Thread by @RichardWWard1

@SenatorLankford spreads dangerous COVID disinformation and misrepresents Israeli study.

Such encourages vaccination via variolation--by getting COVID with mortality rate ~1-2%--over a near zero mortality rate vaccine.

Suspension merited per @TwitterSupport policies.

(more)

https://twitter.com/SenatorLankford/status/1451624398830510082

At best, natural immunity is ~1% more effective than 2-dose Pfizer vaccine from 6/1/21-8/14/21.*

Pfizer vaccine: 16024 of 16215 protected from symptomatic infection (~99%)

Prior infection: 16207 of 16215

Both ~100% effective against hospitalization and death during time.

Count 1: @SenatorLankford is a Senator from Oklahoma and has paid staff resources, including the Congressional Research Service, to adequately understand and communicate the results of vaccine studies, yet has failed to use that staff effectively.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressi…

Count 2: Multiple misrepresentations are made by @SenatorLankford of the non-peer reviewed study pre-print (see link below).

These misrepresentations, discussed in Counts 2a et seq, amount to negligent misinformation and/or disinformation meriting ban.

medrxiv.org/content/10.110…

Count 2a:

It is impossible for a study to show something is "27 times more effective" than ~99% protection from symptomatic infection,>99.99% protection from hospitalization, and 100% protection from death, because this would require unachievable >100% protection.

Count 2b: @SenatorLankford refers to "the vaccine" while only one of three approved vaccines--Pfizer--was tested against Delta variant

Three vaccines are approved for use in the U.S. (Pfizer, Moderna, J&J). Use of "the" is misleading.

Count 2c: Vaccine administration provides similar/better protection than infection acquired immunity, making @SenatorLankford's statement false on its face.

See Count 2a. Also see Model 3, where it is shown vaccine administration improves immunity over "natural" immunity alone.

Count 2d: Even if @SenatorLankford's conflation of effectiveness and relative risk was an acceptable error, failure to present broader findings evidences intent to deceive.

Relative rate of infection (Vaccinated/"natural") ranged 0.52-27.02. See Count 2a and 2nd post. Also see:

To be continued.

At this time, recommend Twitter suspension until deletion of @SenatorLankford post violative of deceptive COVID vaccine posting policy.

Furthermore, longer bans should be considered, especially if post is not retracted with apology.

help.twitter.com/en/rules-and-p…