tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6211405954943098401.post1436972950121605769..comments2023-11-20T00:23:16.290+01:00Comments on Stethoscope On Rome: Next Time ‘RoundSusan Levenstein, MDhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04664082134917253721noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6211405954943098401.post-80072439863568727232022-12-06T16:32:55.476+01:002022-12-06T16:32:55.476+01:00Josh - unfortunately both of us missed a crucial f...Josh - unfortunately both of us missed a crucial footnote (§§), where the researchers make it clear that they do not base their results on those raw data but on analyses that are adjusted to control for a large range of relevant variables: "age, gender, race, ethnicity, SVI of the testing location, underlying conditions (presence versus absence [of 11 conditions carrying covid risk]), state of residence of person tested, pharmacy chain conducting the test, local incidence (cases per 100,000 by site zip code during the 7 days preceding test date), and date of testing." Susan Levenstein, MDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04664082134917253721noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6211405954943098401.post-37935972581915948462022-12-04T17:45:06.707+01:002022-12-04T17:45:06.707+01:00Susan -
Thanks for your response and thanks fo...Susan -<br /> Thanks for your response and thanks for maintaining this space for in-depth analysis of vital public health issues.<br /> Re Children's Health Defense -- I write for CHD because I believe in their integrity and their mission. I know they have a reputation for misinformation, but I have found no evidence of that. In fact, when I submit articles to CHD, I am challenged and fact-checked at every step. I have submitted to major biology journals and I have published with a major academic press and a major trade publishing house, and no one has submitted my writing to the kind of scrutiny I get at CHD. The editors at CHD tell me they have to do this because their website is in the crosshairs. So please, Susan, if you find misstatements in my article or anything else published on the CHD website, please let me know -- let all of us know.<br /> Re: Calculation of 9% efficacy -- Table 1 from the MMWR contains positive and negative test counts for the unvaccinated and the same numbers for the bivalent boosted<br />Unvaxed Bivalent<br />28,874 5,800 positive test<br />72,010 16,474 negative test<br />100,884 22,274 total tests<br /> <br />72,010 / 100.884 = 0.286 is the proportion of unvaccinated who tested positive<br />5,800 / 22,274 = 0.260 is the proportion of bivalent-boosted who tested positive<br /><br />The difference between these two proportions is 0.026. So the absolute risk reduction is 2.6%<br />This represents a relative difference of 0.026 / 0.286 = 0.091. So the relative risk reduction is 9.1%<br /><br />- JoshJosh Mitteldorfhttp://mitteldorf.substack.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6211405954943098401.post-2834100837445251122022-12-04T16:24:13.409+01:002022-12-04T16:24:13.409+01:00I should also mention that most of the tests in th...I should also mention that most of the tests in the CDC study were done before BQ.1 and 1.1 became dominant in the US, so efficacy against those subvariants remains unknown.Susan Levenstein, MDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04664082134917253721noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6211405954943098401.post-8922922224865494832022-12-04T16:21:23.437+01:002022-12-04T16:21:23.437+01:00Four comments.
1) The source you are citing is a ...Four comments. <br />1) The source you are citing is a novax and G5 conspiracy theory group aligned with Bobby Kennedy Jr. Their latest "Community Forum Alerts" at https://childrenshealthdefense.org/community-forum/action-alerts/ include: "Insist Public Health Officials Suspend mRNA Vaccines Until States Complete Safety Analyses, " "#No5GNearSchools — Keep Cell Towers Away From Schools and Demand 5G Safety Studies," "Defend the Heroes Who Defend Our Freedoms" (against DoD vaccine mandates) etc. etc. <br />2) Can you tell me how you personally calculated 9%?<br />3) If the bivalent boosters "only" brought protection levels back to what they had been months earlier, at the peak effect of previous boosters, that is exactly what is desired.<br />4) The experts I most trust, such as Anthony Fauci and Eric Topol, interpret the CDC in the same way as the CDC itself. Susan Levenstein, MDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04664082134917253721noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6211405954943098401.post-4442897096922695132022-12-04T15:33:21.434+01:002022-12-04T15:33:21.434+01:00Glad it went well for you! It's pretty rare to...Glad it went well for you! It's pretty rare to catch covid outdoors but yes... Both times we were in Berkeley during covid people were hyper-cautious and if the concert was packed I would have figured they'd all be masked. But what do I know, by now.Susan Levenstein, MDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04664082134917253721noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6211405954943098401.post-36766949177006499132022-12-04T15:27:29.117+01:002022-12-04T15:27:29.117+01:00Getting it right is a pretty broad concept, but in...Getting it right is a pretty broad concept, but in a word my answer is no. The UK has been running somewhat lower excess mortality (see link below) than, say, Italy or the US, which is good. But by switching metrics at the same site you can see it has rather more cases lately than the US, though lower than Italy. Confirmed COVID deaths are very similar in the 3 countries, and in my opinion would be much lower if people were masking in indoor public spaces and if more were getting boosters. I'm a bit shocked to see that both the US and the UK seem to have stopped reporting booster administrations just when the updated shots came out. https://ourworldindata.org/explorers/coronavirus-data-explorer?zoomToSelection=true&facet=none&pickerSort=asc&pickerMetric=location&Metric=Excess+mortality+%28%25%29&Interval=Cumulative&Relative+to+Population=true&Color+by+test+positivity=false&country=ITA~USA~GBRSusan Levenstein, MDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04664082134917253721noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6211405954943098401.post-8710278676953469132022-12-04T01:52:55.462+01:002022-12-04T01:52:55.462+01:00I looked at the same CDC study on the bivalent boo...I looked at the same CDC study on the bivalent booster that you cite and I found their raw data didn't seem to jive with the numbers they claimed for vaccine effectiveness. The raw data implies an effectiveness against positive COVID test of only 9%. https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/covid-bivalent-booster-falls-flat-cdc-report/<br />(Greetings from your Harvard classmate - JJM) Josh Mitteldorfhttp://mitteldorf.substack.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6211405954943098401.post-67098845517978674932022-12-04T00:50:20.025+01:002022-12-04T00:50:20.025+01:00Always glad to read your blog. Amazed at how much ...Always glad to read your blog. Amazed at how much you can cover. I’m one of the over-65 who was glad to get Paxlovid when I caught COVID, apparently at an open-air Bonnie Raitt concert at the Greek Theater in Berkeley. Should have worn a mask! Felt better soon after completing the 5-day course (actually during the course) and tested negative 10 days after first symptoms. No relapse. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6211405954943098401.post-28060398374722574432022-12-03T22:18:32.868+01:002022-12-03T22:18:32.868+01:00Thanks. Interesting but difficult to deduce wheth...Thanks. Interesting but difficult to deduce whether we are getting it right in the UK. I am now 91, so keenly interested. KPAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com