Thanks for the link, it’s interesting that they have similar findings to other studies based on passive reporting systems like VAERS in the US.
I don’t think the forever-recurring boosters are going to be a thing, it seems like cellular immunity is holding, and from the apparent drop off in myocarditis with greater spacing between doses one and two in this paper, that seems like evidence that 3-6 months would have been a better spacing than 3-4 weeks
> Interestingly Moderna+Pfizer seems to have no(!?) risk, whereas myocarditis is very high among Pfizer+Moderna. Not sure what to make of it.
I wouldn’t pay this much heed at all (based on this data at least). There were under 10k people in that first group (and zero cases of myocarditis), and the confidence intervals of the poisson regression overlap. You can even see from the figure how the model predicts a non-zero rate even though there were no actual cases!
I don’t think the forever-recurring boosters are going to be a thing, it seems like cellular immunity is holding, and from the apparent drop off in myocarditis with greater spacing between doses one and two in this paper, that seems like evidence that 3-6 months would have been a better spacing than 3-4 weeks
> Interestingly Moderna+Pfizer seems to have no(!?) risk, whereas myocarditis is very high among Pfizer+Moderna. Not sure what to make of it.
I wouldn’t pay this much heed at all (based on this data at least). There were under 10k people in that first group (and zero cases of myocarditis), and the confidence intervals of the poisson regression overlap. You can even see from the figure how the model predicts a non-zero rate even though there were no actual cases!