Oh come on. "95% efficacy" for either Moderna or Pfizer in the FDA process DOES NOT mean "95% less severe hospitalizations and death in vax'ed individuals." This is a strikingly incorrect "correction."https://twitter.com/Laurie_Garrett/status/1359219118315036673 …
-
Show this thread
-
The efficacy endpoint for these trials has been "any symptomatic disease"—even sniffles, headache, fever. That's what the 95% refers to, not "less severe hospitalization & death" which, in the trials (all the trials) have been reduced by 100%. Transmission, is another thing.
20 replies 81 retweets 900 likesShow this thread -
zeynep tufekci Retweeted A Marm Kilpatrick
Here's a very smart thread based on actual data (not the nonsense "we have no idea" that's become standard) on transmission with initial estimate of about 90% reduction in transmission. Not the final word, but there will be SOME transmission reduction.https://twitter.com/DiseaseEcology/status/1359213768488620034 …
zeynep tufekci added,
A Marm Kilpatrick @DiseaseEcologyIncorporating uncertainty from each component (except Ct-infectiousness correlation) w/ parametric boostrapping produces median reductions of 90% (87-93%) in infection & 91% (89-94%) of transmission (Note: many CIs were not symmetrical so median !=mean/point estimates): pic.twitter.com/4enSxpQvdKShow this thread7 replies 130 retweets 525 likesShow this thread -
It makes total sense to wait for more data to estimate transmission reduction to guide policy in a more fine-grained matter. That's not the same as "we don't know" or "we have no idea." Multiple trials have already measured some relevant data and we've had more recently.
3 replies 13 retweets 282 likesShow this thread -
So to repeat: the Pfizer/Moderna trials endpoint was *any* symptomatic disease. So even sniffles or headache counts. All the vaccines* seems to work well against severe disease, but especially well against deaths/hospitalizations. (*I can't make sense of ChAdOx1right now).
5 replies 24 retweets 298 likesShow this thread -
And we've had multiple data points coming in about transmission reduction since December. From the trials, from labs, and pretty soon we will start getting data from vaccinated people in the community. We're not in some totally agnostic "we have no idea" land here.
10 replies 14 retweets 268 likesShow this thread -
zeynep tufekci Retweeted Laurie Garrett
I just want to add that to this thread and note that the below is nonsense. With all due respect to her good work before, this has become an unacceptable situation. (And I’ve ignored multiple other examples).https://twitter.com/Laurie_Garrett/status/1362814447656587264 …
zeynep tufekci added,
Laurie GarrettVerified account @Laurie_Garrett3/ What we are looking at is "vaccine resistance" -- it's akin to antibiotic resistance that can be so strong in some bacteria that they are 100% incurable infections. In this study, the spectre of#COVID19#vaccines being rendered useless looms -- NOT assured, but ominous.Show this thread15 replies 58 retweets 349 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @zeynep
Mark C Retweeted Laurie Garrett
She missed so badly on
#mRNA capabilities for a vaccine no one should trust her proclamations at this point. She is fodder for antivaxers and doom scrollershttps://twitter.com/Laurie_Garrett/status/1227984370469933057 …Mark C added,
Laurie GarrettVerified account @Laurie_GarrettGee, who knew it was so easy to make & clinically test a#coronavirus#vaccine? It's been 17 yrs effort for#SARS vax -- nothing. Six yrs for#MERS,.nothing. Where is this "we can do it in 7 or 8 months" optimism coming from? https://twitter.com/dougmmilford/status/1227978296605978625 …2 replies 0 retweets 9 likes
I know. In fairness, lots of people were surprised. But, of course, the point is some people are better at figuring out where things are going.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.