USAID improvements

With Professor Robert Clancy.Uploaded 21-02-25Link to Quadrant, https://quadrant.org.au/news-opinions/uncategorized/after-covid-now-its-the-lawyers-turn/ Monovalent mRNA XBB.1.5 vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 hospitalization in Quebec, Canada: impact of variant replacement and waning protection during 10-month follow-uphttps://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.11.13.24317190v1 Protection Conferred by COVID-19 Vaccination, Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection, or Hybrid Immunity Against Omicron-Associated Severe Outcomes Among Community-Dwelling Adults https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/78/5/1372/7450138 Comparing frequency of booster vaccination to prevent severe COVID-19 by risk group in the United Stateshttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-45549-9 Two-Dose Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Vaccine Effectiveness With Mixed Schedules and Extended Dosing Intervals: Test-Negative Design Studies From British Columbia and Quebec, Canadahttps://academic.oup.com/cid/article/75/11/1980/6570607COVID-19 mRNA VACCINES: THE PROBLEM THAT WON’T GO AWAY.Emeritus Professor Robert Clancy AMThis month we ‘celebrate’ 5 years since the covid pandemic began in Australia. This is the 10th article I have written for Quadrant on covid pandemic management. Prior to the pandemic my 300+ publications had been in peer reviewed medical journals. Most reported research on airway immune protection which has been my passion for 50 years. In 2019 the University of Newcastle awarded me a Doctor of Science for this work (I was informed that this was the first such award given by the University). My point is that in 2020 with the appearance of SARS-CoV-2 (the virus causing Covid-19), entirely by circumstance, I was as well placed as anyone to understand this new airway infection, its pathogenesis and its management. Specifically, the likely place for vaccination in the control of the pandemic. That is what I did. So, why write 10 articles for Quadrant that were critical of the official response to the pandemic? The answer is a simple one. Everything I had understood about the history of pandemics, the science-based development of an Australian Pandemic Plan, the immunology of mucosal (airway) infections, and the sanctity of the doctor-patient relationship, had been summarily replaced with a narrative centred on a genetic vaccine that had never been used in man, and that did not exist. At this stage the medical press that I had worked with for 50 years had been bought by the narrative and would publish nothing that threatened to compromise it. The legacy press (including its ‘experts’) wore ignorance on a grubby sleeve. But these were the prisms through which medical professionals and the public would learn about the pandemic to inform decisions that affected their patient’s, and their own, health.The narrative made no sense to me. It denied historic experience. It was confused with inherent dangers by neglecting what could be done, while failing to anticipate what might happen. The official Australian Pandemic Plan had been updated in 2019 for an anticipated influenza pandemic. This was modified to cover the new SARS-CoV-2 pandemic early in 2020. Experience with influenza was considered an appropriate model for a pandemic involving a corona virus mutant.How did this narrative conflict with the Plan it replaced? First, it ignored the lessons of epidemiology and science. The corollary was the punitive lockdowns and senseless vaccine mandates. Second, it denied the use of safe, cheap and effective repurposed drugs, decisions that contributed to needless loss of life amongst the most vulnerable. Third and at its centre, it distorted views regarding what could be expected as clinical outcomes of a global mRNA vaccination programme, while minimising concerns an untested genetic vaccine may have unexpected adverse event Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Covid antibodies found in stored blood samplesUploaded 04-11-22Milan Institute for Tumour Diseases, Coronavirus antibodies, September, 2019Unexpected detection of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in the prepandemic period in Italy (October 2021)https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33176598/Full text versionhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8529295/Screening and Multiple Intervention on Lung Epidemics (SMILEhttps://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03654105There are no robust data, coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and spread, prepandemic period worldwideWe investigated the presence of SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain (RBD)-specific antibodiesBlood samples of 959 asymptomatic individuals,enrolled in a prospective lung cancer screening trial,between September 2019 and March 2020Plasma samples repositoryResultsSARS-CoV-2 RBD-specific antibodies were detected in,111 of 959 (11.6%) individualsAll the patients were asymptomatic at the time of blood sample collection.Actual timeframeFirst positive test, 3rd SeptemberSeptember 2019 23/162 (14.2%) October 2019 27/166 (16.3%) Second week of February 2020, (more than 30%)By the end of September, Lombardy, Veneto, Piedmont, Emilia Romagna, Liguria, Lazio, Campania, Friuli.Official timeframeEnd of December 2019, coronavirus 2 identified in Wuhan, Hubei Province, ChinaJanuary 30th 2020 Italy’s first two cases, (two tourists from China tested positive in Rome)February 20, 2020 Lombardy, 38-year-old man, no history of travelAuthorsThis study shows an unexpected very early circulation of SARS-CoV-2 among asymptomatic individualsSeveral months before the first patient was identifiedFinding SARS-CoV-2 antibodies in asymptomatic people before the COVID-19 outbreak in Italy may reshape the history of pandemic.Phenomena 1Underestimation of prevalenceSwabs and serology, focused on symptomatic casesTherefore, an underestimation of overall COVID-19 infections(Selection bias)Therefore overestimation of mortality rateMay 25 and July 15 (2020)SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence study, n = 64,660Prevalence rate was 2.5%Approximately 1.5 million, (many of whom were asymptomatic)Estimate almost 5 times higher than official reportsPhenomena 2Onset of the epidemic, likely to have preceded identification of the first caseNovember–December 2019Doctors reporting, severe respiratory symptoms in elderly and frail,with atypical bilateral bronchitis, which was attributed to aggressive forms of seasonal influenzaBased on these findings, a prior unnoticed circulation of the virus among the Italian population could be hypothesized.October 2019 to February 2020https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7428442/Molecular analysis, PCR, 40 wastewater samples Milan/Lombardy, Turin/Piedmont, and Bologna/Emilia Romagna) Presence of viral RNA,December 18th in Milan and TurinSo, in which direction did the virus travel?7th Military World Games第七届世界军人运动会Commonly known as Wuhan 2019October 18–27, 2019 Around 230,000 volunteers9,308 athletes from 109 countries competing in 329 events Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Nearly all youth in England had COVID-19 antibodies by March 2022. Implications for vaccine policies?Uploaded 28-06-22https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19/latestinsights27 June 2022Results from Round 3 (3rd March to 25th March 2022)Schools Infection SurveyAntibodies in secondary school pupilsN = 88499.3% of had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, comprised of 64.9% who were vaccinated,and 34.4% who were unvaccinated. Antibodies in primary school pupilsN = 88482.0% had SARS-CoV-2 antibodies, comprised of 0.4% who were vaccinated,and 81.6% who were unvaccinated.Schools Infection Surveyhttps://www.ons.gov.uk/releases/covid19schoolsinfectionsurveyenglandpupilantibodydatamarch2022https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/methodologies/covid19schoolsinfectionsurvey2021to2022methodsandfurtherinformationThe pupil antibody test used inOral fluid collectionLower sensitivity than blood antibody tests, (estimated at 80.0%) for unvaccinated pupils. Immunoglobulins in oral fluids are at least 1 per 1,000th of bloodPupils were tested forAnti-N (antibodies from natural infection),and anti-S (antibodies from natural infection or vaccination)Comparisons between Round 1, Round 2 and Round 3Round 1 (10th November to 10th December)Primary, 40.1%Secondary, 82.4%Round 2 (10th January to 3rd February)Primary, 62.4%Secondary, 96.6%Round 3, (3rd March to 25th March 2022)Primary, 82%Secondary, 99.3%Antibody testing in Round 3Coronavirus cases in England were increasingOmicron BA.1 variant timesUK infectionshttps://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19/latestinsightsWeek ending 18 June 2022Likely caused by Omicron variants BA.4 and BA.5.1,360,600 (1 in 40 people) in England68,500 (1 in 45 people) in Wales59,900 (1 in 30 people) in Northern Ireland250,700 (1 in 20 people) in ScotlandDeathsCoronavirus, 6th sixth leading cause of death in England and Wales3.3% of deaths in both countriesIn April 2022, COVID-19 was the third leading cause of death. Causes of death, UKhttps://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/monthlymortalityanalysisenglandandwales/february2022Dementia and Alzheimer’sIschaemic heart diseaseCerebrovascular diseaseChronic lower respiratory diseaseCancer, trachea, bronchus, lungInfluenza and pneumoniaIll-defined conditionsCancer, colorectalCancer, lymphoid, haemopoieticDeaths in the UShttps://www.healthline.com/health/leading-causes-of-deathHeart disease, 23.1%Cancer, 21.7%Accidents, (unintentional) 5.9%Chronic lower respiratory diseases, 5.6%Stroke, 5.18%Alzheimer’s 4.23%Diabetes, 2.9%Influenza and pneumonia, 1.88%Kidney disease, 1.8%Suicide, 1.64%Septicemia, 1.42%Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis, 1.39% Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Direct link to parliament TV, https://parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/5e1f14d2-72b3-488f-a53c-fc94fee92dac Uploaded 27-01-24Link to Hansard full transcript, https://hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2024-01-16/debates/152B485D-812D-43CC-9D25-C2B651564810/ExcessDeathTrends?highlight=westminster%20hall#contribution-46059AFE-9A03-472B-9364-0BF972E2E7D8Miriam Cates (Penistone and Stocksbridge) (Con) I will be brief, because it is clear that there is far more demand to speak in the debate than there is time. That shows that we absolutely need a longer debate; we need a debate on the Floor of the House, because it is not just Members present who want to speak, and members of the public have shown enormous interest.I will not go over the excellent points that have been made and the data that has been shared. We know we have a problem in this country with excess deaths, particularly among younger people and particularly from cardiovascular disease. That, in itself, is a huge challenge. We need medical experts and statisticians to address those issues—I am not qualified to do so.What I will say is this: lockdown changed everything. Our response to covid changed everything. Just as we look back on different periods of history—before the war; before the industrial revolution—I believe we will look back at before and after lockdown. Lockdown has changed our economy and how we relate to each other. It has changed our health and our understanding of children’s development.The conditions under which those decisions were made—decisions that were overwhelmingly wrong, in my opinion, although I do not blame any individuals, given the pressure they were under—have not changed. The conditions under which we suspended the precautionary principle, ignored the fact that interventions may cause harm, suspended the importance of children’s education, suspended the safeguarding of children, suspended the need for medical trials and suspended all sorts of safeguards that have stood society in good stead for a long time have not changed.The conditions in Government, the media and wider society under which those decisions were made have not changed because, unfortunately, we have not yet got to the heart of the matter. Why did that pressure come from the media? Why did we have to follow what other countries were doing? Why were we obsessed with particular points of data, such as deaths from covid, rather than considering the wider impact on society?My concern about the covid inquiry is that it is asking all the wrong questions. It is concerned with who swore at whom on WhatsApp, and not the wider conditions under which decisions were made. When, several Education Secretaries ago, the former, former, former Secretary of State for Education, my right hon. Friend the Member for South Staffordshire (Sir Gavin Williamson), stood up in the House of Commons and said that he would close schools, I remember, as a mother, shouting at the television, “Don’t do it! Don’t do it!”. I could see the impact it would have—not just on my own children, but across all the wider components of society. Society is like a big machine; we cannot just take out one part and assume that the rest will continue to operate. We have seen that clearly over the past three years.We must address the reasons why these decisions were made. We cannot do that in three minutes each—we must have a longer debate. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Impact of Delta on viral burden and vaccine effectiveness against new SARS-CoV-2 infections in the UK Uploaded 19-08-21https://www.ndm.ox.ac.uk/covid-19/covid-19-infection-survey/results/new-studieshttps://www.ndm.ox.ac.uk/files/coronavirus/covid-19-infection-survey/finalfinalcombinedve20210816.pdfN = 384,543Households, 221,909Obtaining two vaccine doses remains the most effective way to ensure protection against Delta With Delta, Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines still offer good protection against new infectionsbut effectiveness is reduced compared with AlphaHowever, Delta infections after two vaccine doses had similar peak levels of virus to those in unvaccinated people(with the Alpha variant, peak virus levels in those infected post-vaccination were much lower)Two doses of either vaccine still provided at least the same level of protection as having had COVID-19 through natural infectionPeople who had been vaccinated after already being infected with COVID-19 had even more protection than vaccinated individuals who had not had COVID-19 beforeTwo doses of Pfizer-BioNTech have greater initial effectiveness against new COVID-19 infectionsbut this declines faster compared with two doses of Oxford-AstraZenecaAfter four to five months, effectiveness of these two vaccines similarhowever, long-term effects need to be studiedThe time between doses does not affect effectiveness in preventing new infectionsYounger people have even more protection from vaccination than older peopleUK, third shotshttps://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-58266043Prof Peter OpenshawNew and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group (NERVTAGWe can't just look at the antibody levels and think that that equates to levels of protectionIt still seems that you get a lot of protection from these vaccines, even if the antibody levels have drifted down to some sort of stable level Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices