all 1 comments

[–]stickdog[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Excerpt:

A new preprint is out entitled: “Risk of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) among Those Up-to-Date and Not Up-to-Date on COVID-19 Vaccination” and it concludes from a multivariate analysis of 48,344 individuals (Employees of Cleveland Clinic) that ‘those not “up-to-date” on COVID-19 vaccination had a lower risk of COVID-19 than those “up-to-date”’.

I can already hear the hit piece vultures circling and chanting: it’s not peer-reviewed. No it’s not, but read it anyway and ask yourself if this study has merit. Decide for yourself. Maybe my summary can help.

What did they do?

They looked at the differences between ‘infection rates’ (cumulative incidence) with COVID-19 in individuals who’d received the bivalent shots treating injection with the COVID-19 bivalent product as a time-dependent covariate. What this means is that they accounted for the fact that injection status can change per individual at any time (injection time), and at each injection (event) time, that current status of the individual is compared with the current values of all others who were at risk of COVID-19 at that time.

So they collected and compared two rates: incidence rate for ‘up-to-date’ and ‘not-up-to-date’ which were calculated by dividing the number of individuals in each group who reached the outcome - COVID-19 (as determined by ‘testing’) - by the number of individuals either injected or not.

It is very clear from Figure 1 in the preprint that the risk of getting COVID-19 is lower if you are not up-to-date (red). As time progressed (from the end of January 2023), the disparity between the two groups becomes more apparent. Who here is surprised?

...