Do we have good studies on the IFR of SARS-CoV-2 for people who are fully vaccinated? Preferably age-specific estimates.
I think the ONS in the UK is probably in the best position to do that, since I don't think anybody else does random surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 positivity on a regular basis, but I don't know if they have published any age-specific IFR estimates by vaccination status.
Since I have no doubt that vaccination reduces the probability of infection conditional on exposure, the IFR will understate the benefits of vaccination, but the probability of death conditional on infection is still interesting in my opinion.
The ONS publishes age-specific COVID-19 death rates, but the COVID-19 Infection Survey doesn't give separate estimates of positivity for vaccinated and unvaccinated people. Maybe they don't know the vaccination status of survey participants, but I would find that surprising.

• • •


Keep Current with Philippe Lemoine

Philippe Lemoine Profile picture


Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!



Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @phl43

25 Nov
C'est incroyable et profondément déprimant que, après plus d'un an et demi de pandémie, la HAS puisse encore écrire des choses pareilles sans craindre le ridicule. À juste titre d'ailleurs puisque les journalistes reprennent ça sans sourciller.
Je n'attends pas des journalistes qu'ils comprennent comment ces modèles fonctionnent, même si ce n'est pas très compliqué, mais à défaut de comprendre pourquoi ils sont pourris ils pourraient au moins remarquer que jusqu'à présent ils se sont systématiquement plantés.
Mais au lieu de ça ils répètent servilement des affirmations complètement absurdes parce qu'elles sortent de sacro-saints "modèles" auxquels ils ne comprennent rien.
Read 7 tweets
25 Nov
Le pire c'est que je suis sûr que, si un couvre-feu ou un confinement était déclaré, ce serait beaucoup plus que ça parce qu'avec la propagande non-stop les gens considèrent systématiquement que si le gouvernement fait quelque chose c'est qu'il n'y a pas d'autre choix.
Alors qu'évidemment qu'il y a un autre choix, ne rien faire du tout, ce qui ne changera pas grand chose sur le déroulement de l'épidémie (même si manifestement les cognoscenti ne l'ont toujours pas compris), mais qui fera une différence énorme sur le bien-être de la population.
Les gens n'arrivent pas à concevoir que nous sommes gouvernés par des demeurés qui gèrent la crise en improvisant au fil de l'eau. Du coup ils concluent soit que les restrictions doivent être justifiées soit qu'elles font partie d'un plan machiavélique.
Read 9 tweets
22 Nov
Many have noted the cyclical nature of the pandemic, with waves that come and go seemingly at random, but the reasons for this remain mysterious. In this post, I argue that population structure could explain this and several other puzzling phenomena ⬇️…
I start by describing what an epidemic is supposed to look like according to standard epidemiological models. As long as people have the same number of contacts, incidence rises until herd immunity is reached, at which point it starts falling and eventually the epidemic dies. Image
If people's behavior changes and they reduce their number of contacts, because of a lockdown or because they do so voluntarily, incidence can fall before herd immunity is reached, but it starts rising again as soon as normal behavior resumes. Image
Read 71 tweets
18 Nov
Well, if a meta-analysis of 6 studies that are totally incapable of estimating causal effects and found wildly heterogeneous results say that it's 53%, it has to be 53% and anyone who denies it hates science!
This is one of the 6 studies they used in the meta-analysis, and one of those for which they assessed the risk of bias as "moderate", as opposed to "critical". I just had a look at their model, and it doesn't even include covariates for mobility, lmao.…
Read 5 tweets
18 Nov
There is more to seasons than temperature, but I agree that although "respiratory infections are seasonal" is constantly offered as an explanation, it doesn't actually explain anything.
In my forthcoming post about the effect of population structure on transmission, I take a stab at explaining the cyclical nature of the epidemic. It's speculative but at least I try to go beyond this slogan, which is largely empty in my opinion.
But this is precisely what I'm talking about: explaining the cyclical nature of the epidemic by saying that amounts to explaining what is to be explained by simply restating it, which is not an actual explanation.
Read 6 tweets
17 Nov
I'm happy to report that the "What Country Will Come Up With the Dumbest COVID-19 Rules" contest just opened again in Europe 🥳 I note a somewhat concerning lack of originality so far, but they're just getting warmed up, so I expect more innovations this winter.
At least I hope so, because we have a lot of progress to make before we can compete at the international level with the true giants in the field, such as New Zealand and Australia.
Maybe we should hire former Australian and New Zealand prime ministers so they can train our leaders. Sometimes you have to bring in foreign talent to improve. We could create a special category of visas and give them a tax break to attract them.
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!



Become Premium


Donate via Paypal

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!