A reputed Professor published a couple of papers in the span of less than a month. In one (company sponsored one) efficacy was 78%- this was against previous strain. The other (real world) efficacy was 50%- assumed to be against delta strain. Some docs...
.....not to be taken seriously in topics concerning immunity and infections and vaccines. So ignore.
P.S. These docs will continue to get extensive media time due to the good relations they have developed with media people. Again ignore. Being on right side of science matters.
Significantly waning immunity against changing strains implies uselessness of a prophylactic strategy in getting out of a live pandemic. Common sense says it has to be curative or natural immunity.
The second paper in Lancet Infectious Diseases which came out just states the exact opposite. After showing a poor 50% efficacy, authors go on to say this is a justification for more vaccination. Sometimes I think the authors know better but don't want to anger reviewers😂😂😂

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Sankha Shubhra Chakrabarti

Sankha Shubhra Chakrabarti Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @sankha_shubhra

26 Nov
A lot of effort is being made since yesterday by media figures and some non-medical-background scientists to diss COVAXIN again....stating a 50% efficacy against presumed delta infection.
This is peculiar considering pretty much all the jab types are proving to be useless.....
.....beyond 3 months or so, and against new variants. This debating useless nitty-gritties such as 50% vs 95% (can't be real) is amusing. By design, an inactivated Vax is best (time tested strategy). In effect, none of the jabs is a way out of the pandemic.....
....as mutations in virus would aggravate with non-sterilizing jabs. Initially, and still believe COVAXIN is best design. However, unfortunately, none of the jabs will help us out as they will lag behind virus, and because adverse event component is being silenced. Never good...
Read 4 tweets
24 Nov
Yes. One can still pass on but testing asymptomatic has never been a strategy because in biological sciences, there is always the issue of practicality.
For example, if one never ventures out of their house, they will never die of a road accident but that's not meaningful......
Every drug has side effects. Even traditional medicines do. However the first medical intervention for which I was forced to tell some of my earlier patients that they are 110% safe (because authorities said so on live TV) were developed at warp-speed. Stopped saying soon....
......after doing/publishing own research because there is a limit till which you can act 'against Hippocratic oath'. In medical science, unlike theoretical physics, practicality always Trump's scientific strict-itude.
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(