143
submitted 7 months ago by Posadas@hexbear.net to c/news@hexbear.net
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Teapot@hexbear.net 8 points 7 months ago

This is talking about the population of immunocompromised people, eg, people on immunosuppressants. It is not saying that the entire population of America is immunocompromised

[-] PoisonIvy@lemmygrad.ml 15 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Immunocompromised does not exclusively mean someone on immunosuppressants; I am immunocompromised because I have had an an autoimmune disorder for 20-some years. Generally speaking, if you've had several Covid infections by this point- and I don't know a whole lot of the gen. pop. in the US who has not- you can count yourself in that pool given that we know all variants of it wreck the immune system and stay hanging around to continue wrecking.

[-] JoeByeThen@hexbear.net 10 points 7 months ago

Here's the letter. I don't think I agree. I'd argue there's much less ambiguous language they could have used then.

As you are aware, the supply of JYNNEOS available for distribution through the end of this year is estimated to only be sufficient to immunize half of the individuals at highest risk for monkeypox. In the absence of an adequate supply, we have evaluated the use of alternative vaccines and potential ways to maximize the number of individuals immunized with the available vaccine supply. Use of alternative vaccines was determined to be either impractical or inadvisable at this time.

More specifically, ACAM2000 may not be appropriate now for a potentially immunocompromised population. The local and systemic toxicities of this vaccine may not be considered to be acceptable for the prevention of monkeypox. Consideration was also given to delaying second vaccine doses by 3 to 6 months. However, following careful review of the available animal data with JYNNEOS, and acknowledging the absence of data applicable to this situation, this option was determined to be inadvisable, particularly because it might both be insufficiently protective while at the same time providing individuals with a false sense of reassurance that they were protected against monkeypox when the actual level of protection would be unknown and quite possibly inadequate.

As they did later on when speaking of doses of JYNNEOS.

Yes, this dose is appropriate for individuals who are taking PrEP or PEP. The Fact Sheet for Healthcare Providers Administering Vaccine notes that Immunocompromised persons, including those receiving immunosuppressive therapy, may have a diminished immune response to JYNNEOS.

That, and well, we are all pretty much immunocompromised at this point. Turns out multiple infections of a virus that attacks endothelial cells isn't a good idea.

[-] IceWallowCum@hexbear.net 2 points 7 months ago

I agree with teapot.

the supply of JYNNEOS available for distribution through the end of this year is estimated to only be sufficient to immunize half of the individuals at highest risk for monkeypox

.

More specifically, ACAM2000 may not be appropriate now for a potentially immunocompromised population.

"Population" just means "group of people with this particularity" in epidemiology, not "the american population." Nothing in the text you shared suggests america is immunocompromised

[-] JoeByeThen@hexbear.net 1 points 7 months ago

Regardless of what the letter says, it's a moot point. A year and a half later the general pop of the US is largely immunocompromised. Unless you're living under a rock, it's pretty obvious that we are living through a mass disabling event and humanity is on the path of mass immune dysregulation

this post was submitted on 06 Apr 2024
143 points (99.3% liked)

news

23574 readers
873 users here now

Welcome to c/news! Please read the Hexbear Code of Conduct and remember... we're all comrades here.

Rules:

-- PLEASE KEEP POST TITLES INFORMATIVE --

-- Overly editorialized titles, particularly if they link to opinion pieces, may get your post removed. --

-- All posts must include a link to their source. Screenshots are fine IF you include the link in the post body. --

-- If you are citing a twitter post as news please include not just the twitter.com in your links but also nitter.net (or another Nitter instance). There is also a Firefox extension that can redirect Twitter links to a Nitter instance: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/libredirect/ or archive them as you would any other reactionary source using e.g. https://archive.today . Twitter screenshots still need to be sourced or they will be removed --

-- Mass tagging comm moderators across multiple posts like a broken markov chain bot will result in a comm ban--

-- Repeated consecutive posting of reactionary sources, fake news, misleading / outdated news, false alarms over ghoul deaths, and/or shitposts will result in a comm ban.--

-- Neglecting to use content warnings or NSFW when dealing with disturbing content will be removed until in compliance. Users who are consecutively reported due to failing to use content warnings or NSFW tags when commenting on or posting disturbing content will result in the user being banned. --

-- Using April 1st as an excuse to post fake headlines, like the resurrection of Kissinger while he is still fortunately dead, will result in the poster being thrown in the gamer gulag and be sentenced to play and beat trashy mobile games like 'Raid: Shadow Legends' in order to be rehabilitated back into general society. --

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS