Interesting titbit from the Pfizer study - the attack rate in the general population and the people who had already had COVID-19 was similar. 1.3% of people who had COVID-19 antibodies BEFORE vaccination got infectedpic.twitter.com/c4rJ8TGQn5
You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
Worth noting that we need a lot more information on these individuals to make any firm statements - it's possible some were false +ves on serology, or that they were infected before the trial etc. Hard to tell from the information at hand!
any thoughts on those of us who have/had covid months ago and still have symptoms?
They report that there are no safety concerns in this subgroup but no specific data in the file that I can seepic.twitter.com/n8WZ4Xa4vq
There are reports of some cross reactivity with other corona virus antigens. Some have tried to make the case it leads to less severe COVID, although I haven't actually analyzed the data.
I have thought reinfection would be rare, but now I'm not so sure. Could be coincidence, but have friend where 2 family members were reinfected in November after all had March infections. The two more sick in March did not reinfect and second infections were closer to colds.
Second episode milder in everyone?
Do you have any thoughts on the confusing Astra-Zeneca numbers (accidental half sized first dose leading to much better apparent effectiveness)?
It seems like one would want to see the case accumulation curves to assess this. If most cases weren't already present pre-symptomatically at enrollment, wouldn't it indicate that previous infection provided no protection from symptomatic COVID-19?
That's an interesting question. From a study design point of view, it's a selected subgroup so hard to interpret, and it could potentially also be due to their case definition? If someone was recently infected but still PCR positive?
But wait, according to the 'reinfections-are-rare' proponents, can only count reinfections were genomes between first and second infection are different.
Is here any mechanism for this virus to stay dormant or something like that to re-emerge later? Otherwise requirement to have different genomes is overkill.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.