So, again the 29 re-hospitalized out of the mere 315 re-infections is slightly proportionally larger (29/315=9.2%) than 4094 hospitalized out of 74,196 initial infections (5.4%). As they say, the tiny group susceptible to reinfection is proportionally more immunocompromised!
-
-
Replying to @zeynep @lisa_iannattone and
This is how conditional probability works, also for vaccines: if you look at severe outcomes for vaccinated people, they are pretty uncommon (as is reinfection as this paper states!) but when they do occur, more likely to be immunocompromised or otherwise higher-risk.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zeynep @lisa_iannattone and
PLUS, they explain they are missing all the mild/asymptomatic re-infections (because not tested) and even the 29 (compared to initial 4094) just happen to be in the hospital, they can't even say it's a COVID hospitalization but even assuming they all were, it's super uncommon!
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @lisa_iannattone and
Hence excellent news, and great paper. Looking up conditional probability (sometimes called selecting on the dependent variable) would help clarify the misunderstanding, though the paper does explain the findings—assuming the audience understands conditional probability. Cheers!
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @zeynep @lisa_iannattone and
Sorry, did not attach the right screenshot. Here you go! Green is the re-infections, red is the initial infections. You can see how rare re-infections that reach any level of concern are (even testing). Just the raw numbers speak for themselves. https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/1445421564011372547 …pic.twitter.com/2XeOX4Kla0
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @nogenderid and
Your messaging is inconsistent. On one hand you reassure ppl that we’ll catch covid, likely many times, and it’s fine bc the danger is the novelty. But with data showing covid reinfections are dangerous, the message shifts to it being okay bc people are unlikely to catch it again
1 reply 2 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @lisa_iannattone @nogenderid and
The obvious point, that has been highlighted many times, is that reinfections are a bigger threat especially to elderly (immunosenescence) and the immunocompromised or otherwise high-risk. For most people, obviously, they are less severe or asymptomatic—that's how vaccines work.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @lisa_iannattone and
The vaccinated and/or previously-infected do not face the same severity risk as the immunologically naive, which is pretty basic (again, how vaccines work), but obviously, less often, severe re-infections and breakthroughs occur—and *again* disproportionately in the high-risk.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @lisa_iannattone and
Hence we should have extra precautions especially around vulnerable populations: vaccine mandates around them (like nursing homes), frequent testing, lower virus circulation. Immunity is protective but not absolute immortality, obviously. Cheers!
3 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @lisa_iannattone and
Everyone's immunity to
#covid19 will wane over time after 1st infection. Then their chances of being hospitalized go up rather than down on subsequent infections, if the data in this paper hold up to subsequent studies. Do you disagree with that statement? Thank you for engaging.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Check the numbers. Of the initial 75,000+, there were 4094 hospitalizations. That's a 5.5% hospitalization rate, yikes. Same group then went through an intense surge, no vaccine, and had 29 hospitalizations—likely not even all due to COVID but let's say all were. That's 0.039%.pic.twitter.com/msLT4qZooN
-
-
Replying to @zeynep @lisa_iannattone and
Hi, you're not addressing my point which is that it is known that immunity wanes (and as more people get infected) reinfection will become more likely. The conditional prob of being hospitalized given it's a reinfection appears higher than if it is an original infection.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @nogenderid @lisa_iannattone and
To make that claim: *any* reinfection is more likely to turn into hospitalization compared with initial infection, you'd need to test the whole sample of 75,000: to get the correct denominator. That's not what the paper does, it's a conditional probability paper.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
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.