6 ms·
No Difference in Viral Load Between Un/Vaxed/A/Symptomatic Covid Delta Infected
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y agoGiven that you're looking to be tested, you probably are showing symptoms. It doesn't seem surprising that viral load would be about as high between vaxxed and unvaxxed given symptoms.
- brewdad 5y agoTrue in most cases but there are exceptions. My child moved on to his college campus this month. There is a vaccine mandate for all students with something like a 97% compliance rate. Still, every student had to be tested within 72 hours of arriving on campus. That would be some interesting data to examine and I'm sure the School of Public Health will be doing so over the coming months.
- asdfasgasdgasdg 5y agoI guess my question would be, "Out of positive test cases, what fraction sought testing because of symptoms?" For random tests, I would guess that the positivity rate is far, far lower than for folks seeking tests due to symptoms. Therefore, I expect that folks seeking tests due to symptoms are the large majority of the positive tests. I cannot submit any proof of this view, but it is what seems most likely to me.
- tinus_hn 5y agoIt’s not that bad if the vaccines aren’t working! This paper advocates for using masks instead, so we can just move the goalposts a little again!
- shkkmo 5y ago> This paper advocates for using masks instead That is absolutely false. The paper clearly advocates for using masks and testing in addition to vaccination.
- tinus_hn 5y agoOh, well I guess we can leave that one goalpost where it stands. Now how to deal with the problem of selling vaccine passports while this paper shows ‘no difference in viral loads’…
- moistly 5y agoWell, for starters, segregating the unvaccinated population into “safe zones” will prevent our healthcare system from being completely destroyed. In Canada, we are seeing children’s surgeries being postponed because their doctors have been called out to help mostly-unvaccinated covid patients. This is insanity. We have solid mathematical proof of an excellent prophylactic against severe sars-cov-2 outcomes. Regardless any unfortunate harm caused by any of the variety of vaccinations that are available, the outcome odds are better than for being virus-naïve and catching covid. A looot of people catching covid are staying sick, feeling foggy and out of breath; a loooot of people with vaccinations get over it right quick. Basic 1+1=2 math IMO.
- tinus_hn 5y agoSo the goalposts have moved from protecting the vulnerable from the unvaccinated to the old nanny state protecting people from themselves.
- moistly 5y agoNo. The state is protecting itself — that is, its healthcare system — from the unvaccinated.
- tinus_hn 5y agoA common excuse for the same thing. Why wouldn’t this apply to prohibiting fast food or alcohol? The only reasons it’s not used for that is that we’ve had fast food and alcohol forever and nobody would buy the nanny state using that argument.
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y agoMany of the tests that I have done are around travel, and not to do with symptoms. Some others were due to exposure, and also not to do with symptoms.
- gfodor 5y agoI brought up the theory in other threads that the vaccine greatly reduces the chance of developing an infection but, conditional on infection, outcomes are the same. Got massively downvoted for being anti-vax, of course, despite the point being that if true we should be aggressively vaccinating but stop telling vaccinated people they get "less sick" and if they develop any symptoms to take it as seriously as they would if they were unvaccinated. We're pretty screwed: tribalism has eaten through things enough that it's basically impossible to discuss these things.
- Mikeb85 5y agoThey do get less sick though. There's a clear difference in outcomes even if the viral load at a certain point in time is the same.
- standardUser 5y ago"vaccine reduces the chance of developing an infection but, conditional on infection, outcomes are the same" That is a spectacularly wrong interpretation according to all the data.
- gfodor 5y agoI would like to update my priors if possible that this theory has been refuted. Can you provide counter evidence? Note that the theory does not influence the degree to which one should seek to get vaccinated. If you think that it does, you don't understand it.
- standardUser 5y agoI'm perfectly happy to not understand your "theory".
- gfodor 5y agoNot my theory, but thank you for so nicely demonstrating the problem. You have presumed I am anti-vax, and presumed the theory presented is anti-vax. But it's not. But you don't care. Nice work.
- jaywalk 5y ago"asymptomatic vaccinated individuals may increasingly contribute to the ongoing pandemic as the proportion of vaccinated individuals grows" Uh oh...
- foogazi 5y agoYes, if we had 100% vaccination rate then 100% of covid infections would be due to vaccinated individuals
- standardUser 5y agoThe first line says it all... "Vaccines reduce infection, severe disease, and death from SARS-CoV-2" Viral load does not equal chance of transmission, and those who don't get infected thanks to a vaccine, or have a shorter illness thanks to the vaccine, are obviously less likely to spread the virus.
- psychometry 5y agoAt some point in time after infection, viral load might be the same, but: > the viral loads decreased more rapidly in vaccinated than unvaccinated individuals in Singapore [3], suggesting that vaccinated individuals may remain infectious for shorter periods of time.
- nradov 5y agoA recent or pre-print study attempts to quantify the effect of vaccination on transmission. There appears to be some reduction (subject to multiple confounding factors) but transmission by vaccinated individuals is still common. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.09.28.21264260v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.09.28.21264260v... So it's important to get vaccinated to protect yourself. Just don't expect it to reliably prevent you from infecting others.
- xenophonf 5y agoWhich underscores the importance of continuing masking, social distancing, and other positive steps toward preventing disease transmission by everyone (regardless of vaccination status) while simultaneously continuing vaccination initiatives to reduce the heavy load on the healthcare system, etc.
- voisin 5y agoNo question based on that quote that people should get vaccinated. But to make vaccine passports to eat in restaurants (popular in Canada right now), doesn’t seem to make sense in terms of vaccinated people being less likely to transmit the virus. Though I suppose as a carrot to encourage the unvaccinated to get vaccinated it might work.
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y agoyes, but do the vaccinated have the viral load the same length of time, or less?
- ian123net 5y agoExactly - this report seems to say that the viral load of those who tested positive in a PCR test is similar whether or not the individual was vaccinated. But that could be true even if non-vaccinated people were infectious for 10 times as long! The average viral load of those testing positive would be somewhere between 100% and the testing threshold. Or have I missed something?
- mulvya 5y agoLook at Table 5 on pg 19 of https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1018547/Technical_Briefing_23_21_09_16.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... For those under 50, the single-dosed have the lowest Delta CFR of 11/83009 = 0.013%; for unvaxxed it's 132/248803 = 0.053%; for double-vaxxed it's 48/85407 = 0.056%. The lower Delta CFR for single-vaxxed vs twice vaxxed holds for those 50+ too, 1.935% vs. 2.173%.
- habibur 5y agoCFR : Case fatality rate. People dead/people diagnosed as infected.
- joelbondurant 5y agoI prefer Coronavirus to Communist Cuckbois.