In this thread @EricTopol describes evidence from Israel of waning anti-#SARSCoV2 immunity months after mRNA #COVID19 #vaccination.
But as I wrote https://t.co/NZk0v3r6Dc the explanation is about timing. People ARE immune, but after months response goes
MORE
More from Covid
Breaking—UK scientists just reported a case-control study that the mutated UK 🇬🇧B.1.1.7 variant is not associated w/ more severe #COVID19— “found no significant differences in hospital admissions and case fatality at 28 days, & occurrence of reinfections”, says @mvankerkhove
2) That said, the new UK mutated strain is a more transmissible (contagious) variant. Keep transmissibility and illness severity separate. They are two different things. Don’t get them confused.
3) The new UK variant severity study is included in today’s WHO report, to be released soon this afternoon according to WHO sources. Waiting for it to drop. I’ll keep folks posted on the details.
4) Update: here is UK Technical report on #SARSCoV2 variant of concern (B.1.1.7) in 🇬🇧 with prelim findings from their case-control study of no increased severity for the new variant that I reported yesterday.
5) Also keep in a mind that a virus that spreads faster (more contagious) yields much worse total outcomes than a virus that is just merely more severe.
All things equal, a new mutated variant that is more contagious & no more severe is worse. And that is what we now have.
2) That said, the new UK mutated strain is a more transmissible (contagious) variant. Keep transmissibility and illness severity separate. They are two different things. Don’t get them confused.
3) The new UK variant severity study is included in today’s WHO report, to be released soon this afternoon according to WHO sources. Waiting for it to drop. I’ll keep folks posted on the details.
4) Update: here is UK Technical report on #SARSCoV2 variant of concern (B.1.1.7) in 🇬🇧 with prelim findings from their case-control study of no increased severity for the new variant that I reported yesterday.
5) Also keep in a mind that a virus that spreads faster (more contagious) yields much worse total outcomes than a virus that is just merely more severe.
All things equal, a new mutated variant that is more contagious & no more severe is worse. And that is what we now have.
Why a SARS-CoV-2 variant that's 50% more transmissible would in general be a much bigger problem than a variant that's 50% more deadly. A short thread... 1/
— Adam Kucharski (@AdamJKucharski) December 28, 2020
A teachable moment for Bayesian reasoning – when one study finds a result that's massively different than all the others, and, moreover, conflicts with what we know about the science, there's a pretty good chance it's either a fluke or it's wrong.
The Israeli estimate of relatively high immune escape from Delta that a lot of you were freaking out about now looks like it was the result of sloppy statistical analysis. https://t.co/F5sHsJDFF1
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) July 28, 2021
You May Also Like
Recently, the @CNIL issued a decision regarding the GDPR compliance of an unknown French adtech company named "Vectaury". It may seem like small fry, but the decision has potential wide-ranging impacts for Google, the IAB framework, and today's adtech. It's thread time! 👇
It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details): https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha
I've read it so you needn't!
Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.
The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.
Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.
It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details): https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha
I've read it so you needn't!
Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.
The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.
Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.