pahnzoh t1_iw7f1iv wrote
Reply to comment by Darwins_Dog in Farmington child hospitalized for RSV in Maine after family cannot find NH beds by every1getslaid
It's referring to actual studies.
I'm talking about the vaccines performance now. Not a year ago or whenever in the past.
People are so dogmatic about vaccines as soon as they see the word their reptilian brain just goes haywire. It's okay to admit its a complex issue and the vaccines are not that great in November 2022 since the predominant strains in circulation have heavily mutated.
Darwins_Dog t1_iw7wbef wrote
It includes a lot of links to make it look like they refer to actual research, but very little reference to actual research. Of the 10 links in the article, 5 are to other articles written by Time, 2 are to data about the prevalence of omicron variants, 1 is the GSAID homepage, and 1 is a treatment guideline update for monoclonal antibody treatment. Also at least 3 of the linked organizations (CDC, NIH, and GSAID) recommend vaccines and boosters for anyone eligible.
So 1 of 10 references is an actual (preprint) article about reduced vaccine efficacy. It also shows (figure 1b, c, d) that vaccination boosters provide a substantial increase in titers of neutralizing antibodies to all variants examined.
The point of this article is for people to read it while "researching" vaccine information and share it to bolster an argument. It contains almost no relevant information and what it has it heavily editorialized. I guess I can't fault them too much because it worked on you 100%.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments