Protection from Omikron quickly wanes. At what point does that "extra bit of immunity" justify heart injury? We're talking about roughly 1 in 10000 doses administered causing Myocarditis in a young male. We don't know if the risk increases after each dose, but preliminary data suggests that it may:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.23.21268276v...
The study also shows that there was practically no increase in risk for the third shot (though with a fairly wide CI), so it's possible the risk may just depend on whether someone is immunonaive or not.
The risk is given by the FDA as up to 1:14285 (males aged 12-17) for the second dose:
https://www.fda.gov/media/154869/download
However, a study from Hong Kong found an incidence of up to 1:2700 in the second dose (males aged 12-17):
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34849657/
What we don't know is whether a vaccination would actually prevent Myocarditis in a breakthrough infection. These risks may well not be mutually exclusive. In any case, the risks are not directly comparable unless you assume 100% PCR-confirmed infection risk over six months, which is of course unrealistic.
> In any case, the risks are not directly comparable unless you assume 100% PCR-confirmed infection risk over six months, which is of course unrealistic.
I do wonder how unrealistic it is with Omicron, but maybe we'll get lucky and Omicron's less likely to cause myocarditis.
[1]: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.23.21260998v...
Has America tried addressing COVID that way, increasing the number of doctors?
The amount of education doctors get is harmful. It actually makes them worse at their job. It's effectively a form of hazing by AMA.
There's a combinatorial explosion of effects and side effects in the human body. It's important to learn and memorize, and memorization is undervalued, but not to that extent. It's like memorizing optimal solutions to traveling salesman instances. Other times it's like memorizing a times table of the three-digit numbers. That is a waste of time and will make you a much worse mathematician.
https://www.ucdavis.edu/health/covid-19/news/viral-loads-sim...
And that's after fewer people who are vaccinated catch the virus, and there's more aborted infections and asymptomatic infections after vaccination.
All of those studies use PCR Ct values as proxies for viruses and compare vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals with similar symptom severity, and it turns out that correlates at peak because symptoms are on average due to antigen loading. Those studies aren't very good at showing how effective vaccination is at preventing transmission. They just show that its nonzero.
As I have stated elsewhere in this thread, the rate of vaccine escape has gone up by about 5x, (from 6% to 30%), but that's still much better than one would get from no vaccination.
I can't see how it could spread any faster than it already does through vaccinated people. A few people there being unvaccinated wont make a difference.
This is the big one. Conditional on symptoms the viral load may be similar betwee vax/no vax, but if the vax have much less probability of getting symptoms then all is good.
I honestly don't understand how there wouldn't be protection from the vaccine. It's not a sterilising vaccine, but it does offer protection.
In other words, once infected, there is no reduction. How effective are these boosters against Omikron infection, weeks and months down the line?
With vaccine and booster shots, both require a similar amount of hospital resources.
The current way is simply not sustainable.
Look, the risks are pretty low for younger people, but from a population level every extra bit of immunity helps to reduce the likelihood of health care system collapse (which has been the goal throughout the pandemic).