回复 5楼fonny的帖子 My PhD is immunology and biochemistry. I am well aware of the hazards. Everyone has pursuits. This is my pursuit. I like this kind of life.
回复 5楼fonny的帖子 My PhD is immunology and biochemistry. I am well aware of the hazards. Everyone has pursuits. This is my pursuit. I like this kind of life. mallowmarsh 发表于 2021-09-12 22:18
Among fully vaccinated patients, the proportion who had received each vaccine product among hospitalizations and ED/UC encounters, respectively, were Pfizer-BioNTech, 55.3% and 53.6%; Moderna, 38.8% and 36.1%; and Janssen, 6.0% and 10.3%. 没看懂,这难道不是强生最有效?
Among fully vaccinated patients, the proportion who had received each vaccine product among hospitalizations and ED/UC encounters, respectively, were Pfizer-BioNTech, 55.3% and 53.6%; Moderna, 38.8% and 36.1%; and Janssen, 6.0% and 10.3%. 没看懂,这难道不是强生最有效? mermaidyuu 发表于 2021-09-13 00:08
你发的这个数据没有被normalize,没有什么意义,最关键的一句话是这个:“Across all ages, VE was significantly higher among Moderna vaccine recipients (95%) than among Pfizer-BioNTech (80%) or Janssen (60%) vaccine recipients.”
Among fully vaccinated patients, the proportion who had received each vaccine product among hospitalizations and ED/UC encounters, respectively, were Pfizer-BioNTech, 55.3% and 53.6%; Moderna, 38.8% and 36.1%; and Janssen, 6.0% and 10.3%. 没看懂,这难道不是强生最有效? mermaidyuu 发表于 2021-09-13 00:08
回复 5楼fonny的帖子 My PhD is immunology and biochemistry. I am well aware of the hazards. Everyone has pursuits. This is my pursuit. I like this kind of life. mallowmarsh 发表于 2021-09-12 22:18
你发的这个数据没有被normalize,没有什么意义,最关键的一句话是这个:“Across all ages, VE was significantly higher among Moderna vaccine recipients (95%) than among Pfizer-BioNTech (80%) or Janssen (60%) vaccine recipients.” Garfield_pipi 发表于 2021-09-13 00:17
他们没有考虑抗体随时间衰减的问题: “The findings in this report are subject to at least three limitations. First, VE by time since vaccination was not examined; ” 这些疫苗并不是同时推出的,要不要打第三针也跟个人有关系。
总的来说都是三个月以后 The median interval from becoming fully vaccinated to the hospital admission or ED/UC encounter, respectively, were 110 and 93 days (Pfizer-BioNTech), 106 and 96 days (Moderna), and 94 and 94 days (Janssen).
总的来说都是三个月以后 The median interval from becoming fully vaccinated to the hospital admission or ED/UC encounter, respectively, were 110 and 93 days (Pfizer-BioNTech), 106 and 96 days (Moderna), and 94 and 94 days (Janssen). lshmmsy 发表于 2021-09-13 10:25
回复 5楼fonny的帖子 My PhD is immunology and biochemistry. I am well aware of the hazards. Everyone has pursuits. This is my pursuit. I like this kind of life. mallowmarsh 发表于 2021-09-12 22:18
Among fully vaccinated patients, the proportion who had received each vaccine product among hospitalizations and ED/UC encounters, respectively, were Pfizer-BioNTech, 55.3% and 53.6%; Moderna, 38.8% and 36.1%; and Janssen, 6.0% and 10.3%. 没看懂,这难道不是强生最有效? mermaidyuu 发表于 2021-09-13 00:08
只想知道你精神是否正常
肯定是不正常啊。。
😂😂😂
My PhD is immunology and biochemistry. I am well aware of the hazards. Everyone has pursuits. This is my pursuit. I like this kind of life.
这个跟小浣熊昨天总结的观点一致。
Nuclear Launch Detected! 😂
勇士,赐彘肩。。
没看懂,这难道不是强生最有效?
这是已经注射疫苗,又得了新冠住院的人中,三种疫苗接种者的比例吧,不能说明有效性。强生比例小是因为注射人数也少
你发的这个数据没有被normalize,没有什么意义,最关键的一句话是这个:“Across all ages, VE was significantly higher among Moderna vaccine recipients (95%) than among Pfizer-BioNTech (80%) or Janssen (60%) vaccine recipients.”
数据分母是vaccinated patients 你看两组数据三个百分比加起来都差不多100% 如果考虑进三种针的接种比例可能可以说明一部分问题,可是因为疫苗是self select的而不是随机盲选 可能结果也不一定有意义
即使是免费的这种便宜也不能占啊
话说你的乙肝药有着落了吗
你的英文暴露了你的学历
Fauci不是CDC的吧
他们没有考虑抗体随时间衰减的问题: “The findings in this report are subject to at least three limitations. First, VE by time since vaccination was not examined; ”
这些疫苗并不是同时推出的,要不要打第三针也跟个人有关系。
看起来三种时间没啥区别
不过从打完针到接触病毒大概才3个多月,还没wane掉呢。数据主要是7月的
那你倒是发表peer review的paper啊
Fauci就是cdc的头,cdc乱改数据,已经被佛州抓包,不得不把数字改回去,人家佛州根本就没有那么多入院人数。
m的剂量大, 抗体肯定多一些
反转总是太快 让子弹再多飞一会
看破不点破 这才是高情商。这个论坛上看出来的多了去。只有你说出来了。
好几倍的量,副作用也大,效果再不好点没天理了。
准备打第三针,人家爱打不打。
都僵了,超级点就超级点吧,食物链往上总比往下强
就是如此,并不是它比Pfizer高级到哪去,纯粹量取胜,所以副作用也更难受一些。
三倍的剂量,应该持续18个月才合算
哎哟,难道信你家床铺或是李大师?
LOL
你这阅读能力。。。
你是总统吗? 刚刚任命Fauci 当CDC的头? 无知者无畏
你这点悟性,不理解也罢。
Fauci是NIH的传染病研究所所长, 不是CDC的头!满嘴跑火车造谣,还悟性,还理解,你有病,要吃药!