COVID Vaccines Appear Safe and Effective, But Key Questions Remain

By Bernard J. Wolfson, Kaiser Heralth News

The recent rollout of two newly authorized COVID-19 vaccines is a bright ray of hope at the pandemic’s darkest hour.

We now have a path that can lead us to happier times — even as we watch and suffer from the horrible onslaught of new infections, hospitalizations and deaths that mark the end of this regrettable year.

Health care workers and nursing home residents have already begun to get shots in the first phase of the rollout. Vaccinations should start to be available to the general public sometime in the first few months of next year.

The two vaccines — one developed by Pfizer and BioNTech, the other by Moderna — use the same novel genetic approach. Their development in under a year, shattering all records, is a marvel of science. It’s also a cause for concern for millions of Americans who fear the uncertainty of an unknown technology.

The clinical trial data for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines show that when both shots of the dual-injection immunization are taken, three weeks to a month apart, they are about 95% effective — at least at preventing severe COVID illness.

However, “a vaccine that remains in the vial is 0% effective no matter what the data show,” says Dr. Walter Orenstein, a professor of infectious diseases at the Emory University School of Medicine in Atlanta and associate director of the Emory Vaccine Center.

Hence, the imperative of persuading millions of people, across racial, cultural, religious, political and generational lines, to get immunized when a vaccine becomes available to them. A survey published this month showed 45% of respondents are taking a wait-and-see approach to vaccination.

Because the vaccines were developed under duress as the coronavirus exacted its deadly toll, the premium was on speed — “warp speed.” So although the number of people in the COVID-19 trials is as large as or larger than in previous vaccine trials, some key questions won’t be answered until millions more are vaccinated.

For example, we don’t know to what extent the vaccines will keep us from transmitting or contracting the virus. We don’t know whether irreversible side effects might emerge, or who is at higher risk from them. And we don’t know whether we’ll need to get vaccinated every year, every three years, or never again.

Skepticism about the vaccines reside in many quarters, including among African Americans, many of whom have a long-standing mistrust of the medical world; the vocal “anti-vaxxers”; and people of all stripes with perfectly understandable doubts. Not to mention communities with language barriers and immigrants without documents, who may fear coming forward.

Here are answers to some questions you might be asking yourself about the new vaccines:

Q: How can I be sure they’re safe?

There’s no ironclad guarantee. But the federal Food and Drug Administration, in authorizing the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines, determined that their benefits outweighed their risks.

The side effects observed in trial participants were common to other vaccines: pain at the injection site, fatigue, headache, muscle pain and chills.

“Those are minor side effects, and the benefit is not dying from this disease,” says Dr. George Rutherford, a professor of epidemiology at the University of California-San Francisco.

Saturday, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported six cases of anaphylactic allergic reaction in the first 272,000 people who got the Pfizer vaccine outside the clinical trials. This has led the CDC to recommend that people receiving the vaccine be observed for up to 30 minutes afterward. It’s possible other unexpected adverse effects could pop up down the road.

“The chances are low, but they are not zero,” says Orenstein. There’s not enough data yet to know if the vaccines pose an elevated risk to pregnant or lactating women, for example, or to immunocompromised people, such as those with HIV. And we know very little about the effects in children, who were not in the initial trials and for whom the vaccines are not authorized.

Q: Why should my family and I take it?

First of all, because you will protect yourselves from the possibility of severe illness or even death. Also, by getting vaccinated you will be doing your part to achieve a vaccination rate high enough to end the pandemic. Nobody knows exactly what percentage of the population needs to get inoculated for that to happen, but infectious disease experts put the number somewhere between 60% and 70% — perhaps even a little higher. Think of it as a civic duty to get your shots.

Q: So, when can I get mine?

It depends on your health status, age and work. In the first phase, already underway, health care workers and nursing home residents are getting vaccinated. The 40 million Moderna and Pfizer doses expected to be available by year’s end should immunize most of them.

Next in line are people 75 and older and essential workers in various public-facing jobs. They will be followed by people ages 65-74 and those under 65 with certain medical conditions that put them at high risk. Enough vaccine could be available for the rest of the population by late spring, but summer or even fall is more likely. Already, some distribution bottlenecks have developed.

On the bright side, two other vaccines — one from Johnson & Johnson, the other from AstraZeneca and Oxford University — could win FDA authorization early next year, significantly increasing the supply.

Q: Once I’m vaccinated, can I finally stop wearing a mask and physical distancing?

No. Especially not early on, before a lot of people have been vaccinated. One reason for that is self-protection. The Moderna and Pfizer vaccines are 95% effective, but that means you still have a 5% chance of falling ill if you are exposed to someone who hasn’t been vaccinated — or who has been but is still transmitting the virus.

Another reason is to protect others, since you could be the one shedding virus despite the vaccination.

Q: I’ve already had COVID-19, so I don’t need the vaccine, right?

We don’t know for sure how long exposure to the virus protects you from reinfection. Protection probably lasts at least a few months, but public health experts say it’s a good idea to get vaccinated when your turn comes up — especially if it’s been many months since you tested positive.

Q: How long before our lives get back to normal?

“If everything goes well, next Thanksgiving might be near normal, and we might be getting close to that by the summer,” says Dr. William Schaffner, a professor of infectious diseases at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine in Nashville, Tennessee. ”But there would have to be substantial acceptance of the vaccine and data showing the virus moving in a downward direction.”

This story was produced by Kaiser Health News, which publishes California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation.

LSD Won’t Make a Good Painkiller

By Roger Chriss, PNN Columnist

Recent news that a small pilot study found LSD has a “protracted analgesic effect” at low doses garnered a lot of enthusiasm and hype. Headlines declared that LSD “could replace opiates” and be a “potent weapon against pain.”

The study looked at two dozen healthy volunteers given low doses of LSD or a placebo and then subjected them to a “cold pressor test” – immersing a hand in near-freezing water. Researchers found that 20 micrograms of LSD “significantly increased the time that participants were able to tolerate exposure to cold (3°C) water.”

Despite this, LSD has a clear problem: Its therapeutic index is very low.

The therapeutic index is a measure of the relative safety of a drug, computed by dividing the toxic dose by the dose needed for a therapeutic response. A toxic dose represents a threshold beyond which undesirable side effects or adverse events become common.

A high therapeutic index is better. It signifies a broader range of possible doses, letting clinicians adjust a dose precisely for a specific patient. Body weight, age, gender and metabolic status all influence drug metabolism and a high therapeutic index improves clinical safety.

A high therapeutic index also means that the drug can be given in multiple doses. If an initial dose is inadequate, a second dose can be given. Or a dose of another medication from the same class can be given. Or the drug can be given repeatedly over a short time without risky cumulative effects. All of this is important, because acute pain associated with trauma, injury or surgery may last for days.

The therapeutic dose of LSD in the simulated pain study was 20 micrograms (lower doses were ineffective). In general, a hallucinogenic dose starts at 25 micrograms. This suggests that LSD’s therapeutic index is 1.25.

Other measures of drug safety look even worse. The measure known as the margin of safety looks at how a dose may be toxic for 1% of people while being clinically effective for the other 99 percent. This accounts for variations in dose-response curves. Since some people experience LSD’s psychoactive effects at well below the standard 25 microgram threshold, LSD’s margin of safety is also very low.

LSD probably has little future as an over-the-counter analgesic or in a standard clinical setting for acute or chronic pain. It may instead have potential as a narrow therapeutic index (NTI) drug, which the FDA defines as a drug “where small differences in dose or blood concentration may lead to serious therapeutic failures and/or adverse drug reactions that are life-threatening or result in persistent or significant disability or incapacity.”

Current NTI drugs include lithium and methotrexate, which are used to treat serious conditions such as bipolar disorder and rheumatoid arthritis in carefully selected patients under close medical supervision. LSD could wind up being designated as an NTI drug, but only if clinical trials demonstrate safety and efficacy in the management of specific types of pain.

In general, however, LSD is unlikely to be a broadly useful analgesic. Pain relievers need to have a wide therapeutic index in order to succeed, and there seems to be no practical way to do this with LSD.

Roger Chriss lives with Ehlers Danlos syndrome and is a proud member of the Ehlers-Danlos Society. Roger is a technical consultant in Washington state, where he specializes in mathematics and research. 

Precautions Needed for Medical Cannabis

By Roger Chriss, PNN Columnist

Medical cannabis continues to thrive. Older Americans are flocking to cannabis dispensaries and more states are considering legalization or adding approved indications.

But there is relatively little information about the potential risks and pitfalls of medical cannabis. The New York Times reports that “researchers are uneasy about the fact that older people essentially are undertaking self-treatment, with scant guidance from medical professionals."

There are three broad categories of precautions that people who are using or considering medical cannabis should be aware of.

Product Quality and Reliability

Reliably sourcing a high-quality cannabis product can be difficult. Product labels are often inaccurate. A 2015 survey of cannabis edibles in Seattle, San Francisco and Los Angeles found that only 13 of the 75 products tested (17%) had labels that accurately indicated their THC content.

More recent testing in California found that about a quarter of the cannabis-infused cookies, candies and tinctures failed safety tests because of improper labeling or because they contained pesticides.

One lab in Sacramento was even found to be falsifying test results. A spokesman for the California Cannabis Industry Association said it's an open secret in the industry that companies have been paying for favorable test results.  

States from Massachusetts to Nevada are also seeing problems with pesticides, mold and heavy metals contaminating medical-grade cannabis.

DRUG POLICY ALLIANCE

Interactions and Contraindications

Cannabis consists of over 100 cannabinoids, as well as other physiologically active substances. This makes for a lot of possible drug interactions. Drugs.com lists 129 major and 483 moderate interactions that cannabis can have with medications such as acetaminophen, codeine, fentanyl, hydrocodone, pregabalin and oxycodone.

Moreover, cannabis has been found to reduce thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH) levels. For people with thyroid disease, artificially suppressed TSH can affect medication decisions. Similarly, cannabis reduces platelet aggregation, a problematic and even risky issue for people with bleeding disorders or low platelet counts.

A new review in Current Opinion in Neurology found that cannabis exacerbates tinnitus (ringing of the ears), a common problem for older people and people with Meniere’s disease or Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease.

Tolerance and Withdrawal

Cannabis tolerance may be a clinically significant issue. A new study on CBD oil for seizure management found that cannabidiol loses its effectiveness in treating epilepsy. About one-third of patients in the study stopped taking CBD because of a lack of benefits or side effects like sleepiness and gastrointestinal trouble.

“CBD is a good option for children and adults with certain kinds of epilepsy, but as with anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs), it can become less effective over time and the dose may need to be increased to manage the seizures,” said lead author Shimrit Uliel-Sibony, MD, head of the pediatric epilepsy service at Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center.

Also important is withdrawal. Recent research on cannabis withdrawal in a group of chronic pain patients found that about two-thirds reported at least one moderate or severe withdrawal symptom. Withdrawal symptoms included sleep difficulties, anxiety, irritability and appetite disturbance.

In sum, there are important issues to address when using or considering medical cannabis. Unfortunately, knowledgeable physicians are hard to find and high-quality cannabis is difficult to obtain reliably. It is hoped that this will change soon so that medical cannabis can be used safely and effectively.

Roger Chriss lives with Ehlers Danlos syndrome and is a proud member of the Ehlers-Danlos Society. Roger is a technical consultant in Washington state, where he specializes in mathematics and research.

The information in this column should not be considered as professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. It is for informational purposes only and represents the author’s opinions alone. It does not inherently express or reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of Pain News Network.