Really important to note this. There may be the usual fears around B.1.617 because people will see a paper with "x-fold reduction in neutralizing antibodies" etc. Keep in mind that drop DOES NOT correspond even to reduced efficacy, let alone ability to prevent severe cases.https://twitter.com/VincentRK/status/1391869808858238979 …
Yes to watching variants for partial immune escape but I see many people scaring themselves & others when they see "x-fold drop" in neutralizing antibodies. Don't fall for it. It may have little to no clinical significance. Look for real life data. Longer:https://www.theinsight.org/p/vaccine-efficacy-statistical-power …
However, while I think it's fair to say we expect the vaccines to keep working very well, increased transmissibility — which is looking increasingly likely for B.1.617 (like the earlier B.1.1.7 variant) — is a huge threat to the unvaccinated, exactly because it's exponential.
In December, when
@michaelmina_lab and I called for *a trial* for delaying boosters, especially for younger populations, the upside was the potential to expand coverage quickly and globally. I'll always regret lack of such a trial/option. (And we both got harshly attacked, tbh).
The vaccines we have available right now are far more effective against COVID than the flu shot is normally. Leaves a lot of room for variants that are still impacted by the vaccine. Very good news indeed.
Very hard to stop the twitter panic. Ty as always, real life is where we tell reality from panic
What about the Chinese vaccines? A friend in Mexico received one and is now worried it's not protective enough.
I was going to write a wisecrack about not cramping a certain alarmist’s style on this topic. But his recent post on this was quite muted and measured compared to his usual Great to see positive news based on evidence.
So, does high or low nab matter? or are we more depending on our memory B and T cells so level of nab is arbitrary?
High is better but it ain't everything by a long shot