3 ms·
Pretty misleading citation source there, you must be implying the Kentucky study which is infected+vaccinated compared to infected only (not infected to vaccina
by peteradio 5y ago
Pretty misleading citation source there, you must be implying the Kentucky study which is infected+vaccinated compared to infected only (not infected to vaccinated as most would read your sentence). You apparently ignore the New York/California study in the same link. All this completely ignores the age factor as well which reduces the absolute risk for youths to essentially negligible.
- radford-neal 5y agoYes. Even taking the Kentucky study at face value, the estimate odds ratio (probably similar to relative risk, given reinfection is fairly unlikely) is 2.34 (confidence interval 1.58 to 3.47), not "over 5-fold higher chances". However, as they say, "...persons who have been vaccinated are possibly less likely to get tested. Therefore, the association of reinfection and lack of vaccination might be overestimated."