1/ Thread: Vaccination of recovered.
This line of research has been interpreted as: ”People who have had a PCR confirmed covid-19 infection may only require one dose“.
Is there another possible interpretation?
Recall: vaccinating recovered is newscience. bmj.com/content/372/bm…
2/ Most exposed clear up the virus without much trouble.
Likewise, if re-encountered through respiratory route.
Injection is not natural route for re-encounter.
“That offender, which I handled easily, shows up on my immune cells, far away!”
Is the immune system confused?
3/ Exaggerated response to the 1st dose in recovered. Good or bad?
Recall: over-reaction is part of the pathology.
What would be the response when re-encountering the virus/variant through natural route, after 1st dose?
Over-reaction? papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf…
4/ No response to the 2nd dose. Good or bad?
Unsure.
Lost recognition of the offender?
World-wide decisions were based on what? Hand-waving?
This is not “take 0, 1, or 2 Tylenol pills.”
2/ Here is what we see:
Continued divergence between infected vulnerable and non-vulnerable (by age).
Was fairly parallel in winter.
This divergence is the most important difference between current (summer) wave and winter wave.
1/ UK: Delta variant:
What can we learn, and what can we not learn, from PHE reports?
About the IFR? flu at most
About vacciine effect on death? nothing
2/ See here IFR=0.1%, 0.3%
Why estimates differ?
Several explanations, but one we’ll need later: risk is not # death/# people. It is # deaths/# person-time.
Need to add up the number of days each person was observed to compute “rate” (epidemiology).
Risk is over people AND time.
3/ We don’t have time (days) for all 92,056 cases. We only have it for 11,250 (28 days per person).
Regardless, these are not all cases. By now it’s clear that 80-90% of infections are asymptomatic.
Therefore IFR must be << 0.3%
Flu. Or less.
Delta much less virulent than Alpha
1/
Peer review (unsolicited)
Another analysis of Israel data on vaccine effectiveness. Fully vaccinated vs. unvaccinated
Observation period: Jan 24-Apr 3
Bottom line: again, likely over-estimation of effectiveness. thelancet.com/journals/lance…
2/ Over the study period:
1)People shifted from unvaccinated to fully vaccinated.
2)Rate of infection was declining (peak Jan 20)
3/ Distribution of unvaccinated on the calendar is shifted to the left (time of HIGHER infection rate)
Distribution of vaccinated is shifted to the right (time of LOWER infection rate)
So, part of the difference between vaccinated & unvaccinated is due natural wave decline.