3 ms·
> It's even worse than that; hazard ratio increases significantly with each re-infection https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-02051-3 https://www.nature.c
by ejstronge 4y ago
> It's even worse than that; hazard ratio increases significantly with each re-infection
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-02051-3 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-022-02051-3
I don’t think this paper is a great source for that idea - the ratio of people with one infection (440,000) to people with three or more infections (1,000) is so different that I wonder if demographics or behavioral characteristics differ between the groups.
Empirically, their conclusion can’t really be true or each COVID-wave would be worse than the preceding one
- leoedin 4y agoI think most people I know have had it at least twice now - if symptoms were escalating with each infection it would be pretty big news.
- rngname22 4y agoUnless that damage that is accumulating doesn't lead to immediate visible effect but delayed worse outcomes, eg. early death via heart failure or stroke, long-term slightly reduced IQ, mildly worse blood circulation leading to subtle sexual dysfunction etc.
- presto8 4y agoThe linked paper says, "Compared to no reinfection, reinfection contributed additional risks of death [...], hospitalization [...] and sequelae [...]". I need to read the full paper when I have more time, but it does not seem to be dealing with symptoms? And the sequelae seem most troubling since those could take a long time to manifest.