Various COVID Studies (links)
Real science is never settled, and anyone who has certainty on such things is not qualified to discuss it.
Here’s a batch of low-grade stuff, just to capture the state of crap-grade science.
The Lancet has a tarnished history, but that doesn’t meant it all is tainted (I hope).
The Lancet: (B.1.617.2) variant in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals in the UK: a prospective, longitudinal, cohort study
...Our findings help to explain how and why the delta variant is being transmitted so effectively in populations with high vaccine coverage. Although current vaccines remain effective at preventing severe disease and deaths from COVID-19, our findings suggest that vaccination alone is not sufficient to prevent all transmission of the delta variant in the household setting, where exposure is close and prolonged. Increasing population immunity via booster programmes and vaccination of teenagers will help to increase the currently limited effect of vaccination on transmission, but our analysis suggests that direct protection of individuals at risk of severe outcomes, via vaccination and non-pharmacological interventions, will remain central to containing the burden of disease caused by the delta variant.
WIND: if vaccination doesn’t stop spread effectively, how is getting vaccinated for anyone but the elderly and sickly anything but taking a needless risk with as yet unknown long-term consequences? Particularly for children?
Covid-19: One in four vaccinated people living in households with a covid-19 case become infected, study finds
Vaccination reduces but does not eliminate the risk of covid-19 transmission within households, a study published in Lancet Infectious Diseases has found.1 It showed that one in four vaccinated household contacts of a covid-19 positive case became infected compared with 38% of unvaccinated contacts.
WIND: is this news? I mean, besides, the highly misleading cherry-picking of post-vaccination time frame (near the peak of vaccination response), versus the real world 2-3 months later as well. This is the kind of “science” that gets bandied about as proof of nothing useful by dropping real world context. A month later, the data could change radically.
The real issues are the risks of vaccination vs not for the young/healthy, how natural immunity plays out, and the boosters-forever problem. Run the study again in two months, on the same households, and things could change entirely! And left undiscussed is the fact that vaccinated people have a “jab psychology” that makes them psychologically unlikely to consider COVID infection, and thus far more likely to engage in close contact with others, and hence this pandemic will not end soon. Study that!
Below, I’m not a fan of The Guardian, a leftist screed with zero credibility, and a sorry mess after founder Glenn Greenwald departed. I include this here so you can see the hysteria that dominates their thinking.
Covid cases are surging in Europe. America is in denial about what lies in store for it
The US thinks it will be ‘immune’ to what is happening in Europe. That’s wishful thinking.
...That brings us to the United States, sitting in the zone of denial for the fourth time during the pandemic, thinking that in some way we will be “immune” to what is happening in Europe. That somehow the magical combination of mRNA vaccines with only 58% of the population fully vaccinated, a relatively low proportion of booster shot uptake, a start to vaccinating teens and children, and a lot of prior Covid, and little in the way of mitigation, will spare us. That’s no magic. Add to that the complete lack of availability of cheap, rapid home tests to screen for infectiousness. Unlike Europe, the US was not capable of uncoupling cases from hospitalizations and deaths during its initial Delta wave – fully 75% of hospitalizations and 66% of deaths occurred compared to its third wave peak before vaccinations were available....
WIND: the article makes sure to blame the unvaccinated, along with idiotic country-to-country comparisions (way too many variables). This is their usual ultra-low standard of fearmongering journalism. Just read the 1st paragraph about the author, and you’ll get the idea of the total hysterical trash this author produces.