Genuine question: Denmark now recommends a booster shot of the updated COVID-19 vaccines to all citizens>50. What is the evidence for any benefit of vaccinating those>50, who had Omikron since January 2022 (a quite large proportion), and who thus have natural immunity?
In my case: 54 and healthy. I had COVID-19 in July 2022. I am well protected against the most recent variant. I would likely suffer short-term side-effect from being vaccinated. Further, there is no data on the long-term consequences for overall health of COVID-19 vaccinations.
Public health wise: why should society spend money on COVID-19 vaccinating a large group of the population who already have natural immunity - money that could be put to good use elsewhere in our health care system?
I hope we can discuss this, openly and respectfully. #becurious
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Good piece on "The Pandemic Evidence Failure":
"we cannot just demonstrate medical drugs or devices have a mechanism which should cause the effect that we want - because when we apply them to complex systems, unexpected things happen".
It is a favorite topic of mine. During the pandemic, I suggested numerous cluster-randomized trials that could have been done while we rolled out (or rolled back) some of the population-targeted health interventions @DanishIAS#becurious
My insisting on real-life testing of health interventions - even if there are clear ideas about how they should work - stems from Africa. We observed that vaccines affected all-cause mortality much more than explained from their specific effects. ted.com/talks/christin…
Some thoughts on censoring of the vaccine debate.
In 2019 WHO declared vaccine hesitance one of the 10 biggest health threats – along with climate changes. I was against that. The main reason for low vaccination rates are broken health systems. theconversation.com/declaring-vacc…
Very few people are completely against all vaccine – so-called ”antivax”. A larger but still small group are “vaccine hesitants” – they usually vaccinate but they ask questions about vaccines, not least they are focused on the need for better data on vaccine safety. 2/n
With the WHO declaration and with the COVID-19 pandemic, we are witnessing increasing censoring of the vaccine debate on social media. Anything but propaganda messages about “safe and effective vaccines” risks getting censored. 3/n
The Norwegian Institute of Public Health has analysed the need for COVID-19 vaccination of children. The report (written in Norwegian) is data-driven and balanced and well worth a read. 1/13 fhi.no/contentassets/…
I have translated some quotes for the non-Norwegian speakers. I have focused on the information that I think has been a bit “forgotten” in the public messaging, Translations are my own and the Norwegian Institute of Public Health is obviously not responsible. 2/13
“Given the low risk of severe infection in children, the broad and long-lasting immunity after infection may be beneficial to them, especially in the light of new virus variants in the future”. 3/13
New study from Vietnam confirms Peter Aaby's observations on measles:
Compared with unvaccinated uninfected children, measles infected children had higher risk of hospitalisation in the first month, but thereafter their risk was substantially lower. bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.11…
Measles infection seems to train the immune system so it becomes better at defending itself against other unrelated disease organisms in the future.
But of course, this training comes with the risk of becoming severely ill from the infection itself. academic.oup.com/aje/article/14…
A safer way to obtain the immune training is measles vaccine, a live attenuated vaccine, which basically can be seen as a controlled way of getting a mild measles infection. Measles vaccine is also associated with lower risk of other infections. #NSEvacjamanetwork.com/journals/jama/…
Twitter-rens: Jeg holder af at høre andre synspunkter og har kun sjældent blokeret. Men når jeg læser kommentarerne til mine tweets idag, så indser jeg, at der er visse emner, jeg har hørt rigeligt om nu.
Jeg vil fremadrettet tillade mig at blokere de, der ikke er ude på at diskutere og blive klogere, men som benytter mine tweets som afsæt for at forkynde, at SARS-CoV2 ikke findes og/eller at pandemien er the grand reset, skabt af folk, der ønske at begrænse jordens befolkning.
Selvom vi kan være fagligt uenige, så har jeg stor respekt for mine kolleger i Sundhedsstyrelsen, på Statens Serum Institut og landets universiteter, og jeg vil derfor også blokere de, der som respons på mine tweets kommer med personangreb på disse fagpersoner.
Skal Corona være en vaccinesygdom eller en børnesygdom?
Jeg afbrød min sommerferie for at give mit bud i @Orientering (efter 1 t 06 min). 1/n dr.dk/radio/p1/orien…
Lige nu er valget taget politisk: Corona er udset til at være en vaccinesygdom. Men der er et alternativ, der på en gang ville kunne sikre mere stabil pandemikontrol og spare ressourcer, der kunne bruges på at bedre folkesundheden. Det er at gøre Corona til en børnesygdom. 2/n
Hvordan tæmmer vi Corona til en børnesygdom? Ved at lade være med at fokusere på antal smittede og i stedet fokusere på hospitaliseringer. Lade være med at teste asymptomatiske, fjerne restriktioner og stoppe nedlukninger, og ikke mindst: lade være med at vaccinere børn. 3/n