The CDC Foundation is encouraging COVID-19 vaccinations by partnering with arts and cultural organizations.
On Thursdays edition of Closer Look, Judy Monroe, the president and CEO of CDC Foundation, told program host Rose Scott that people need to hear from trusted sources and that the foundation is funding a total of 30 organizations across the country to boost vaccine confidence.
According to the foundations website, Dads Garage Inc., Out of Hand Theater and the University of Georgia are the three Georgia community-based organizations that will receive funding from the foundation.
Monroe further explained that the selected organizations had to submit proposals about how theyd engage and educate their audiences about COVID-19 vaccines.
The visual arts, they really matter in our culture and how we view the world, said Monroe.
More than half the states are pursuing renewed legal challenges against a requirement from the Biden administration for millions of healthcare workers across the U.S. to be vaccinated against COVID-19.
The vaccine requirement for Medicare and Medicaid providers was one of several mandates the administration imposed upon private-sector employers to try to drive up vaccination rates and slow the spread of the coronavirus.
After a Supreme Court ruling allowed it to go forward, the vaccine requirement for health workers was implemented gradually in all states. But opponents are again trying to stop it, arguing among other things that circumstances have changed as cases tied to the Omicron variant have receded.
Two of President Bidens other high-profile orders are on hold. The Supreme Court blocked a separate rule that would have required employers with more than 100 workers to be vaccinated or tested weekly for coronavirus infections. And a lower court has blocked a requirement for employees of federal contractors to be vaccinated.
Newsletter
Get our free Coronavirus Today newsletter
Sign up for the latest news, best stories and what they mean for you, plus answers to your questions.
Enter email address
Sign Me Up
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
Bidens various vaccine orders were challenged in court by Republican-led states, conservative groups and some businesses. The lawsuits argued in part that the mandates exceeded federal executive powers and infringed on states rights to regulate public health matters.
About 69% of the U.S. population age 5 and older is fully vaccinated against COVID-19.
Heres an overview of the Biden vaccine mandates that affect the private sector and the status of the legal fights over them.
What it would do: Under a rule published Nov. 5 by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid (CMS), a wide range of healthcare providers that receive federal Medicare or Medicaid funding are to require their workers to be vaccinated. The rule affects doctors, nurses, aides, technicians and even volunteers at hospitals, nursing homes, outpatient surgery centers, home health providers and other medical facilities. It allows exemptions for medical and religious reasons.
The CDC says the requirement covers 10.4 million health care workers at 76,000 facilities.
Who challenged it: The rule was challenged in several lawsuits filed by Republican-led states, mostly in groups. The states argued there were no grounds for an emergency rule, that the CMS had no clear legal authority to issue the mandate and that the rule infringed on states responsibilities.
Where it stands: The Supreme Court on Jan. 13 lifted injunctions that had been issued by lower courts prohibiting enforcement of the healthcare vaccine mandate in about half the states. The CMS subsequently implemented the mandate in several waves.
Health workers were required to have their first dose of the vaccine by Jan. 27 in jurisdictions that had not challenged the mandate in court. The first shot requirement kicked in on Feb. 14 in two dozen other states whose collective lawsuits prompted the Supreme Court decision. The requirement took effect Tuesday in Texas, which had sued separately from the other states.
Sixteen states filed a renewed challenge to the mandate on Feb. 4 in a Louisiana court. They argued that its unconstitutional to include some state government agencies in the requirement and that the mandate is not needed because vaccines have been less effective at stopping the spread of the Omicron variant. A coalition of 10 other states raised similar arguments in filing a renewed lawsuit Wednesday in federal court in Missouri.
Whats next: Guidance documents from the CMS indicate it will initially grant leniency to healthcare providers who are showing progress in vaccinating their employees. But providers that dont eventually have their full staff vaccinated or exempted ultimately could face penalties, including the loss of federal Medicare and Medicaid funding.
What it would do: Under a rule published by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration on Nov. 5, businesses with 100 or more workers were to require employees to be vaccinated. If they were not, employees were to be tested weekly and wear masks while working, with exceptions for those who work alone or mostly outdoors. The requirement would have applied to businesses with a combined 84 million employees, and OSHA projected it could save 6,500 lives and prevent 250,000 hospitalizations over six months.
Who challenged it: The requirement was challenged by 27 Republican-led state governments, some conservative and business groups, and some individual businesses. The states mostly filed lawsuits in groups. They argued that the rule exceeded the agencys powers and that it was the job of states, not the federal government, to deal with public health measures.
Where it stands: The Supreme Court on Jan. 13 blocked the vaccine rule from being enforced. It said OSHA exceeded its authority granted under federal law. The agency subsequently withdrew the rule.
Whats next: Businesses do not have to require their employees to be vaccinated as a result of federal policy, though businesses are free to impose their own requirements in some states.
What would it do: Under an executive order issued by Biden on Sept. 9, contractors and subcontractors for the federal government are required to comply with workplace safety guidelines developed by a federal task force. That task force subsequently issued guidelines requiring that new, renewed or extended contracts include a clause requiring employees to be fully vaccinated. There are limited exceptions for medical or religions reasons. The requirements could apply to millions of employees.
Who challenged it: The guidelines have been challenged in more than a dozen lawsuits, including seven brought by Republican-led states or coalitions of states. The arguments are similar to those against other vaccine mandates, asserting the Biden administration exceeded the procurement rule making powers granted by Congress, infringed on states responsibilities and didnt properly gather public comment.
Where it stands: The rule is on hold. A federal judge in Georgia issued a ruling Dec. 7 prohibiting enforcement of the requirement for contractors nationally. The nationwide injunction is in addition to rulings by other courts that blocked the requirement only in particular states that sued.
Whats next: The nationwide injunction is on appeal to the Atlanta-based U.S. 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. That court has declined a request by the federal government for expedited consideration of the case.
On January 20, 2022, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security updated its travel advisory to require all foreign national travelers (except U.S. permanent residents) to present proof of COVID-19 vaccination when seeking entry to the United States via land ports of entry and ferry terminals. The new guidance expands upon already existing COVID-19 travel requirements and establishes similar COVID-19 vaccination requirements for non-U.S. travelers seeking entry to the United States by both air and land.
Vaccination Requirements: Air and Land
With limited exceptions, all foreign nationals (except U.S. permanent residents) are now required to be fully vaccinated to travel to the United States by air, land, or ferry points of entry. Travelers are required to provide proof of vaccination for entry. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Preventions (CDC) guidance, acceptable proof of vaccination includes: (1) a vaccination certificate with QR code or digital pass via smartphone app with QR code; (2) a printout of the COVID-19 vaccination record or certificate; or (3) digital photos of the travelers vaccination card, record, or certificate. Travelers seeking entry must also attest to their COVID-19 vaccination status. Air travelers are further required to complete a passenger attestation form.
Testing Requirements: Air
All passengers traveling to the United States by air are required to present proof of a negative COVID-19 viral test. The CDC recommends that this test be taken no more than one day prior to air travel to the United States, regardless of vaccination status. An individual who has recently recovered from COVID-19 may present a positive COVID-19 viral test result from not more than ninety days before his or her flights departure, as well as a letter issued by a licensed healthcare provider documenting recovery from COVID-19. Children under two years of age are not required to submit COVID-19 viral test results.
Travelers seeking entry to the United States by land or ferry ports of entry are not required to present proof of negative COVID-19 tests or documentation of recovery.
Vaccination Exceptions
Current guidance includes limited exceptions for unvaccinated nonimmigrant visa holders seeking entry to the United States by air, land, rail, or ferry points of entry. These exceptions include, but are not limited to the following individuals:
The CDC provides a complete list of vaccine exceptions.
Key Information About the Medical Contraindication Exemption
An individual with a medical contraindication to the COVID-19 vaccine may be granted an exemption that allows travel to the United States by air or land if he or she can present a signed letter from a licensed physician that documents a medical contraindication to receiving a COVID-19 vaccine.
What is a medical contraindication?
The National Library of Medicine defines contraindication as a specific situation in which a drug, procedure, or surgery should not be used because it may be harmful to the person.
Documentation requirements to request a medical contraindication exemption
An individual seeking a medical contraindication must obtain a letter from a licensed physician. The letter must:
Important Reminders
Travelers may want to note that:
Despite overwhelming scientific evidence showing that COVID-19 vaccines are a safe and effective means to prevent severe cases of a disease that has killed nearly one million people in the U.S., there has been a proliferation of false and misleading claims trying to undermine the publics confidence in their safety and uptake.
Stanford scholar Rene DiResta is the author of a new report looking how to stop the online spread of mis- and disinformation related to the COVID-19 vaccine. (Image credit: Andrew Brodhead)
As the pandemic continues to be an ongoing health emergency with new variants rapidly spreading, it is increasingly urgent that accurate vaccine-related information be accessible and readily available to the public, said Stanford scholar and leading expert on mis- and disinformation, Rene DiResta.
Throughout 2021 and into the present, DiRestas team at the Stanford Internet Observatory (SIO) has been working hard to detect and disrupt mis- and disinformation related to the COVID-19 vaccines in real-time as part of her work leading the Virality Project, a multi-year effort between SIO and five other research groups. Their collaboration has culminated in a new report, Memes, Magnets and Microchips: Narrative dynamics around COVID-19 vaccines, that offers specific recommendations for how public health officials, social media platforms and other academic institutions can counter and curb the spread of false or misleading information that has a potential negative impact on individual or public health.
There are very real-world impacts to vaccine hesitancy at this moment in time, said DiResta, the technical research manager at SIO. Myths, rumors and disinformation contribute to vaccine hesitancy, and thinking about our information environment is part of understanding the public health quandary that we find ourselves in.
The Virality Project grew out of prior research DiResta was involved with at SIO and the University of Washingtons Center for an Informed Public (UW), as well as Graphika, a social network analysis firm, and the Atlantic Councils Digital Forensics Research Lab during the 2020 U.S. election to address electoral-related mis- and disinformation.
When mis- and information about vaccination started going viral at the start of the coronavirus pandemic long before a vaccine against COVID-19 had even been developed or approved the team reassembled (and added new members NYU Tandon and the National Conference on Citizenship) to apply what they learned during the 2020 U.S. election to the COVID-19 crisis that was unfolding all around them. The team also wanted to better understand what makes anti-vaccination rhetoric, which has existed as long as vaccines themselves, distinct from other forms of mis- and disinformation, which DiResta started tracking when she co-founded Vaccinate California in 2015, a parent advocacy group working to improve public health in California by raising vaccination rates.
Since the spring of 2020, the Virality Project has investigated some 900 incidents across major social media platforms in the U.S., including Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Reddit and TikTok, as well as newer online spaces such as Gab, Parler, Telegram and Gettr. In addition, posts in Spanish and Mandarin Chinese the two most spoken languages in the United States after English were also analyzed by language specialists.
Public health organizations and social media platforms have been trying to tackle the problem of anti-vaccine activism and hesitancy long before the coronavirus pandemic. Indeed, vaccine misinformation can be traced back to when vaccines were first developed, DiResta explained.
Shortly after Edward Jenner created the vaccine in 1796 to protect people against smallpox, opposition to this new life-saving technology proliferated. Its derivation from cowpox captured peoples imagination: Wild imagery circulated in pamphlets of inoculated women growing horns and birthing calves, for example.
Some 200 years later, anti-vaccination fears coalesced in the late 1990s after Andrew Wakefield published a now-retracted, notorious study in The Lancet that fraudulently connected the MMR jab to autism. While there has since been plenty of research debunking the claim and Wakefield has had his medical credentials pulled, trepidation about vaccination persists.
Today, online communities foment fears by offering digital spaces for mis- and disinformation to flourish in largely echo chambers where anti-vaccination activists, unrestrained by editorial gatekeepers, have been able to broadcast their claims, unchecked. Despite social media platforms developing policies against vaccine-related mis- and disinformation, anti-vaccination activists have become savvy at avoiding accountability for the misleading and pseudoscientific claims they spout.
Thus, when conversations about a potential COVID-19 vaccine emerged, anti-vax groups were already positioned to insert their own ideology into the media landscape, DiResta and her team explain.
The Virality Project has convened over 30 weekly briefings, provided in-depth policy analysis and issued Rapid Response reports that examined overarching trends and tactics used within the anti-vaccination community and its influential supporters on how to stop rumors and lies from spreading even further.
In Memes, Magnets and Microchips, the researchers break down what theyve learned from their various narrative tracking efforts. For example, they detail the various ploys online influencers use to undermine health experts, like how they sow doubt by asking their followers to do their own research on already well-established scientific facts, or by highlighting incredibly rare events or miscasting statistics to give the impression such occurrences are more common and harmful than they actually are.
Theyre framed as if large numbers of people are being injured by the vaccines. And thats not true: far, far greater numbers of people are dying from COVID, said DiResta. For example, anti-vaccination influencers, like Robert F. Kennedy, Jr and Joseph Mercola, have cherry-picked unverified reports from the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), the public health database where people self-report adverse side effects from vaccination, in a way that misrepresents vaccine safety.
For people who dont spend all their time looking up or understanding how vaccine trials or vaccine adverse event reporting systems work, these statistics and numbers can be very scary, said DiResta.
In an information-saturated world, it can be hard for people to distinguish between established facts and speculation. This was especially true in the early days of the pandemic, when there was so much uncertainty about how to respond to this new, emerging disease. For example, there was even a brief debate about whether face coverings were an effective strategy to curb community transmission of COVID-19. At first, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) said people didnt need to wear masks. They didnt change their stance about masking until early April 2020, and by that point, they already faced the challenge of countering a vast amount of misinformation, including their own inaccurate messaging, DiResta pointed out.
Slow responses like this have led the public distrust of public health officials, said DiResta.
Even people who have not taken the vaccine are not necessarily anti-vaccine. Many of them are hesitant, she said. They dont know who to trust or what to believe. Understanding how information reaches them, what sources they trust and continue to share along, is important for understanding how to address false and misleading claims on social media in the long term.
Adding further to the issue has been a growing partisan divide about the countrys handling of the pandemic. The anti-vaccination community and other influential proponents, including conservative news broadcasters, took advantage of this chaotic, politicized news environment to further undermine the publics confidence in authoritative sources.
Memes, Magnets and Microchips provides tailored recommendations that the academic research community, social media platforms and public health officials can follow to mitigate the deleterious effects of mis- and disinformation.
Go to the web site to view the video.
Stanford Cyber Policy Center
The Stanford Cyber Policy Center hosted U.S. Surgeon General Vivek H. Murthy for a conversation about confronting health misinformation.
Overall, there are three things that must happen, DiResta said.
One is finding a trustworthy messenger to deliver accurate information to people still hesitant about the vaccines. The messenger is very, very important particularly at a time when people have lost a lot of confidence in the government and traditional authorities, she said.
That person could be someone from within their own community with similar lived experiences and background, and therefore better able to connect on a deeper, personal level. This is particularly important in underserved or marginalized communities. For example, when the Stanford Cyber Policy Center and the Virality Project hosted Surgeon General Vivek H. Murthy for a panel discussion about vaccine misinformation, one of the panelists, Katrina Rudolph, who runs a hair salon in a predominantly Black community, shared how she uses her role as a local hairdresser to talk supportively with her clients, colleagues and friends about how they can arrive at informed decisions about their health, like seeking information about the vaccine from their healthcare provider and not what they see on social media.
It is also important that people combatting mis- and disinformation have a clear understanding of what exactly is spreading across social media whether it is specific allegations or an emotional resonance point so that they can respond in a way that directly addresses specific concerns a vaccine-hesitant person may have. Just saying the vaccines are safe and here are the stats is not enough, said DiResta. It doesnt address the root concern that people have.
Finally, the format of the message is important too particularly one that will lend itself to a social media environment. For example, releasing a PDF or holding a press conference that details scientific information in a cold and matter-of-fact way might not be a suitable medium for a chatty, digital world. DiResta suggests communities get creative with how they promote their messages, like coming up with a clever meme or TikTok video, for example. An effective example of this was the #ThisIsOurShot grassroots campaign, which involved frontline healthcare workers who are considered to be some of the most trusted sources of health information sharing their own personal experiences getting vaccinated on social media.
Ultimately, given the dynamic nature of social media and the divisive political environment, the scholars say members from across society, including government, academia, civil society, individual citizens and industry, must be united in addressing dis- and misinformation in real-time.
The fight against misinformation is only beginning, the authors of the Memes, Magnets and Microchips conclude. The collective effort must continue.
Executive editors of the report are Rene DiResta, Elena Cryst and Lily Meyersohn, all affiliated with Stanford University.
Stanford staff contributing to the report include: Carly Miller.
Stanford students that also helped on the report include: Toni Friedman, Zoe Huczok, Lindsay Hurley, Chase Small, Abigail Tarquino and Julia Thompson.
Other contributors from outside Stanford are: Taylor Agajanian, Julienne Ching, Osiris Cruz-Antonio, Kaitlyn Dowling, Laura Edelson, Kris Fortmann, Cameron Hickey, Alyssa Kann, Kolina Koltai, Kathy Liu, Rachel Moran, Kyle Weiss, Matt Masterson, Erin McAwee, Lily Meyersohn, Carly Miller, Rachel Moran, Chase Small, Abigail Tarquino, Julia Thompson and Kyle Weiss.
Healthcare companies that came up with effective Covid-19 vaccines, treatments and tests are seeing a huge financial payoff and are starting to spend their cash, while grappling with questions about whether the growth is sustainable.
Companies including Pfizer Inc. and Moderna Inc. so far have reported at least $79 billion in combined global sales of Covid-19 vaccines and treatments for 2021, according to a Wall Street Journal review of recent earnings reports. Diagnostic sales also have been strong for companies including Abbott Laboratories , which had $7.7 billion in Covid-19 test sales last year.
Nearly 1 in 3 Wisconsin residents have received a COVID-19 vaccine booster dose; state reports fewer than 600 patients in hospitals Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
2022-02-25
It has now been 62 weeks since the first shipments of the COVID-19 vaccine were sent out to states, kicking off the largest vaccination campaign in human history. As of February 24, 688,186,745 doses of the vaccine have been sent out across the country equivalent to 209.7% of the U.S. population.
While the initial distribution of the vaccine took longer than federal projections had indicated, in recent months the U.S. has made great leaps in the worldwide race to administer vaccinations and some states are faring far better than others. Under the current system, led by the White House COVID-19 Response Team, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sends states limited shipments of the vaccine as well as funding and tasks them with distributing the vaccine in accordance with relatively loose federal guidelines.
Each state has developed its own rollout plan, prioritizing different age groups and classes of essential workers. The mix of policies and logistical challenges across the country has led to wide variations across states in both the percentage of vaccines that have been administered and the percentage of the population that has been vaccinated.
In Wisconsin, 89.1% of allocated vaccines have been administered to residents as of February 24, greater than the national average of 80.2% and the largest share of all states.
The administered doses amount to 169.1% of the state population, in line with the 168.1% national figure and the 21st largest share of all states.
While a majority of Americans remain unvaccinated due to a lack of supply, there are some who have no plans to receive a vaccine at all. According to a survey from the U.S. Census Bureau, 64.4% of U.S. adults 18 and over who have not yet received the vaccine will either probably not or definitely not get a COVID-19 vaccine in the future. In Wisconsin, 74.8% of adults who have not yet received the vaccine report that they will probably not or definitely not get a vaccine in the future, the 10th largest share of any state. The most common reason cited for not wanting a vaccine is being concerned about possible side effects. Other commonly cited reasons include not trusting COVID-19 vaccines, believing they don't need a vaccine, and not trusting the government.
To determine how states are doing with the vaccine rollout, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. States were ranked based on the number of vaccines administered within a state as a percentage of the number of vaccines distributed to that state by the federal government as of February 24. Data on confirmed COVID-19 cases as of February 24 came from various state and local health departments and were adjusted for population using data from the U.S. Census Bureau's 2019 American Community Survey. Data on the percentage of adults who probably or definitely will not get a COVID-19 vaccine and their reasons for not getting one came from the Census Bureau's Household Pulse Survey, conducted from December 29, 2021 to January 10, 2022.
In a statement to the Globe, a city spokesperson expressed confidence in Wus legal strategy.
Courts across the country have repeatedly recognized the rights of state and local governments to require full vaccination of public employees. Our appeal will help ensure the City can protect public health moving forward in line with that precedent as we continue negotiating with our labor partners.
Trial Court spokeswoman Jennifer Donahue said that the appeals court was closed because of Fridays snowstorm, meaning any electronically filed, or paper mailed, notice of appeal submitted today or over the weekend would not be processed until Monday.
The order the city is appealing was issued by a single justice of the Appeals Court. The Wu administration had 30 days from Singhs ruling to file notice of appeal, and any appeal would go before a panel of three justices of the Appeals Court for briefing and decision, Donahue said.
In all such appeals, the states highest court, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, may order a case transferred to the SJC for direct appellate review, said Donahue. Some parties can seek to file a petition with the SJC, but that is not the regular avenue of appellate relief, she said in an e-mail.
On Friday, the Boston Police Superior Officers Federation, one of the unions involved in the litigation, said it was disappointed in Wus decision to appeal, saying it reflects a disregard for city workers and for taxpayers by continue to use public monies on outside law firms.
The Federation and our allied public safety unions have made several offers to Mayor Wus advisors to resolve this dispute and she has ignored them, the union said in a statement.
Mayor Wus decision to continue litigating instead of meeting with us at the bargaining table is frustrating, read the unions statement. Our members who have committed themselves to a life of service deserve to be protected, respected, and fairly treated.
Singhs ruling represented a blow to Wus vaccination mandate, and threw the future of such a policy, which has dominated Wus early tenure, into question.
Just weeks into her term, Wu announced in December that she was requiring the citys 19,000-plus workers be vaccinated against COVID-19 to help curb the spread of the virus and protect the public. In her announcement, she said she wanted to do away with a weekly testing option in lieu of vaccines, adding that under her plan, vaccination would be a condition of employment with the city of Boston meaning unvaccinated workers who do not receive an exemption could be fired.
Wus vaccination mandate has received vocal pushback from opponents, with demonstrators protesting outside her Roslindale home and at her public events. But Wus team has credited her proposal with helping raise the vaccination rate among city employees, which has topped 95 percent.
Public health experts widely agree that vaccination against COVID-19 is more effective at curbing the diseases spread than testing alone, which provides only a snapshot in time of whether an individual is infected.
The unions have accused Wu of ignoring previous collective bargaining agreements they reached with the city last year. They say it is wrong for the mayor to make vaccination a condition of employment with the city.
Singhs order applies to only the trio of unions that brought the litigation against the city the Boston Firefighters Union Local 718, Boston Police Superior Officers Federation, and Boston Police Detectives Benevolent Society and not to other municipal unions.
But in the wake of that decision, not one employee from the citys workforce has been fired for lack of compliance with the vaccination mandate, a Wu spokesman confirmed Thursday. Last week, Wu said her administration was likely to appeal the most recent court ruling regarding the mandate.
The citys court filing came a day after a city council hearing considered the citys pandemic response. Front-and-center in that discussion was the vaccination mandate, with union officials indicating they were waiting for Wus next move.
Currently no policy is being enforced, no testing is happening, said Leah Barrault, an attorney representing Boston Firefighters Union Local 718, at the hearing. Nothing is happening.
Danny McDonald can be reached at daniel.mcdonald@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @Danny__McDonald.
FORT HOOD, Texas- Carl R. Darnall Army Medical Center will move COVID-19
vaccination and testing operations back to the main hospital.
Active-Duty Service members, family members, and retirees age 11 and older can seek
vaccinations for COVID-19 at the Hematology clinic on the second floor of the hospital beginning
February 28th, 8 a.m. 4 p.m. Monday Friday.
Abrams Gym has been the central location for COVID -19 vaccinations on Fort Hood since
early 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic demand for vaccinations and will shut down
Friday, February 25th at 3:30 p.m.
COVID-19 vaccinations for children ages 5 11 are now available at the Pediatric clinic in the hospital on the first floor.
For appointments, please call 254-553-3523. Walk-ins are welcome.
Due to a significant decrease in testing needs, the COVID-19 Testing Site closed Wednesday,
February 23rd.
COVID-19 Testing transitioned back to primary care clinics on Thursday, February 24th.
To book appointments for ages 11 and older vaccinations or testing, log on to www.tricareonline.com or call the
Patient Appointment Line at 254-288-8888. Walk-ins are welcome.
COVID-19 48-hour testing for OCONUS permanent change of station and official travel
is available in the Emergency Department after regular duty hours. For more information, call 254-
288-8114.
-30-
Arriving fashionably late, Novavax is finally ready to rock with its COVID-19 vaccine.
The first doses of the Nuvaxovid vaccine have departed a distribution site in The Netherlands, bound for Austria, France and Germany, the company said on Wednesday. Supplies to other countries in the European Union are soon to follow.
The Novavax COVID-19 vaccine provides a differentiated option to bolster vaccination rates across Europe, Stanley Erck, CEO of Novavax, said in a release.
Unlike the highly successful mRNA shots from Pfizer-BioNTech, Nuvaxovid is a protein-based jab, much like the traditional flu shots that have been around for decades.
Novavax has a deal to provide 100 million shots to the EU and the bloc has an option to order 100 million more. The shot has been authorized for adults in Europe. Novavax said it will file for EU approval in kids ages 12 to 17 this quarter.
RELATED: JPM 2022: How Novavax plans to be a COVID-19 vaccine force in 2022
Getting shots delivered was a long time coming for the Gaithersburg, Md.-based company, which had never developed an approved vaccine.
After it was hailed as a rags-to-riches success for its rapid development of the vaccine, Novavax ran into a series of regulatory and manufacturing stumbles. The company originally projected its shot would be authorized and ready for delivery in the middle of last year.
Now, the company is piling up approvals around the globe, has solidified its production capabilities with its manufacturing partner the Serum Institute of India and is touting its ability to bring a differentiated shot to the market.
Novavax sees its shot filling a need as a primary series, a booster and as a pediatric answer. As a more traditional shot, the company believes it may be more accepted among vaccine holdouts. The shot also could be successful in middle- and low-income countries as it has less stringent cold-storage requirements.
Theres an emerging body of evidencenot only from studies done by others but from our own that we seek to growthat shows we can be used as a booster, Sylvia Taylor, Novavaxs EVP of global corporate affairs and investor relations, told Fierce Pharma last month.
RELATED: Novavax struggling to meet quality standards in COVID-19 vaccine production push: report
Novavaxs shot is one of seven being evaluated in COV-Boost, a mix-and-match trial in the U.K. The vaccine is also part of Com-COV2, another trial exploring the mixing of COVID-19 vaccines and boosters.
Last month, Novavax filed for emergency approval of the vaccine in the U.S.
Analysts at Jefferies believe there's lots of opportunity for Novavax's shot to thrive.
"(It) has high efficacy/immunogenicity and clean safety/tolerability, as well as convenient logistics and a well-validated protein-based technology," analyst Roger Song wrote. "As a result, we believe it could play a meaningful role in the future COVID-19 vaccine market."
