Oxford/ONS study:
• Viral load similar vaccinated vs unvaccinated, no measure of actual transmission
• Significant vaccine effectiveness vs Delta but …
• reducing over time, esp for AZ
What are implications for Govt policy to sack unvaccinated carers?
ndm.ox.ac.uk/files/coronavi…
• Viral load similar vaccinated vs unvaccinated, no measure of actual transmission
• Significant vaccine effectiveness vs Delta but …
• reducing over time, esp for AZ
What are implications for Govt policy to sack unvaccinated carers?
ndm.ox.ac.uk/files/coronavi…
…
[I’ll refer mainly to comparisons based on PCR test Ct values < 30, i.e. higher viral load. The paper also provides comparisons based on all +ve PCRs & +ve PCRs with self-reported symptoms] …
[I’ll refer mainly to comparisons based on PCR test Ct values < 30, i.e. higher viral load. The paper also provides comparisons based on all +ve PCRs & +ve PCRs with self-reported symptoms] …
…
Overall, having a prior infection provides a similar level of protection to being vaccinated (Table 1a/2a). Protection is lower relative to Pfizer (statistically significant difference), higher than AZ (statistically insignificant). However .,.
Overall, having a prior infection provides a similar level of protection to being vaccinated (Table 1a/2a). Protection is lower relative to Pfizer (statistically significant difference), higher than AZ (statistically insignificant). However .,.
... they find VE reduces over time, especially for Pfizer. So 100 days from vaccination, immunity from either vaccine seems to be lower than from prior infection (Fig S3 & Table 2a) …
...
(Vaccination does increase immunity even further for those with a prior infection, but the marginal effect of prior infection is much bigger) ...
(Vaccination does increase immunity even further for those with a prior infection, but the marginal effect of prior infection is much bigger) ...
…
So there really is zero case for sacking unvaccinated care workers with a prior infection.
In fact, if you were really wanted to lower infection risk of care workers, you would be better off sacking those vaccinated with AZ (at least a few months post-vaccination) …
So there really is zero case for sacking unvaccinated care workers with a prior infection.
In fact, if you were really wanted to lower infection risk of care workers, you would be better off sacking those vaccinated with AZ (at least a few months post-vaccination) …
But can we be sure there is any public health benefit at all from sacking unvaccinated care workers? …
Vaccines still reduce infections overall but:
1. The vaccinated still have a significant risk of getting infected. E.g. VE looks to be about 60-70% after 100 days (Fig S3) …
Vaccines still reduce infections overall but:
1. The vaccinated still have a significant risk of getting infected. E.g. VE looks to be about 60-70% after 100 days (Fig S3) …
…
2. Oxford/ONS find VE reduces consistently over time, especially for AZ. So by the time unvaccinated care workers are sacked in the autumn, VE will presumably be even lower for many workers & the difference in risk vs unvaccinated even less …
2. Oxford/ONS find VE reduces consistently over time, especially for AZ. So by the time unvaccinated care workers are sacked in the autumn, VE will presumably be even lower for many workers & the difference in risk vs unvaccinated even less …
…
3. VE overestimates the increased risk of transmission by unvaccinated:
If unvaccinated are tested (as happens now) & isolate when they have symptoms, the practical additional risk of transmission within care homes from having a small % of unvaccinated carers will be tiny …
3. VE overestimates the increased risk of transmission by unvaccinated:
If unvaccinated are tested (as happens now) & isolate when they have symptoms, the practical additional risk of transmission within care homes from having a small % of unvaccinated carers will be tiny …
…
4. Even worse, there may be unintended behavioural effects:
As the Oxford/ONS paper points out, there is a danger those vaccinated perceive their risk of transmission to be lower than it is, meaning, e.g., they may be less likely to take note of symptoms …
4. Even worse, there may be unintended behavioural effects:
As the Oxford/ONS paper points out, there is a danger those vaccinated perceive their risk of transmission to be lower than it is, meaning, e.g., they may be less likely to take note of symptoms …
…
Taken together, we simply don’t know if sacking unvaccinated care workers will actually reduce transmission in care homes at all ...
Taken together, we simply don’t know if sacking unvaccinated care workers will actually reduce transmission in care homes at all ...
...
Further, now most care home residents are themselves vaccinated, even if sacking unvaccinated carers did lead to a small, marginal reduction in transmission the benefit in terms of death/serious illness will be even smaller …
Further, now most care home residents are themselves vaccinated, even if sacking unvaccinated carers did lead to a small, marginal reduction in transmission the benefit in terms of death/serious illness will be even smaller …
…
Against that we have to factor in:
• risks of side effects (known & unknown) in carers unwillingly vaccinated.
• serious infringements of carers' human rights.
• worse care for residents from sacking thousands in a sector already experiencing a staffing crisis …
Against that we have to factor in:
• risks of side effects (known & unknown) in carers unwillingly vaccinated.
• serious infringements of carers' human rights.
• worse care for residents from sacking thousands in a sector already experiencing a staffing crisis …
…
Sacking unvaccinated care workers is unlikely to bring any significant benefits, will worsen care for the elderly & unnecessarily targets thousands of hard-working carers.
It’s a dangerous, ill-thought through policy. Ministers need to rethink urgently ...
Sacking unvaccinated care workers is unlikely to bring any significant benefits, will worsen care for the elderly & unnecessarily targets thousands of hard-working carers.
It’s a dangerous, ill-thought through policy. Ministers need to rethink urgently ...
...
And of course much of the above applies also to US mandates for nurses, students etc., to the proposed law banning unvaccinated from English nightclubs & football as well as other vaccine passport laws in places like France & NY City.
And of course much of the above applies also to US mandates for nurses, students etc., to the proposed law banning unvaccinated from English nightclubs & football as well as other vaccine passport laws in places like France & NY City.
esp for *Pfizer* Sorry!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
