4 ms·
Yeah, sorry I wasn't clear, I was talking about the covid shots. There are studies suggesting negative efficacy against infection after the initial period°. So
by ifyoubuildit 2y ago
Yeah, sorry I wasn't clear, I was talking about the covid shots. There are studies suggesting negative efficacy against infection after the initial period°. So while I think for hospitalizations and death there is a stronger argument, for infections it's not terribly clear.
° from chat gpt (with all the standard caveats):
Source: "Vaccine effectiveness against SARS-CoV-2 infection with the Omicron or Delta variants following a two-dose or booster BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 vaccination series: a Danish cohort study" (Published in The Lancet).
Source: "Efficacy of a Fourth Dose of Covid-19 mRNA Vaccine against Omicron" (Published in NEJM).
Source: UKHSA COVID-19 vaccine surveillance reports.
- guyzero 2y agoFrom the first paper: "Conclusions Two vaccine doses provided high protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 hospitalization with the Alpha and Delta variants with protection, notably against infection, waning over time. Two vaccine doses provided only limited and short-lived protection against SARS-CoV-2 infection with Omicron. However, the protection against COVID-19 hospitalization following Omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection was higher. The third vaccine dose substantially increased the level and duration of protection against infection with the Omicron variant and provided a high level of sustained protection against COVID-19 hospitalization among the +60-year-olds." No indication of negative efficacy.
- ifyoubuildit 2y agoLook at the table on page 9 for 2 doses past 180 days. Negative efficacy is within the error bars. By no means a slam dunk, but it's there. EDIT: Also consider that the endpoint is "symptomatic infection", so it misses asymptomatic infections. The 3rd dose followup periods aren't long enough in this study to see what happens there.