Vaccines for longevity

Note: Pfizer funded.

Real-world effectiveness of 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine against all-cause outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years and older in the USA: a retrospective cohort study

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(26)00115-5/abstract

“PCV20 vaccination was associated with a lower risk of all invasive pneumococcal disease, all pneumococcal pneumonia, all-cause pneumonia, and LRTI among adults aged 65 years or older in the USA compared with no PCV20 vaccination.”

2 Likes

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/27/science/autism-treatments.html

Newly approved mRNA flu vaccine provides a more effective flu shot for older adults

In the pivotal phase 3 trial, the mRNA vaccine was as effective in participants 65 years or older as it was in trial participants overall, although whether its clinical efficacy is superior to that of the high-dose or other enhanced flu vaccines remains to be seen.

With a median follow-up of 181 days, the phase 3 trial found that the mRNA vaccine across all ages was approximately 27% more effective in preventing polymerase chain reaction–confirmed illness caused by any influenza A or B strain than the standard dose comparator vaccine, researchers reported in May. About 2% of participants who received the mRNA vaccine were diagnosed with the flu, compared with 2.8% who received a comparator vaccine.

Among the more than 19 000 trial participants who were at least 65 years of age, the mRNA vaccine’s relative efficacy was the same as that for all ages, which suggests benefits similar to those of high-dose and other enhanced influenza vaccines in the oldest adults, according to the authors. (Previous research has shown that the relative efficacy of high-dose flu vaccines vs standard-dose shots is about the same as that of the mRNA flu vaccine vs standard-dose shots, Goodman explained.)

Overall, those who received the mRNA vaccine were more likely to report experiencing the adverse events researchers asked about, including injection site pain, fatigue, headache, and muscle aches, which have also been seen after immunization with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. Most adverse events were mild to moderate and transient, the scientists noted.

In another Moderna-sponsored phase 3 trial, researchers studied the immunogenicity of mRNA-1010 compared with a standard-dose comparator vaccine in adults ages 18 through 64 years or the high-dose flu vaccine in about 3000 people 65 years or older. The mRNA vaccine demonstrated an immune response superior to both the comparator vaccines, the scientists reported in February 2025.

“Based on immunogenicity data, this vaccine will perform in a superior manner” to the high-dose vaccine, Osterholm said. “Obviously, they’re going to be doing postmarketing evaluation.”

Accelerated approval is based on surrogate end points, in this case the immunogenicity data for people 65 years or older. Higher immunogenicity, such as increased neutralizing antibody titers, often correlates with better protection, but Moderna must confirm its vaccine’s clinical benefit in a postmarketing trial involving individuals who are at least 65 years old.

According to the FDA briefing document for the June VRBPAC meeting, the postmarket, or phase 4, confirmatory study will enroll approximately 400 000 adults 65 years or older in each of 2 flu seasons. Vaccine clinics that administer the shots will alternate weekly between mRNA-1010 and an agreed upon CDC-recommended vaccine throughout the flu seasons.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2853094

4 Likes

not an expert, and not to get political, and I haven’t read on vaccine studies much lately, but I’d like to see if the mRNA vaccines have the same protection as live attenuated in terms of the overall impact on health… Aren’t a lot of the studies on vaccines that promote anti cancer affects and affects against cognition of the more natural to the body vaccines like the dead virus than mRNA? Frontiers | Repurposing Infectious Diseases Vaccines Against Cancer

Will be interesting to see long term data on that. Maybe I’m behind on the studies of how the Covid vaccine is playing out long term

1 Like

No? We have the shingles example. The earlier vaccine, Zostavax, used the live (attenuated) virus, whereas the newer vaccine, Shingrix used only a virus protein fragment, recombinant. Not only is Shingrix vastly more protective and longer lasting against shingles compared to Zostavax, but in comparing the effectiveness at lowering dementia risk Shingrix again outperforms Zostavax.

As to mRNA vaccines, in general they are highly effective, outperforming live or attenuated pathogens based vaccines, though of course each case needs clinical proof - specific cancer etc.

In general however mRNA vax seem to be the bees knees.

1 Like

ok, but are recombinant still the body’s natural defenses to the actual virus if its not using the entire virus? I know this is stepping in areas that usually cause hard opinions… I’m learning here too

My point was that if you are looking for “natural” vaccines or what body defences encounter in the environment, then the most natural are live viruses - you gain natural immunity which is not at all superior to the effectiveness of attenuated viruses. And recombinant are even less “natural” as they address only fragments of a virus, and yet as the shingles example I gave can be vastly more effective against the disease and better at lowering dementia risk. So much for “natural” being better - not at all.

Right now mRNA are the covid ones from moderna and pfizer. So we can’t prove anything yet for cancer or dementia etc. but we see the same pattern - the mRNA vaxes are more effective against covid than the virus based ones like Jansen. So one would expect this to also carry over to the other effects like dementia just as before. The superstitious cult of “natural” has no rational basis. Why would virus based ones be in any way superior? Meanwhile if you look at how mRNA vaxes work, one would expect them to be vastly superior. Soon we’ll see that in action.

3 Likes

“Superstitious cult”, brother, this is a longevity forum where science should be discussed freely… It shouldn’t be politicized… from either side.

One just has to do a random google/twitter search on covid vaccine outcomes and there is a host of diversity and variety of stuff you will see (even if the length of time the vaccine has been out hasn’t been long). Thats why I asked, because we have some intelligent people on the board, if there have been consistent papers yet on the long term affects of mRNA. Think of this like taking rapa, melatonin, glp ra, sglt2i, statins, low dose lithium or pretty much everything else we discuss, and there is a broad science of papers supporting the substance.

I think “natural” also comes into play in bioavailability of vitamins vrs synthetic vitamins…

And I wouldnt correlate how the vaccine combats the actual virus specifically with all cause health. There are a host of medications we can take to deal with an effect that doesn’t mean its healthy per se.

FYI,
We each got the new Moderna mNEXSPIKE yesterday and neither of us could even tell… my temp was up according to oura, but I never felt a thing.

1 Like