Thread by @RafaelPolidoro2

I'll make a quick thread on why I'm still skeptical with the press releases on vaccines. Please add to the discussion.

1) Press release is not science. It has actually done more harm than good.
2) It seems that the symptoms were the endpoint in all >90% protection claims, but +

If my model (pinned post) is minimally correct, systemic inflammation due to lung injury demands neutrophils and other leukocyte infiltration, immature release of leukocyte from the bone marrow and together with liver stimulation, some coagulopathy +

all those things can be augmented by a previous chronic systemic inflammation (comorbidities), amplifying the odds of getting symptoms in the lung and in the body. Similarly, all those things can b prevented by a chronic tolerogenic environment, and here's how +

those vaccines can work in US so freely. Here you get:
1) adjuvant + vaccine (or virus vaccine in Astraneca)
2) saline

So your 95% protection is adjuvant effect (trained immunity, post-inflammatory tolerogenic liver, bone marrow and neutrophils state) + vaccine. +

In Brazil, for example, the RCT is:
1) adjuvant + vaccine
2) adjuvant + other vaccine
So your protection has to subtract unspecific effects, whereas in US you sum it.
So, I need to see the data, I need to see in different countries, the controls and all... Cheers and good luck!

in conclusion: if those >90% are not specific, we actually don't have a vaccine at all. We'd need to take adjuvants every three months. It's better than lockdown? It is.
It has severe pain in the site of injection and many other symptoms 2-3 days post-shot. But I'd take it too