FDA panel votes against COVID-19 booster recommendation

So maybe finally there are a few people in the FDA that are seeing the data and having 2nd doubts about the vaccine all together:

thehill.com...

A federal advisory panel said Friday the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should not approve a third booster dose of Pfizer and BioNTech's COVID-19 vaccine for everyone 16 or older, but indicated they would be open to boosters for older people.

The panel voted overwhelmingly against the recommendation, 16 to 2.

Friday's vote from the FDA's vaccine advisory committee deals a major blow to the Biden administration's plan to administer booster doses beginning Sept. 20.

Lets see what Biden has to say now.

a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

Well he did say he was losing his patience. Maybe he will suffer an aneurysm due to this wrench in his works.

AWWW S### the narrative is crumbling

originally posted by: americanbuffalo1
a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

Well he did say he was losing his patience. Maybe he will suffer an aneurysm due to this wrench in his works.

That would be poetic justice rendered.

a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

I read somewhere else that it was because they want to wait for more data. Your article says that the FDA doesn't have to listen to what the advisory panel says. So, this on it's own doesn't mean they won't be pushing boosters on people.

It's interesting that the FDA all of a sudden has credibility, when clearly to many here, it did not.

I always find it funny that with most here, that when you agree with the ruling/finding/decision, well then we can trust it. Otherwise, they are a bunch of government hacks.

I don't see how you can not trust them, and in a split second, you can.

Do you see how ridiculous that is?

So you are saying you trust the FDA and the info they distribute to the public?

a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

a reply to: tamusan


Need to find out who is actually on that panel.

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
It's interesting that the FDA all of a sudden has credibility, when clearly to many here, it did not.

I always find it funny that with most here, that when you agree with the ruling/finding/decision, well then we can trust it. Otherwise, they are a bunch of government hacks.

I don't see how you can not trust them, and in a split second, you can.

Do you see how ridiculous that is?

So you are saying you trust the FDA and the info they distribute to the public?

a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

LOL Just LOL

a reply to: MiddleInsite

You are something else. Like every member on the site hasn't noticed your behavior here.

Loony

a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

Couldn't find which board they are talking about, but wondering if it is the VRBPAC which they bypassed for the vaccine. Odd that they bypassed it to approve the vaccine but not the booster......

a reply to: MiddleInsite

No Im not saying I trust the FDA. I hope their vaccination plan comes crumbling down. My wife works in the nursing industry and just last week she said they had a big meeting about getting the booster shot and if you didnt you couldnt work there any longer. She got the jab back in January this year and the 2nd part made her sick as a dog. She tried to push it on me for awhile till she got the jab and now said she doesnt hold it against me for not taking it.

Just found it....it was VRBPAC. They didn't allow them to review before approving the vaccine but are allowing them to review the booster?

What a odd thing to do.

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
It's interesting that the FDA all of a sudden has credibility, when clearly to many here, it did not.

I always find it funny that with most here, that when you agree with the ruling/finding/decision, well then we can trust it. Otherwise, they are a bunch of government hacks.

I don't see how you can not trust them, and in a split second, you can.

Do you see how ridiculous that is?

So you are saying you trust the FDA and the info they distribute to the public?

a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

The other posters who think they’re open minded but are really not that replied can be ignored. They believe they’re wiser than the people getting the vaccine but they are ALMOST as equally deluded.

Your question is a good one but most people aren’t saying they’re agreeing with the FDA now, only they’re relieved that there seems to be less rushing into the decision. That things are not a total s**t show because the FDA said they need more data. I am sure they will still push the boosters though.

a reply to: MiddleInsite

Do you see how ridiculous that is?

Trusting any institution at all under this administration is absolute insanity.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

Voting 16 against the recommendation and only 2 for it............those numbers are pretty far apart.

originally posted by: ColoradoTemplar
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Voting 16 against the recommendation and only 2 for it............those numbers are pretty far apart.

Yeah...makes me wonder what the vote would have been had they allowed them review for approval.

My guess is this was the reason for a couple FDA guys to quit....no review process by the oversight committee that was set up for just that reason.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

So this is in play for next week:

www.foxnews.com...

To be clear, the role of the FDA and advisory panel in this case is to determine whether an additional dose can be used, whereas an expert panel advising the CDC (Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, ACIP), will convene Wednesday to weigh who should receive vaccine and when, following the FDA's final review. Top health officials last month said this group would likely include health care workers and nursing home residents who were targeted in the earliest phases of the rollout.

a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

FDA -ADVISORY- panel, meaning it's non binding. Joe gonna do what Joe wants to do

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
It's interesting that the FDA all of a sudden has credibility, when clearly to many here, it did not.

I always find it funny that with most here, that when you agree with the ruling/finding/decision, well then we can trust it. Otherwise, they are a bunch of government hacks.

I don't see how you can not trust them, and in a split second, you can.

Do you see how ridiculous that is?

So you are saying you trust the FDA and the info they distribute to the public?

a reply to: ColoradoTemplar

LOL

Do you realize that it is the FDA that suddenly agrees WITH US?
It is their findings that finally confirm what WE HAVE BEEN SAYING all along.

Derp derpity derp.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
Just found it....it was VRBPAC. They didn't allow them to review before approving the vaccine but are allowing them to review the booster?

What a odd thing to do.

Not necessarily all that odd.

When they approved the vaccines originally under the EUA, both vaccines showed about 95% efficacy, and the COVID death rate among the elderly was 50 times or more than among the young. The benefit/risk ratio was huge for that particular cohort so the decision was easy.

In this case, the actual COVID risk for those 30 and younger is still quite small (although growing because the Delta variant seems to be more virulent for the young) and the young who have already had the vaccine have had it recently (so their immunity has not declined very much). In this case the benefit/risk ratio is not very clear. I’m guessing that’s why they referred this to a group of specialists to make the call.

FWIW, I think they made the right call.