Post by Admin on Aug 24, 2021 17:32:03 GMT -6
People are searching for truth surrounding COVID, the Delta variant, vaccines, transmission and our health in general. I have found a source, a paper, that gives some hard data on breakthrough infections, vaccines, Delta and outcomes. I am going to link the full paper and summarize what I read below.
Note - this paper is still undergoing peer-review and has not been accepted for publication yet, there is a large disclaimer that it should not be used for personal or public health decisions until the peer-review process is completed. It has been submitted to the Lancet. This paper is a medical research paper and it is highly technical in nature, you are definitely not dumb if you do not understand everything you read in the link. I encourage everyone to try and follow along with my analysis below by finding the same sections in the paper and seeing if you agree or disagree with my interpretation.
Link to Paper - Click Here
What I read in this paper:
A hospital for infectious diseases in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam was offered blanket coverage by the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine for its 866 staff and accepted. Vaccinations were begun in March 2021.
In early June, a staff member complained of muscle aches and fatigue and was tested for COVID. He came back positive (PCR test) which implemented testing for the entire hospital staff, lockdown of the hospital and isolation for those testing positive. Of 866 staff members, over the course of the next 2 weeks, 69 positive test results were recorded and 62 of those participated in the study for the paper.
Of those 62 positive cases, 60 were fully vaccinated and 2 of them had had their first dose only.
While all cases were technically hospitalized due to the isolation procedures, they did not require a hospital for survival. There were 15 asymptomatic positive COVID cases. 47 cases developed respiratory symptoms of some sort. 3 had cases of pneumonia verified by chest x-ray, and 1 required supplemental oxygen via nasal cannula. There were no deaths among the infected.
Genetic sequencing showed that the COVID strain was the Delta variant and deeper analysis showed that it was highly likely that the staff members had been infecting each other rather than being infected from several outside sources of COVID.
The viral loads for the positive patients were 251x higher, on average, than viral loads seen with COVID infections in March/April of 2020 - the original Alpha variant. Viral loads when compared with study symptomatic infection vs. symptomatic Alpha variant infection were much higher than 251x. Asymptomatic comparison of viral loads for older Alpha cases vs. Delta cases in this study were equivalent. Viral loads peaked in the 2-3 days before and after the onset of symptoms. Viral loads in symptomatic patients were 50,000x higher than asymptomatic patients in the study. Median time between positive diagnosis of COVID and a negative PCR test was 21 days with the longest being 33 days.
Tests on the infected and some of the un-infected, as a control group of also vaccinated members, were done on antibody levels. At initial diagnosis, it was discovered that the infected patients had lower levels of antibodies present than the non-infected patients.
As symptoms ramped up and viral loads increased, there was no correlation between level of antibody activity/presence and higher viral loads among the infected.
That's what I read in this paper.
What did I take from this paper?
First, I hope that the peer-review process for this paper is completed and that it is taken as a true result. We need good, open sourced data like this across the board.
Secondly, I wish there were studies done to this level on other vaccines that are being used. This data can only point to the effectiveness of the AstraZeneca version. While there can be inferences made from this data, the bottom line when comparing this to Moderna or Pfizer, will simply be that we do not know.
On the effectiveness of a vaccine to prevent severe cases/death - the data shows that out of 62 breakthrough cases, that perhaps one would have required hospitalization (and that is highly debatable) and that none died. I would have to get a statistician on board to get the exact confidence intervals for such a sample size, but the raw numbers show that the values for hospitalization are likely below 2% and death would be far lower than that. Small sample size could be at play here. Anyone volunteer to run the numbers on highest percentage of hospitalizations in the population given a zero result in 62 samples? Thanks in advance!
On the effectiveness of a vaccine to prevent infection - in this paper, 69 out of 866 tested positive in a breakthrough case. That's 8%. it should be noted that this is the worst of possible conditions. As noted in the paper, the work environment was for treating infectious disease, had a "not great" ventilation system and masks were generally not worn in the office areas. Additionally, those who tested positive showed statistically significant lower levels of anti-bodies upon initial diagnosis than a random sampling of the 92% who were not infected. There is something either about those people or the doses that they received that made the vaccine less effective against the Delta Variant. Without further study, we cannot tell whether it was due to the individual, the particular batch of the vaccine or the procedure to administer it that allowed the breakthrough cases.
On the effectiveness of vaccines to prevent transmission - going with the above paragraph, if you somehow get a breakthrough case of COVID through a vaccine, it does not appear to prevent transmission to others. It is more likely that others with lower anti-body counts will be affected than those with higher anti-body counts, per the results, and it is more likely that you will transmit the virus if you are symptomatic than asymptomatic. I will admit though, that this last part is an assumption of mine based on total viral load. I honestly have no way of knowing what the exact viral load necessary for transmission is. It likely varies between individuals.
On comparing Delta Variant to Early Variants - Delta appears to be MUCH more infectious than previous versions of COVID. This paper shows direct evidence of that with viral loads tested for and calculated. It remains to be seen whether the Delta variant is as deadly, more deadly or less deadly than the original variants though. Data from other sources seems to imply that less deadly is the correct answer, particularly among countries with modern medical systems.
Should you get vaccinated? - the data in this paper shows that in a highly infectious environment, this particular vaccine was greater than 90% effective at preventing infection and no one came close to dying at all. Of course, the long term effects of such injections are still widely unknown and as I said above, inferring effectiveness comparisons between vaccines based on this data might be stretching a bit.
Should you wear a mask? - the data (other sources) shows that masks are effective on preventing spread from an infected/transmissible individual to others provided that they are used correctly in all facets. Distancing is even more effective than masks. The data in this paper shows that for vaccinated individuals, it is possible to be infected and once infected you are able to pass on that infection to others with lower antibody counts. These can be vaccinated or unvaccinated individuals. Asymptomatic individuals have lower viral loads over all and are less likely to pass on the infection, but peak viral loads for symptomatic individuals can be 3 days before the onset of symptoms. I think wearing a mask is a good idea, in general, when indoors and unable to distance, but I am not about mandates.
What about natural immunity? - It should be noted that nothing in this paper addresses natural immunity at all. This is about breakthrough infection data for the AstraZeneca vaccine. There was no mention of previous infection status for any of the 62 infected individuals. Other sources show that natural immunity (having had COVID and recovered) is at least as effective and perhaps MORE effective than getting a vaccine. When we are discussing herd immunity, we should be discussing vaccinated people as well as naturally immune people as part of the herd. Though, that is hard to do because it is shown that vaccines can have breakthrough infections while it has not been reported anywhere that anyone has had multiple COVID infections. And believe you, me, if it had happened in any capacity at all, MSM and those pushing the narrative would have been all over it.
Anyhow, thanks for reading this far. I hope you got some information that was useful to you. Feel free to ask questions or make comments below.
Thanks all!
Note - this paper is still undergoing peer-review and has not been accepted for publication yet, there is a large disclaimer that it should not be used for personal or public health decisions until the peer-review process is completed. It has been submitted to the Lancet. This paper is a medical research paper and it is highly technical in nature, you are definitely not dumb if you do not understand everything you read in the link. I encourage everyone to try and follow along with my analysis below by finding the same sections in the paper and seeing if you agree or disagree with my interpretation.
Link to Paper - Click Here
What I read in this paper:
A hospital for infectious diseases in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam was offered blanket coverage by the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine for its 866 staff and accepted. Vaccinations were begun in March 2021.
In early June, a staff member complained of muscle aches and fatigue and was tested for COVID. He came back positive (PCR test) which implemented testing for the entire hospital staff, lockdown of the hospital and isolation for those testing positive. Of 866 staff members, over the course of the next 2 weeks, 69 positive test results were recorded and 62 of those participated in the study for the paper.
Of those 62 positive cases, 60 were fully vaccinated and 2 of them had had their first dose only.
While all cases were technically hospitalized due to the isolation procedures, they did not require a hospital for survival. There were 15 asymptomatic positive COVID cases. 47 cases developed respiratory symptoms of some sort. 3 had cases of pneumonia verified by chest x-ray, and 1 required supplemental oxygen via nasal cannula. There were no deaths among the infected.
Genetic sequencing showed that the COVID strain was the Delta variant and deeper analysis showed that it was highly likely that the staff members had been infecting each other rather than being infected from several outside sources of COVID.
The viral loads for the positive patients were 251x higher, on average, than viral loads seen with COVID infections in March/April of 2020 - the original Alpha variant. Viral loads when compared with study symptomatic infection vs. symptomatic Alpha variant infection were much higher than 251x. Asymptomatic comparison of viral loads for older Alpha cases vs. Delta cases in this study were equivalent. Viral loads peaked in the 2-3 days before and after the onset of symptoms. Viral loads in symptomatic patients were 50,000x higher than asymptomatic patients in the study. Median time between positive diagnosis of COVID and a negative PCR test was 21 days with the longest being 33 days.
Tests on the infected and some of the un-infected, as a control group of also vaccinated members, were done on antibody levels. At initial diagnosis, it was discovered that the infected patients had lower levels of antibodies present than the non-infected patients.
As symptoms ramped up and viral loads increased, there was no correlation between level of antibody activity/presence and higher viral loads among the infected.
That's what I read in this paper.
What did I take from this paper?
First, I hope that the peer-review process for this paper is completed and that it is taken as a true result. We need good, open sourced data like this across the board.
Secondly, I wish there were studies done to this level on other vaccines that are being used. This data can only point to the effectiveness of the AstraZeneca version. While there can be inferences made from this data, the bottom line when comparing this to Moderna or Pfizer, will simply be that we do not know.
On the effectiveness of a vaccine to prevent severe cases/death - the data shows that out of 62 breakthrough cases, that perhaps one would have required hospitalization (and that is highly debatable) and that none died. I would have to get a statistician on board to get the exact confidence intervals for such a sample size, but the raw numbers show that the values for hospitalization are likely below 2% and death would be far lower than that. Small sample size could be at play here. Anyone volunteer to run the numbers on highest percentage of hospitalizations in the population given a zero result in 62 samples? Thanks in advance!
On the effectiveness of a vaccine to prevent infection - in this paper, 69 out of 866 tested positive in a breakthrough case. That's 8%. it should be noted that this is the worst of possible conditions. As noted in the paper, the work environment was for treating infectious disease, had a "not great" ventilation system and masks were generally not worn in the office areas. Additionally, those who tested positive showed statistically significant lower levels of anti-bodies upon initial diagnosis than a random sampling of the 92% who were not infected. There is something either about those people or the doses that they received that made the vaccine less effective against the Delta Variant. Without further study, we cannot tell whether it was due to the individual, the particular batch of the vaccine or the procedure to administer it that allowed the breakthrough cases.
On the effectiveness of vaccines to prevent transmission - going with the above paragraph, if you somehow get a breakthrough case of COVID through a vaccine, it does not appear to prevent transmission to others. It is more likely that others with lower anti-body counts will be affected than those with higher anti-body counts, per the results, and it is more likely that you will transmit the virus if you are symptomatic than asymptomatic. I will admit though, that this last part is an assumption of mine based on total viral load. I honestly have no way of knowing what the exact viral load necessary for transmission is. It likely varies between individuals.
On comparing Delta Variant to Early Variants - Delta appears to be MUCH more infectious than previous versions of COVID. This paper shows direct evidence of that with viral loads tested for and calculated. It remains to be seen whether the Delta variant is as deadly, more deadly or less deadly than the original variants though. Data from other sources seems to imply that less deadly is the correct answer, particularly among countries with modern medical systems.
Should you get vaccinated? - the data in this paper shows that in a highly infectious environment, this particular vaccine was greater than 90% effective at preventing infection and no one came close to dying at all. Of course, the long term effects of such injections are still widely unknown and as I said above, inferring effectiveness comparisons between vaccines based on this data might be stretching a bit.
Should you wear a mask? - the data (other sources) shows that masks are effective on preventing spread from an infected/transmissible individual to others provided that they are used correctly in all facets. Distancing is even more effective than masks. The data in this paper shows that for vaccinated individuals, it is possible to be infected and once infected you are able to pass on that infection to others with lower antibody counts. These can be vaccinated or unvaccinated individuals. Asymptomatic individuals have lower viral loads over all and are less likely to pass on the infection, but peak viral loads for symptomatic individuals can be 3 days before the onset of symptoms. I think wearing a mask is a good idea, in general, when indoors and unable to distance, but I am not about mandates.
What about natural immunity? - It should be noted that nothing in this paper addresses natural immunity at all. This is about breakthrough infection data for the AstraZeneca vaccine. There was no mention of previous infection status for any of the 62 infected individuals. Other sources show that natural immunity (having had COVID and recovered) is at least as effective and perhaps MORE effective than getting a vaccine. When we are discussing herd immunity, we should be discussing vaccinated people as well as naturally immune people as part of the herd. Though, that is hard to do because it is shown that vaccines can have breakthrough infections while it has not been reported anywhere that anyone has had multiple COVID infections. And believe you, me, if it had happened in any capacity at all, MSM and those pushing the narrative would have been all over it.
Anyhow, thanks for reading this far. I hope you got some information that was useful to you. Feel free to ask questions or make comments below.
Thanks all!