23/03/03 01:26:40.77 LuohM3VE0.net
ID:ALoj9UmI0語録
■ワクチンの予防効果マイナスを示す統計資料
http
s://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.12.17.22283625v1.full-text
955 自分返信：ウィズコロナの名無しさん[sage] 投稿日：2023/03/01(水) 18:31:30.34 ID:YGaMWx/E0
ワクチンの予防効果の話なら、ワクチンの予防効果を否定する医学的な統計を持ってきてくれ。
427 返信：ウィズコロナの名無しさん[sage] 投稿日：2023/03/02(木) 06:08:24.08 ID:B5XsE/Be0
この論文は
「過去にワクチンを接種しちゃった人は二価ワクチン打てば少しはリスク下がるよ（たった30％だけど）」
「でも何回も接種した時のリスクは今後も研究しないと駄目だね（投与回数が多いほどリスクが上がってる現実があるし）」
って結論で締めくくってる
・ 30%の予防効果は、彼にとっては予防効果マイナスである
・ 他、論文の結論に記載されてない内容をエスパーかましてるのはlimitationを飛ばし解釈したのが疑われる。アホかと。
>The study has several limitations. Individuals with unrecognized prior infection would have been misclassified as previously uninfected. Since prior infection protects against subsequent infection, such misclassification would have resulted in underestimating the protective effect of the vaccine. However, there is little reason to suppose that prior infections would have been missing in the bivalent vaccinated and non-vaccinated states at disproportionate rates. Those who chose to receive the bivalent vaccine might have been more worried about infection and might have been more likely to get tested when they had symptoms, thereby disproportionately detecting more incident infections among those who received the bivalent vaccine.