3 ms·

> since you clearly don't trust my own assessment of the data. Clearly. > people who have absolutely no ability to read or evaluate scientific literature asse

> since you clearly don't trust my own assessment of the data. Clearly. > people who have absolutely no ability to read or evaluate scientific literature assert things that they cannot know. That's quite an assumption on HN. Half the people on here have a significant scientific background. I've got a PhD (computational biology), papers published etc. I'm quite happy to read and get the gist of scientific literature in this field. What I don't have is the specific expertise that comes from being a medical expert, having years of experience in the field, and having the time to look at this in great detail full-time. For that I am happy to defer to the experts here. Is your claim that all the experts from all of the countries who have approved the booster programmes are all incompetent? > The booster doses were approved without a single human efficacy trial I don't think that's true at all. I seem to remember several studies. How about this CovBoost one? https://www.covboost.org.uk/results https://www.covboost.org.uk/results

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
timr 3y ago
> I don't think that's true at all. I seem to remember several studies. I linked the FDA announcement for the latest dosing changes. You can see how they justify it. It's funny that you link the CovBoost thing. They're summarizing this paper: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02717-3/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... Which is not about the bivalent vaccines (it's from 2021, concerning dose 3, not...6? 7?), and it's by this fellow, who...let's just say that he's not taking your side of the argument: https://twitter.com/apsmunro/status/1466707690332340227 https://twitter.com/apsmunro/status/1466707690332340227 It's a good paper, it just doesn't support the argument you're making. Overall, it shows that third dose boosting seems to play a minimal role in otherwise healthy people who have had two doses and been infected.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

timr 3y ago

> I don't think that's true at all. I seem to remember several studies. I linked the FDA announcement for the latest dosing changes. You can see how they justify it. It's funny that you link the CovBoost thing. They're summarizing this paper: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02717-3/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6... Which is not about the bivalent vaccines (it's from 2021, concerning dose 3, not...6? 7?), and it's by this fellow, who...let's just say that he's not taking your side of the argument: https://twitter.com/apsmunro/status/1466707690332340227 https://twitter.com/apsmunro/status/1466707690332340227 It's a good paper, it just doesn't support the argument you're making. Overall, it shows that third dose boosting seems to play a minimal role in otherwise healthy people who have had two doses and been infected.