Since I keep getting inquiries about the idea of antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) problems with the coronavirus vaccines, here are some fresh data (1/5)
In May, the US had 18,000 deaths from Covid-19 infections. First: if the vaccines weren’t working, you’d expect these deaths to show roughly the same proportion as that of vaccinated and unvaccinated people in general. (2/5)
And if we had a real ADE problem, you could expect proportionally *more* deaths among the vaccinated, because ADE makes subsequent infections worse - the “enhancement” part. (3/5)
By the end of May, we had just reached half of the adults in the country being fully vaccinated. Basically all the 18,000 deaths were adults as well. So, were 9,000 of them vaccinated (no efficacy) or worse, even more (ADE)? (4/5)
No. Just 150 of the deaths were in fully vaccinated people, a ratio of over 99:1. The vaccines work. They work extremely well, and we are seeing *no signs at all* of ADE. (5/5)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@christymaginn (1/x) There are several bottlenecks to vaccine production, all jostling for the #1 position. One is equipment. Mixers for the mRNA lipid nanoparticles, e.g. Some types of filtration material (not patented!) are in very short supply as well, and there are others.
@christymaginn (2/x) Another bottleneck is in key materials like the lipids needed for the mRNA vaccines. Supply of these has been ramping up, but there's still only so much of these things in the world, and their synthesis is labor-intensive.
@christymaginn (3/x) A really tough one is expertise. All of these processes (mRNA, adenovirus) need hands-on tech transfer to troubleshoot as they ramp up, otherwise production can be spotty with poor QC pass rates. There simply aren't enough experienced people to go around!
(1/8) The UK authorities are now trying to spread out the two doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine as well, in order to get more people the first shot now. A similar situation to what I wrote about yesterday: blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archi…
I see why they’re proposing this, of course. The UK is in bad shape, with the new coronavirus variant spreading quickly. And we have evidence that the first shot really does seem to be immunogenic. BUT. . . (2/8)
. . . There are important things we don’t know. How long does immunity last if you’ve only had one shot? How well does the second booster shot work if the gap between them is longer? (3/8)
Absolutely wonderful news from Moderna: 94% vaccine efficacy, zero severe coronavirus cases, no severe adverse events, and one-month stability under standard refrigeration.
We’re winning. Hang on, hang on, hang on and stay safe. We’re going to win.
Thoughts on the Moderna results this morning - safety, efficacy, and more. The vaccine news is very good, especially when it's illuminated against grim pandemic news in general: blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archi…
You may have seen claims from people promoting hydroxychloroquine that there are numbers from Italy that prove that it's a prophylactic treatment against COVID-19. These numbers are complete fiction. (1/5
There are at least two mentions in media sources (one from an Italian newspaper, one from an interview in the Israeli press) about the Italian Rheumatology Society monitoring their patients who are taking HCQ for coronavirus cases. (2/5)
These sources say that 65,000 such Italian patients have been monitored and that only 20 of them have been diagnosed positive. *This is false*. I dug into the numbers here, and they did not add up (3/5): blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archi…
(1/x) A little history and politics. Folks looking for a science/chemistry thread can skip this one!
(2/x) The Roman Republic took quite a while going off the rails. But eventually (80 BC) a powerful politician and general (Sulla) took over in what can only be described as a military coup, to restore order.
(3/x) He was declared "dictator for the making of laws and for the settling of the constitution". The Republic had been very wary of every vesting power in a single leader, but here it was. He wasted no time exercising his powers.
(1/x) Noted without further comment, this passage from Alexander Hamilton, in a letter to George Washington from August of 1792. The fuull document can be found here: founders.archives.gov/documents/Hami…
(2/x) "When a man unprincipled in private life, desperate in his fortune, bold in his temper, possessed of considerable talents, having the advantage of military habits—despotic in his ordinary demeanour. . .
(3/x)". . .known to have scoffed in private at the principles of liberty—when such a man is seen to mount the hobby horse of popularity—to join in the cry of danger to liberty—to take every opportunity of embarrassing the General Government & bringing it under suspicion. . ."