There's one thing I'm not sure, because I'm not an immunologist: does the fact that only 53% less people in the vaccinated group had developed N-antibodies *prove* a lack of efficacy?
The fact people had N-antibodies proves they *met* the virus, but what does it say about their protection? Even if the vaccine had perfect efficacy in protecting people, couldn't (shouldn't) their immune system build N-antibodies after meeting the virus, even though vaccine-induced S-antibodies were doing the job getting rid of the virus?
I remember reading a paper explaining that Moderna's Covid vaccine seems to prevent people who get breakthrough infections from building proper N-antibodies that would strengthen their immune response for next time they meet a SARS-CoV2 virus. So maybe this 53% reduction of N-antibodies in vaccinees was the result of the impairment of the sane reaction their immune system should have had meeting a virus ?
Another way of asking: with a really perfect vaccine, should the reduction in the number of patients with N-antibodies be 100% or 0% in comparison to the placebo group?
Terrific work, thank you. But where on Earth are the original data of 8 and 162, from which so much was inferred by so many for so long?? Are they in fact 75 and 160 or is there another location of those data?
If I remember well, 8 and 162 were *symptomatic* cases of Covid reported in the vaccinated and the placebo groups during the trial.
Whereas 75 and 160 are the number of people who built N-antibodies between visits 1 and 3, which means they were infected but does not imply they had symptoms.
Great work, once more!
There's one thing I'm not sure, because I'm not an immunologist: does the fact that only 53% less people in the vaccinated group had developed N-antibodies *prove* a lack of efficacy?
The fact people had N-antibodies proves they *met* the virus, but what does it say about their protection? Even if the vaccine had perfect efficacy in protecting people, couldn't (shouldn't) their immune system build N-antibodies after meeting the virus, even though vaccine-induced S-antibodies were doing the job getting rid of the virus?
I remember reading a paper explaining that Moderna's Covid vaccine seems to prevent people who get breakthrough infections from building proper N-antibodies that would strengthen their immune response for next time they meet a SARS-CoV2 virus. So maybe this 53% reduction of N-antibodies in vaccinees was the result of the impairment of the sane reaction their immune system should have had meeting a virus ?
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.04.18.22271936v1
Another way of asking: with a really perfect vaccine, should the reduction in the number of patients with N-antibodies be 100% or 0% in comparison to the placebo group?
Terrific work, thank you. But where on Earth are the original data of 8 and 162, from which so much was inferred by so many for so long?? Are they in fact 75 and 160 or is there another location of those data?
If I remember well, 8 and 162 were *symptomatic* cases of Covid reported in the vaccinated and the placebo groups during the trial.
Whereas 75 and 160 are the number of people who built N-antibodies between visits 1 and 3, which means they were infected but does not imply they had symptoms.
Thanks. Yes, the 8 and the 162 were confirmed cases by PCR tests and had at least one symptom.
Great work. Thank you!
With only 53% efficacy and roughly 1,000 adverse reactions, seems like taking the jab was a risky venture.
Useful - thanks
Thank you!