information including setting forth with as much clarity as possible problems with the wastewater data, particularly potential underestimates of risk, related to issues like those I note here, so that we can make the best judgments possible about our own personal risk?
Thanks, Susan. Always good to hear from you.
Hard to know what is going on with the NYC wastewater data (and other data) and what you've pointed out is of concern. I wasn't aware of this issue until reading your post and wish I knew more for what is behind it.
I am very disappointed in how the CDC handled the JN.1 wave for which we were forewarned many months ago, but there was so little to aggressively get people especially the vulnerable, in prep and boosted mode.
Hi, Dr. Topol: please don’t feel the need to respond on this, just FYI: while this is way out of my pay grade re reading charts and stats, if I understand the CDC notes correctly, the CDC trend lines go back only 15 days. NYC is well out of that window (latest data still are currently 12/12/23), so this would seem to mean the NYC data are always too late to be picked up in the 15 day timeline, and therefore are always left out of the NE trendline calculation, too.
If this is correct, it suggests a couple things: 1) NYC needs to become more up to date 2) CDC needs to better note this problem, and also, why not give a longer trendline, so older submissions can be picked up?
As an example of the effect of using a longer trendline, there is an online magazine in NYC, The City, that is pulling data from NYC samples and includes a 90 day trend line, which as of 12/12/23 was going straight up. Also, this is what the site shows from 12/12 data as compared with a week earlier:
1,306 ↑34%
patients hospitalized with COVID
↑372%
rise in COVID levels found in wastewater
Given that, to not have more current data, particularly over the holidays, is nothing short of irresponsible, IMO.
https://projects.thecity.nyc/2020_03_covid-19-tracker/
Same issue down here in Northern Virginia. I don’t go through the CDC website, because the Virginia Department of health has its own website to report wastewater surveillance data. Yet it has always been at Best two weeks in arrears. Right now, they are showing wastewater surveillance data posted on December 17 for the week of December 9 through December 16, 20 days from the date we are currently experiencing, January 6.
I know that when the Covid emergency officially ended in May 2023, states, counties in municipalities were relieved of reporting a whole bunch of stuff as it related to Covid. But I’ve always thought the CDC wastewater surveillance network reported on all kinds of things Regardless of what is or is not required?
But I share your concern as well. Partial data is not reliable data upon which to trend and draw predictive conclusions. And if the data set is incomplete, that should be clearly highlighted and the potential impact on the reliability of the results that are present should be clearly called out.
I wonder if I will live long enough to see something like a Harvard business review study on all the things that have been misled from the start of the pandemic right up until present day?
Thanks, Rena. Your observation here is so well stated: “Partial data is not reliable data upon which to trend and draw predictive conclusions. And if the data set is incomplete, that should be clearly highlighted and the potential impact on the reliability of the results that are present should be clearly called out.” (NYS, btw, has its own website, too, and for NYC, the last reported data is from 12/12. In other parts of the state, from the small sample I checked, while the latest date vary county to county, mostly they are from late December, so I think consistent with what you’re seeing in VA. It seems here that the entirety of NYC has just gone dark, as if no wastewater samples have been collected since 12/12, so we are really flying blind. Also, since NYC is so large, I have to think this skews the trendline for the NE region, too.)
Your voice on Covid is important. Vax and relaxed friends who generally minimize Covid sat up and took notice of your opinion piece in the LA times. Please continue to post on X and Substack information about Covid.
Thanks so much for your feedback.
This is fantastic! Bravo, Dr. Topol! And Thanks to you for letting us know.
Thank you for your work. Actual useful information is still coming in from Dr. Osterholm, Katelyn Jetelina and yourself. Casual conversations with people about conditions lead me to believe that an inhalable vaccine would be much more popular. I will try writing my electeds again and hope they listen in this election year.
Thank you.
If we all worked on our elected the chance to get what we need would be enhanced.
Thanks for the update, as always. My thoughts about why we’re where we are:
“it’s inevitable. Everyone will get Covid eventually, so why bother with masks and other measures?” Although it’s practically impossible to permanently avoid Covid, that doesn’t mean limiting the number of infections, which carry short- and long-term risks, isn’t worth it. I finally got Covid for the first time despite being extremely careful, but I’m not about to let my guard down. Unfortunately, the number of people masking in congregate settings is minimal, and see little to no messaging about this.
“Covid is no worse than a cold. It goes away after a few days.” To some extent, the term “tested positive” contributes to this, as it minimizes Covid’s significance. This seems to be unique in the realm of infectious disease. How often do you hear someone saying they tested positive for, say, bacterial pneumonia, TB, or influenza? Sadly, this attitude also ignores the continued loss of life, including people who are suffering and dying from the effects of long Covid.
“Vaccination is harmful.” Anti-vaxxers like RFK, Jr. are bad enough, but statements about mRNA vaccines from Florida Surgeon General Ladapo may be even worse, since they come from the government. As best as I can tell, Ladapo is grossly misstating the facts, and his stance has been denounced by experts, which he is not. But he will be listened to.
“We have bigger problems to deal with.” The world is indeed facing many significant issues, but as you noted, that we haven’t had to deal with a much more potent strain of SARS-CoV-2 is largely a matter of luck. Will it take a return to the early days of the pandemic, when hospitals were overrun and refrigerated trucks were needed for bodies, to get everyone’s attention?
According to this recent report, amongst flu and RSV infections in children, "COVID-19 remains the main driver of hospitalizations."
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/care-coordination/every-hospital-that-does-pediatric-care-is-saturated-hospitals-grapple-with-volume-surges.html
Thank you so much, Dr. Topol. As a long hauler with an immunocompromised husband, it can feel so isolating to be someone continuing to speak up. I shared your post with our school administrator here in San Diego imploring them to ask families to test to return to school, encourage masking, and to improve IAQ. No luck. We built CR boxes for every classroom in August and it was a fight. Reading the facts help me feel less alone.
Thanks Lisa, and very sorry you didn't get support for better protection during this wave.,
I appreciate your voice and I'm grateful to be a subscriber. Thank you for all of your hard work; I point people to your writing often, and they're always grateful. You are awesome. :)
Very grateful!
Dr. Topol, I still haven't had Covid and neither has my husband, but I think we're the only ones! He's on an immune suppressing drug, so we've always been careful, and have always been vaccinated whenever it was recommended. I think it's been six so far, but I've lost track. So you can see I'm by no means anti-vaxx, but I did read a comment to a Medpage article recently by an MD that caused me to do some research on Pubmed. I found the article below in the Journal "Vaccines" that suggested that repeated mRNA vaccinations may lead to increased IgG4 antibodies, which could lead to tolerance to the spike protein, autoimmune disease and possibly cancer in susceptible individuals. I'm wondering if we should switch to an adenovirus based vaccine? Given today's political polarization, I fear that any negative information about vaccines might get "canceled." I hope to hear what you think on the topic in a future post.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10222767/