2 ms·
That's interesting, I understood the opposite is happening[0]: > High COVID-19 vaccination rates were expected to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in populati
by hdjjhhvvhga 5y ago
That's interesting, I understood the opposite is happening[0]:
> High COVID-19 vaccination rates were expected to reduce transmission of SARS-CoV-2 in populations by reducing the number of possible sources for transmission and thereby to reduce the burden of COVID-19 disease. Recent data, however, indicate that the epidemiological relevance of COVID-19 vaccinated individuals is increasing. In the UK it was described that secondary attack rates among household contacts exposed to fully vaccinated index cases was similar to household contacts exposed to unvaccinated index cases (25% for vaccinated vs 23% for unvaccinated). 12 of 31 infections in fully vaccinated household contacts (39%) arose from fully vaccinated epidemiologically linked index cases.
[0] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00258-1/fulltext?s=09 https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7...
- Arnt 5y agoHigh vaccination rates were supposed to do that, but compared to what? If you do an interim thing to reduce the transmission rate (and it works) and then you do something permanent (and it works too, compared to the initial state) and stop doing the first, the transition might not be an improvement compared to the interim.