3 ms·

Look at the plots in my link above. The rates have been low or falling off a cliff for a long time. Again, not doubting efficacy of vaccines. I’m proud to be fu

Look at the plots in my link above. The rates have been low or falling off a cliff for a long time. Again, not doubting efficacy of vaccines. I’m proud to be fully vaccinated. But there’s something else at play.

mike_hearn 5y ago
There's also a new issue which will make determining vaccine effectiveness in the USA very difficult. The CDC has changed how COVID cases are defined, but only for people who are vaccinated. Specifically, reports of 'vaccine breakthrough' i.e. someone who tests positive after being vaccinated, are now only being processed if they: * Are positive with a CT < 25 and * Result in hospitalization or death People who aren't vaccinated on the other hand are counted as being "sick" with COVID if they test positive with a CT < ~40+ (exact values vary by lab) and don't need to be hospitalized or have any symptoms at all. PCR cycle thresholds are exponents. Each cycle doubles the quantity of what you're looking for. Thus a positive at a CT of 40 is drastically different to a positive at a CT of 25. You could inject people with water and using this standard, you would see an enormous effect. Clearly this sort of thing is not sound science and will result in time series that show the CDC what it very much wants to see, rather than what's actually happening. This type of distortion keeps happening with COVID related research, and it's resulted in me no longer trusting it (see [1] for more examples of what I've seen). Not a single figure or data point about this disease can be taken for granted because so often when the details are investigated, there turns out to be some ridiculous catch or unscientific practice being deployed. It's also not just random incompetence because it always seems to be working towards the same end: making COVID seem more dangerous and getting more people to take vaccines. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27231636 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27231636
- AuthorizedCust 5y ago
  I am not using CDC data. Texas has not changed its reporting methodology.
- officialjunk 5y ago
  could you please point me to the CDC change in definition of COVID-19 infection?
  - mike_hearn 5y ago
    https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/bre... "As of May 1, 2021, CDC transitioned from monitoring all reported vaccine breakthrough cases to focus on identifying and investigating only hospitalized or fatal cases due to any cause. This shift will help maximize the quality of the data collected on cases of greatest clinical and public health importance." CTR values: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/downloads/Information-for-laboratories-COVID-vaccine-breakthrough-case-investigation.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/downloads/Information-...
    - officialjunk 5y ago
      thank you.

mike_hearn 5y ago

There's also a new issue which will make determining vaccine effectiveness in the USA very difficult. The CDC has changed how COVID cases are defined, but only for people who are vaccinated. Specifically, reports of 'vaccine breakthrough' i.e. someone who tests positive after being vaccinated, are now only being processed if they: * Are positive with a CT < 25 and * Result in hospitalization or death People who aren't vaccinated on the other hand are counted as being "sick" with COVID if they test positive with a CT < ~40+ (exact values vary by lab) and don't need to be hospitalized or have any symptoms at all. PCR cycle thresholds are exponents. Each cycle doubles the quantity of what you're looking for. Thus a positive at a CT of 40 is drastically different to a positive at a CT of 25. You could inject people with water and using this standard, you would see an enormous effect. Clearly this sort of thing is not sound science and will result in time series that show the CDC what it very much wants to see, rather than what's actually happening. This type of distortion keeps happening with COVID related research, and it's resulted in me no longer trusting it (see [1] for more examples of what I've seen). Not a single figure or data point about this disease can be taken for granted because so often when the details are investigated, there turns out to be some ridiculous catch or unscientific practice being deployed. It's also not just random incompetence because it always seems to be working towards the same end: making COVID seem more dangerous and getting more people to take vaccines. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27231636 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27231636

AuthorizedCust 5y ago
I am not using CDC data. Texas has not changed its reporting methodology.
officialjunk 5y ago
could you please point me to the CDC change in definition of COVID-19 infection?
- mike_hearn 5y ago
  https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/bre... "As of May 1, 2021, CDC transitioned from monitoring all reported vaccine breakthrough cases to focus on identifying and investigating only hospitalized or fatal cases due to any cause. This shift will help maximize the quality of the data collected on cases of greatest clinical and public health importance." CTR values: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/downloads/Information-for-laboratories-COVID-vaccine-breakthrough-case-investigation.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/downloads/Information-...
  - officialjunk 5y ago
    thank you.