4 ms·
The article uses the term COVID-19 sloppily. It says, "The study, released on Saturday, compared almost 400 people who had tested positive for COVID-19, 14 da
by mulvya 5y ago
The article uses the term COVID-19 sloppily.
It says,
"The study, released on Saturday, compared almost 400 people who had tested positive for COVID-19, 14 days or more after they received one or two doses of the vaccine"
and
"The companies said on April 1 that their vaccine was around 91% effective at preventing COVID-19"
COVID-19 is the disease whereas testing checks for presence of portions of the virus. The Phase III clinical trials looked for symptomatic infection. Without details on the clinical progression of the vaccinated who tested positive, there's nothing to see here.
Also,
"But among patients who had received two doses of the vaccine, the variant’s prevalence rate was eight times higher than those unvaccinated - 5.4% versus 0.7%."
This indicates that if the immune system is primed to identify a certain variant, its performance is hindered as opposed to a naive immune system.
The actual paper is at https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.06.21254882v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.04.06.21254882v...
From what I can tell, the median age of the fully vaccinated is 61 and 46 for the unvaccinated. (table 1). And the comparison for the SA variant is between 8 in the former vs 1 in the latter. Sensationalist reporting.
- RcouF1uZ4gsC 5y ago> This indicates that if the immune system is primed to identify a certain variant, its performance is hindered as opposed to a naive immune system. This does not mean that the performance is hindered. It just means that there is a larger immune system performance differential. Here is how it might work. The regular COVID-19 is highly prevalent, the variant has much less prevalent. The vaccine is highly effective against regular COVID-19. Let's also say that it is somewhat effective against the variant so the performance of the vaccinated immune system is actually better than the naive immune system. Because of the selection effect, you could have a higher variant prevalence compared to regular COVID-19 in the vaccinated population, even though the vaccine actually improves the peformance of the immune system with regards to the variant.
- mulvya 5y ago> Let's also say that it is somewhat effective against the variant so the performance of the vaccinated immune system is actually better than the naive immune system. This is begging the question. > Because of the selection effect, you could have a higher variant prevalence compared to regular COVID-19 in the vaccinated population They are measuring the prevalence of the variant between vaccinated and control groups of similar size, not the share of variants within the vaccinated groups.