| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 08/05/2021 12:55:25 AM PDT by Jim Robinson, reason:
donnybrook |
Posted on 08/04/2021 6:03:43 PM PDT by gas_dr
BACKGROUND Despite the high efficacy of the BNT162b2 messenger RNA vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), rare breakthrough infections have been reported, including infections among health care workers. Data are needed to characterize these infections and define correlates of breakthrough and infectivity.
METHODS At the largest medical center in Israel, we identified breakthrough infections by performing extensive evaluations of health care workers who were symptomatic (including mild symptoms) or had known infection exposure. These evaluations included epidemiologic investigations, repeat reverse-transcriptase–polymerase-chain-reaction (RT-PCR) assays, antigen-detecting rapid diagnostic testing (Ag-RDT), serologic assays, and genomic sequencing. Correlates of breakthrough infection were assessed in a case–control analysis. We matched patients with breakthrough infection who had antibody titers obtained within a week before SARS-CoV-2 detection (peri-infection period) with four to five uninfected controls and used generalized estimating equations to predict the geometric mean titers among cases and controls and the ratio between the titers in the two groups. We also assessed the correlation between neutralizing antibody titers and N gene cycle threshold (Ct) values with respect to infectivity.
RESULTS Among 1497 fully vaccinated health care workers for whom RT-PCR data were available, 39 SARS-CoV-2 breakthrough infections were documented. Neutralizing antibody titers in case patients during the peri-infection period were lower than those in matched uninfected controls (case-to-control ratio, 0.361; 95% confidence interval, 0.165 to 0.787). Higher peri-infection neutralizing antibody titers were associated with lower infectivity (higher Ct values). Most breakthrough cases were mild or asymptomatic, although 19% had persistent symptoms (>6 weeks). The B.1.1.7 (alpha) variant was found in 85% of samples tested. A total of 74% of case patients had a high viral load (Ct value, <30) at some point during their infection; however, of these patients, only 17 (59%) had a positive result on concurrent Ag-RDT. No secondary infections were documented.
CONCLUSIONS Among fully vaccinated health care workers, the occurrence of breakthrough infections with SARS-CoV-2 was correlated with neutralizing antibody titers during the peri-infection period. Most breakthrough infections were mild or asymptomatic, although persistent symptoms did occur.
The take home point from the article conclusion:
We found that although the BNT162b2 vaccine is extremely effective, rare breakthrough infections carry an infectious potential and create a special challenge, since such infections are often asymptomatic and may pose a risk to vulnerable populations.
The data demonstrate in highly exposed HCW, that the vaccines are performing at better than 95%. The data also show that cases are either asymptomatic OR mild which is exactly what we are seeing in surge hospitals in America.
I am under no illusion that the usual donnybrook will now occur, and simply ask to leave name calling out of it.
I have posted an article from a well respected journal that has a very good methodology.
Good information. Thank you.
Three cheers for high quality information!
Thanks!
Thank you for posting this.
Back when the efficacy figures for the mRNA based vaccines were first published to the public, I really didn’t believe them, and that skepticism was shared by a couple of friends in the physician trade. It just looked too good to be true.
Good to see those figures being born out in practice.
Wait…….what?
No Whistleblower? No Former Employee? No Video??
STOP SPREADING FACTS!!
Funny you posted this today, as I visited my doctor today also. He said a few people in his department had tested positive. All three had nothing beyond “summer cold” like symptoms.
There is enough circumstantial evidence now, I believe, to state Covid-19 is weapon in the Wuhan Bio-warfare program and probably by intent spread throughout the world. It was successful as all of China’s enemies have been seriously diminished economically and to a degree, militarily.
My question, if the above is true, are these variants entering our countries, such as Delta, also coming out of the Wuhan lab??? Are they part of the Bio-warfare attack of China on the rest of the world?
I know. Someone pointed out this will lead me to smoking turds in hell because I have posted decent information. I will cease and desist with actual well methoded studies. LOL
The 95 percent effective rate doesn’t mean what you think it means. I’m tired of trying to educate fellow Freepers. It’s ridiculous at this point. Half of them here might as well be Democrats on this issue.
How many studies did it take for them to get the results they wanted?
And what about asymptomatic shedders?
To the non-trolls here, Dr. Karl Denninger has a good fisking here.
Note that he quotes CNN (an "approved" source) who talk about the virus mutating to escape and spread from people who got jabbed.
CNN says:
They write that some variants that have emerged over the past few months "show a reduced susceptibility to vaccine-acquired immunity, though none appears to escape entirely."
But they caution that these variants emerged "before vaccination was widespread," and that "as vaccines become more widespread, the transmission advantage gained by a virus that can evade vaccine-acquired immunity will increase."
And Denninger comments:
A vaccine that is not sterilizing permits the virus to infect you and replicate and as a result you can infect others. Technically it is not a vaccine at all (which by definition prevents infection); it is a prophylactic therapy. Such a "vaccine" instead acts to reduce or eliminate symptomatic disease. You don't know you're sick and you don't get sick. You don't go to the hospital and you don't die. Unfortunately since you don't know you're sick but are infected and the virus is both replicating in you and shedding you are more-likely to spread the infection to others. All of the current Covid jabs are in this category and so is, for that matter IPV (injected polio vaccine -- the original Salk discovery.) During the original vaccine trials in the summer and fall of 2020 they deliberately did not test any of the recipients for asymptomatic infections. Only a person who developed a significant illness was tested. This has continued post roll-out with the CDC specifying that a close contact of a known case who was vaccinated did not need to quarantine or be tested until and unless they became symptomatic. They knew damn well, in other words, that the jabs were not sterilizing but did not want that data up for public debate because then those who have read history would be likely to make the connection to the present day and thus they did their level best to hide it. That has now blown up in their face with it being conclusively known that jabbed people in fact not only get infected but spread the virus to others.
Seeing how its a data analysis the answer is one. This is an extremely well documented article with excellent methodology. I am sorry it works agains the narrative that some wish to promote.
The data are the data.
Interesting, but not exactly on point to the article presented. It does not change the above analysis.
following
Also from the article: “Of the 33 isolates that were tested for a variant of concern, 28 (85%) were identified as the B.1.1.7 variant, by either multiplex PCR assay or genomic sequencing. At the time of this study, the B.1.1.7 variant was the most widespread variant in Israel and accounted for up to 94.5% of SARS-CoV-2 isolates.1,16 Since the end of the study, the country has had a surge of cases caused by the delta variant, as have many other countries worldwide.”
Ping for your interest
So let me see if I have this correct………
You are countering The New England Journal of Medicine with some dude quoting CNN???????????????
Naw….I’ll take these folks and NEJM any day of the week……
Moriah Bergwerk, M.B., B.S., Tal Gonen, B.A., Yaniv Lustig, Ph.D., Sharon Amit, M.D., Marc Lipsitch, Ph.D., Carmit Cohen, Ph.D., Michal Mandelboim, Ph.D., Einav Gal Levin, M.D., Carmit Rubin, N.D., Victoria Indenbaum, Ph.D., Ilana Tal, R.N., Ph.D., Malka Zavitan, R.N., M.A., et al.
Which is exactly what I have right now. I'm vaccinated. I never get colds.
Bah.
REVEALED: Anti-Trump New England Journal Of Medicine Is Partnered With A Chinese Communist Publishing House
The National Pulse ^ | OCTOBER 8, 2020 | NATALIE WINTERS
Posted on 10/10/2020, 11:47:48 AM by E. Pluribus Unum
The medical journal had never involved itself in U.S. presidential elections before, but recently published an op-ed entitled, “Dying in a Leadership Vacuum,” which implored American voters to remove President Trump office.
he New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), therefore, shares the same election preference as the Chinese Communist Party: a victory for Democratic Presidential candidate Joe Biden.
NEJM and the Chinese government, however, have considerably more in common.
NEJM launched a Chinese publication, app, and website in late 2016.
NEJM also partnered with Shanghai Science and Technology Publishing House, a subsidiary of government-approved Shanghai Century Publishing Co.
Shanghai Science and Technology Publishing House boasts on its mission page how it belongs to “the first batch of “National Excellent Publishing Houses named” by the Chinese Communist Party’s Central Propaganda Department and has received a host of awards from the government.
Furthermore, the group describes itself as “under the guidance of the party and the government’s publishing policies.”
The publishing house routinely holds meetings to entrench employees’ adherence to the goals of the Chinese Communist Party, including trips to Chinese government buildings, meetings with high-level Chinese Communist Party officials, study sessions on Xi Jinping’s speeches, and taking the Chinese Communist Party oath.
And, this....
The New England Journal of Medicine has remained nonpartisan for more than 200 years — until now; In an editorial signed by 34 editors, journal said Trump "took a crisis and turned it into a tragedy"
New York Times via Chicago Tribune ^ | 10/08/2020 | Gina Kolata
Posted on 10/8/2020, 10:01:21 PM by SeekAndFind
Throughout its 208-year history, The New England Journal of Medicine has remained staunchly nonpartisan. The world’s most prestigious medical journal has never supported or condemned a political candidate.
Until now.
In an editorial signed by 34 editors who are U.S. citizens (one editor is not) and published Wednesday, the journal said the Trump administration had responded so poorly to the coronavirus pandemic that it “have taken a crisis and turned it into a tragedy.”
The journal did not explicitly endorse Joe Biden, the Democratic nominee, but that was the only possible inference, other scientists noted.
The editor-in-chief, Dr. Eric Rubin, said the scathing editorial was one of only four in the journal’s history that were signed by all of the editors. The NEJM’s editors join those of another influential journal, Scientific American, who last month endorsed Biden, the former vice president.
The political leadership has failed Americans in many ways that contrast vividly with responses from leaders in other countries, the NEJM said.
In the United States, the journal said, there was too little testing for the virus, especially early on. There was too little protective equipment, and a lack of national leadership on important measures like mask wearing, social distancing, quarantine and isolation.
There were attempts to politicize and undermine the Food and Drug Administration, the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the journal noted.
As a result, the United States has had tens of thousands of “excess” deaths — those caused both directly and indirectly by the pandemic — as well as immense economic pain and an increase in social inequality as the virus hit disadvantaged communities hardest.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.