rsfern

41 ms·

451.
by rsfern 5y ago
Those are the marginal tax rates. You can’t just add the marginal rates and come up with your actual tax burden, at least in the US. (Can’t speak specifically to property tax in CA) Honestly surprised to see this misapprehension of progr
452.
by rsfern 5y ago
Wow, webmd made it really hard to find the primary source for that. To be clear, they are attributing this drop off of this flu strain to be likely due to pandemic mitigation efforts, as well as maybe lucky timing and some specifics of how
453.
by rsfern 5y ago
As the data becomes more available from South Africa, the UK, and Denmark, it’s starting to look like Omicron is a more infectious version of the wild type, maybe 40% less virulent than Delta, at least in terms of putting people in the hosp
454.
by rsfern 5y ago
I think there’s a bit more nuance to it than that The paper in question found that in this age group risk of hospitalization for cardiac adverse events (CAE) is a few times higher than risk of hospitalization with Covid. It’s unclear (to me
455.
by rsfern 5y ago
So one of the main conclusions is that SARS-CoV-2 in children produces antibody responses to all the other human coronaviruses (this happens in adults too, but the effect is stronger in children) In the discussion section they speculate tha
456.
by rsfern 5y ago
With the clinical trials of various cancer immunotherapies being announced lately, I found this a really interesting resource for some context on this research field There’s some interesting discussion of balancing tech transfer and deploym
457.
The cancer vaccine roller coaster (2009)(nature.com)
1 points by rsfern 5y ago|1 comments
458.
by rsfern 5y ago
If you mean South Africa, I don’t think it’s thought that Omicron originated there, just that it was first sequenced there because they do quite a lot of surveillance sequencing. I have read that it’s thought to have originated in maybe Bot
459.
by rsfern 5y ago
Have you seen any solid data about how unvaccinated individuals fare with omicron? I have been curious and it’s been hard to come by. This preprint from yesterday suggests basically what you’re saying, that underestimated prior immunity cou
460.
by rsfern 5y ago
How is 40% less likely to lead to 1+ day hospitalization “maximally menacing”? I haven’t read this imperial college paper yet, but yesterdays preprint from SA has it at 80% less likely to lead to hospitalization, with some uncertainty as to
461.
by rsfern 5y ago
> one benchmark would be the relative severity profile versus the outgoing Delta variant, right? Agreed, and that’s what this SA study is doing. They compare to delta cases from this summer, and also non-omicron (presumably mostly delta?
462.
by rsfern 5y ago
This paper is interesting and I agree seems like good news. It was posted yesterday BTW. There is a wrinkle though: the 80% reduction in hospitalizations is compared to this summers delta infections, but they found no difference in hospital
463.
by rsfern 5y ago
People want to believe the headlines that confirm their prior beliefs, when if you read the actual research reports your will find that there is still just a lot of uncertainty on the question of intrinsic severity. Those that want to repor
464.
by rsfern 5y ago
That’s exactly the point though! The real question is “what is the relative severity, conditioned on prior immunity” — as in, what is the intrinsic virulence. As in, should an unvaccinated person with no prior Covid expect delta symptoms, o
465.
by rsfern 5y ago
This is good news, but my personal uncertainty factor is still high as to what is driving this. They find lower severity relative to the Delta wave this summer, but no difference in severity relative to non-omicron infections from November.
466.
by rsfern 5y ago
If you read the preprint that first blog links to, they didn’t actually find a negative efficacy with any kind of confidence. They find large confidence intervals that include zero, with large(ish) p-values to boot. P-values and multiple co
467.
by rsfern 5y ago
Ok. That wiki page cites this report from the UK on those stats (which seem to be derived from raw values in the tables maybe?) [0]. The thing is, it’s not straightforward to answer the question “was delta more severe/virulent than alp
468.
by rsfern 5y ago
This summary from august points to a couple studies that support the general 2x hospitalization rate in unvaccinated delta patients. Honestly I wasn’t aware that there was this much uncertainty at the time, I remember hearing that delta was
469.
by rsfern 5y ago
I was hoping for new information, but the points on severity in this article just summarize the recent imperial college preprint, which has been discussed quite a bit. In contrast to just about all the headlines I’ve seen based on that arti
470.
by rsfern 5y ago
This is a very strong claim to make without supporting evidence that the vaccines directly caused or contributed to the cause of these deaths.
471.
by rsfern 5y ago
What? Omicron aside, Delta was more harmful than the original wild type, not less. More severe, higher rate of hospitalization and mortality.
472.
by rsfern 5y ago
Somewhat of a counterpoint: the CDC has tracked the flu through the flusurv network for almost 20 years now (starting 2003/4 season). Popular reporting on how the flu season was going has been pretty common, though obviously with much
473.
by rsfern 5y ago
Unclear, but they must have published early trial data with discussion of why they didn’t go higher?
474.
by rsfern 5y ago
Right, that’s fair, I was overreacting a bit because you left out the age qualifier. For reference the under 40 stats are (4, 9) + (12, 16) extra events for moderna vs (7, 11) for infection
475.
by rsfern 5y ago
This study isn’t based on VAERS data, it’s from the UK. The design tracks their medical record system, under reporting shouldn’t be a big concern Edit: > We assessed the temporal association between COVID-19 vaccination and cardiac adver
476.
by rsfern 5y ago
This isn’t based on VAERS, it’s a uk study using NHS records. Also I think OP’s summary is kind of misleading
477.
by rsfern 5y ago
That’s not how I read the abstract of this paper. Moderna: (2, 8) + (7, 11) extra cases per million Covid: (38, 41) (95% confidence intervals)
478.
by rsfern 5y ago
You mentioned a study, but there’s no DOI, journal, or preprint link… do you mean the blog post linked in the Twitter thread? Edit: I guess I don’t see why there would be time for a DOI or peer review, but I could see there being time for
479.
by rsfern 5y ago
+1. Their business model isn’t ads, it’s 4k$ open access fees paid by the authors
480.
by rsfern 5y ago
> It has a more dangerous risk profile than the previously accepted vaccines Is there compelling research that shows this is actually true? There is elevated risk of heart inflammation, but in my understanding that is not an unprecedente

More ›