While I was away, the daily newspaper collects and after some time I get around to reading them. These are papers from late January and early February. I read them while half-watching the Stupor Bowl. I learned a few things. At least one hospital system in Minnesota acknowledged that over half their admissions attributed to CV-19 were incidental. While the hospitals try to claim they still have to spend more on these patients, that is irrelevant. These people would not have been admitted to hospital solely for their CV-19 infection, if they even had one, so they should not be counted as a CV-19 hospitalization. Taking them out would obviously substantially lower case rates of hosp and per capita rates.
I learned that the Mayo Clinic model is a worse predictor of wave trajectory than Dave and my method. We said the peak would be in the January 10-11 area and it was. Mayo, after that date, was saying the peak would be January 29. The Governor supposedly relies on the Mayo model, which I am sure he has no real understanding of. What he really relies on is the teachers’ unions–whatever they tell him to do, he does. Science and data be damned.
I also learned that the Strib thinks boosters are making a big difference. The research begs to differ. As with two doses, there may be some initial effect on case levels and other events, but that appears to wear off, at least in regard to cases, fairly quickly.
We are done here in Minnesota, just some clean-up reporting on lingering hosps and deaths, but barring some new terrifying variant, it is hard to imagine another substantial case wave, assuming we also stop the absurd testing approach. Time to completely let go, which is why the Governor is keeping a very low profile and we don’t get briefings any more.
An interesting study on the effect of prior immunity and its interaction with vaccination. This study, a retrospective cohort design from Israel, examined the effect of having a prior infection and then getting at least one dose of vaccine with not gettting any vax. Subjects in the emulated trials were carefully matched. Prior infection was highly protective, with or without a vax dose, but the risk of infection was substantially lower for those who received a dose of vax. However, only ten people were hospitalized in the entire set of subjects and none died. A weakness is inability to account for undetected prior infection, which could have differed between the groups. (Annals Study)
And from this research we learn that the lesser apparent effectiveness of vaccines against Delta was attributable more to the weakening immune response from vax over time than with the characteristics of that variant. This was a test negative, case control design that evaluated likelihood of symptomatic CV-19 infection following vax. (JAMA Article)
Increasing numbers of people are recognizing that all the CV-19 suppression measures were not just foolish but harmful. Here is another piece of research in the “doh” category. People with Parkinson’s disease saw their continue worsen due to disruptions in care and their social exposure. (JAMA Article)
A case control study from India attempted to ascertain what was behind a surge in fungal disease during the epidemic. Gee, what a shock, masks were part of the problem, because it turned out they collected fungus. When I called masks “virus collection devices” I was inaccurate. I should have said they were pathogen collection devices. And they provide a lovely warm, moist environment that the pathogens thrive on. (Medrxiv Paper)
Some authors are so obvious in their biases that it is almost funny. These researchers claim that a statistical test shows that many countries undercount CV-19 deaths. This is an absurd claim, leaving aside the statistical hijinks. The reality is that everyplace is overattributing deaths to CV-19, including the US. (Medrxiv Paper)