Marie writes:

HI!

 and thank you for all you ALL continue to do.

My daughter is being followed @ Kaiser for her pregnancy. Now in her 3rd trimester, I had her ask about the RSV vaccine and she was told “they are NOT doing anymore due to  finding “Guillain Barre” in those pregnant women getting the RSV vaccine”. Do you have any information on this and can you guide us? 

Thnx again, love your show long term follower from beginning of covid, donator to Parasites w/o Borders

Marie R

Jenn writes:

Hi Vincent and Daniel, 

Love the podcast.  I was wondering what your thoughts were on the safety and efficacy of the live attenuated Chikungunya vaccine.  I’m going to France in a couple of months and I’m trying to weigh the pros and cons, but I don’t trust the data about the prevalence and severity of adverse effects coming out of the CDC or FDA right now (for obvious reasons).

Thanks, 

Jenn

Grant writes:

Hello Dr Griffin, I really enjoyed my first episode of TWiV with you, and of course Dr. Racaniello, last Friday = #1238.  After a Parkinson’s diagnosis in 2016, my knowledge of biology exploded into a new universe?  Who knew there was more than one mitochondria per cell, who knew mitochondria has unique DNA?!!  For years after, I read a lot and tried to spend time reading actual trials and studies so I had a better chance of sorting fact from fiction.  Wow, a lot of Google searches to get the terminology down.  Rarely did I read about viruses.  Then I stumbled across Daniel Beckman’s “X” account and then her images of covid virus inside a monkey’s cerebral artery only 7 days after SarsCOV2 infection.  It happened again, a portal into another universe, that of the virus!  And a universe a lot of the PD community seems to ignore?  I am fascinated and heartened.  If alpha synuclein plaques are the problem, finally a reason for the proteins to go rogue, maybe?  I am also weighed down by what you and colleagues are explaining about the ongoing Covid 19 risk.  The world does not know what you know.  If the algorithm on our phones don’t include the story, it doesn’t exist.  By the way, I am very supportive of the idea that you on-board a veterinarian.  Although agricultural practices can vary be region, the statements made last Friday regarding dairy cows were quite inaccurate and will hurt your credibility with some rural people who don’t want to believe your other messages:

  • Dairy cows can not reach their own udder.  It just is not physically possible.
  • Cows do not steal milk from each other.  Occasionally a yearling may (the occasional “thumb sucker”, so to speak).  Cows don’t generally tolerate / farmer may put a ring in its nose with some barbs that will make the cow jump away, if the yearling tries to suckle.
  • It is very rare to find dairies still set up as stanchion barns.  Generally, cattle are free to wander around a sheltered area or even a pasture area until it is time to milk.  They enter a milking parlour at that time and are secured only then.  Some milk parlours sit on a bearing mounted, large circular concrete disk.  Cows enter one side of the parlour, at a time of their own choosing.  A bar code reader identifies the cow.  It knows when the cow was milked in the past, how much milk it provided, how much feed it was given.  The computer adjusts feed amount provided during this milking, accordingly.  This method maximizes the productivity of the cow while providing the most natural experience.  Just as a cow would provide its calf several feedings a day, she can choose to provide the farmer with several milkings per day.
  • No doubt modern agriculture has adopted a lot of automation, the term “factory farm” will not endear you to that constituency, however.  A lot about agriculture is mis-represented.  I don’t know how many people realize, in Alberta, Canada, at least, the vast majority of our beef cattle are born and raised on the range.  They may spend as little as 3 months in feedlots.  In those situations, often cattle are fed an 80% chopped barley plant or chopped corn plant green feed or sileage diet 20% supplemented with rolled barley grain.  (Corn may be occasionally substituted for barley when the price of the latter gets too high – across the 49th, on your side of the line, the preference is the opposite.)  By the end of the 3 month period, the animals feed regimen will have transition to 80% rolled grain and only 20% green feed.  This marbles up the meat to suit eating preferences.

I have been assisting my brother, during peak seasons, on his grain farm for the last dozen years – I am not an active beef or dairy producer, but have spent time around those operations.  I did confirm the points made above with a dairy farmer friend this morning.  

Perhaps young calves are infected orally and then pass onto the cow udder when suckling?  Dairy cows must calve before they lactate… of course! 

Thanks very much for what you do for us all.  I will continue to “attend” your programming.  It is an amazing thing to have access to the talent and knowledge you both have and share.  It also creates a burden of responsibility for us to attempt to do something good with this knowledge.  Crazy times.

Grant

Red Deer, Alberta, Canada

Alessandro writes:

Dear Dr. Griffin,

With the current administration’s dismantling of the advisory committees of the CDC and FDA, and the unopposed unilateral and unqualified decision making by the HHS secretary to undermine the science-based recommendations of those institutions, there is a great deal of concern surrounding reimbursement by insurers, especially as it relates to vaccines and childhood vaccine schedules.

Medical organizations and influential members of the public health community, such as yourself, that have expressed grave concerns about these exploitations of our Federal health infrastructure need to remind themselves that most insurance, including health insurance, is regulated by the States. As such, organizations such as the American Medical Association, the American Pediatric Society, The American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, and the Infectious Disease Society of America need to lobby State regulators to ensure that science-based vaccine schedules and healthcare protocols sponsored by these organizations continue to be reimbursed by insurers, even if the guidance from CDC, FDA, and HHS suggest otherwise. 

State regulators could require insurers operating in their State to follow the schedules set out by APS, ACOG, and IDSA, ensuring that citizens of their States receive coverage based on scientifically validated standards and not the whims of an unqualified demagogue bent on destroying evidence-based medicine in our country.

Thank you for your efforts in presenting the science behind the medicine to a wider audience in order to get us to a point where we can say everyone is safe.

Alessandro

Alessandro Rosa, Ph.D.

Adjunct Assistant Professor

Hunter College, City University of New York

New York, New York 10065

Volker writes:

Dear Daniel, 

Here’s a quote from the episode with number of your Apple Watch password:

“And remember, these are children. 256. And as we talked about before, over 90% not vaccinated. So these are 90% of these little children could be alive.”

If the unvaccinated 90% could have been saved, that would imply the flu vaccine is 100% effective against death in children. But then, why did the 10% who were vaccinated still die?

I ran the numbers (with ChatGPT’s help). Assuming a vaccination rate of 55% in children and 10% of the deaths occurring among vaccinated children, the vaccine effectiveness against death works out to roughly 91% (using the screening method).

At a 100% vaccination rate, the expected number of deaths would be below 50—so about 80% of the 256 deaths might have been prevented.

That’s still a remarkable effect. And it likely remains so even after considering possible adverse effects and costs—especially when weighed against the medical and societal costs of treating severe influenza in children.

Since you often emphasize sticking to the science, may I suggest phrasing this more precisely to avoid overstating the (wonderful) effectiveness of vaccines? Even if you meant that 90% of the unvaccinated children might have been saved, a clearer wording would help.

Thanks very much—and keep up the great work.

Best regards,

Volker