@lindblad_glenn @Infoseepage @AnaCabrera @nataliexdean I don't know the context but he was likely talking about against infection, not against severe disease or death.
Also, the tweet above was about Moderna, so not relevant.

@lindblad_glenn@info渗流@AnaCabrera@nataliexdean我不知道上下文，但他可能是在谈论对抗感染，而不是对抗严重疾病或死亡。
此外，上面的推文是关于摩德纳的，所以不相关。

@lindblad_glenn @Infoseepage @AnaCabrera @nataliexdean They're not ineffective. That is antivax misinformation.
It is fair to debate necessity but effectiveness is well established.

@lindblad_glenn@info渗流@AnaCabrera@nataliexdean他们并不是无效的。这是反VAX的错误信息。
讨论必要性是公平的，但有效性已经确立。

@lindblad_glenn @Infoseepage @AnaCabrera @nataliexdean More than is typical for flu.

@lindblad_glenn@info渗流@AnaCabrera@nataliexdean比流感的典型症状更严重。

@lindblad_glenn @Infoseepage @AnaCabrera @nataliexdean False. The risk if infected is generally similar (probably depends on variant but hard to measure), but covid is a lot more contagious, so much more likely to be infected, probably frequently.
Compare kids who died from covid (many) and flu (almost none) in the past two years.

@lindblad_glenn@info渗流@AnaCabrera@nataliexdean False。感染的风险通常是相似的（可能取决于变异，但很难衡量），但新冠病毒的传染性要大得多，因此感染的可能性更大，可能更频繁。
比较过去两年死于新冠病毒（很多）和流感（几乎没有）的儿童。

@stancil_jordan @ColinDotNet @mikiebarb @DLeonhardt His article wasn't even about a snapshot today, it was about a snapshot in October in November, coupled with his made up guesses about upcoming risk.

@stancil_jordan@ColinDotNet@mikiebarb@DLeonhardt他的文章甚至不是关于今天的快照，而是关于11月10月的快照，以及他对即将到来的风险的虚构猜测。

@ColinDotNet @stancil_jordan @mikiebarb @DLeonhardt Fair

@ColinDotNet@stancil_jordan@mikiebarb@DLeonhardt Fair

@ColinDotNet @stancil_jordan @mikiebarb @DLeonhardt That gets complicated fast. Boosted are more vulnerable in some obvious ways (higher % boosted among elderly), but may also be more careful or have lower risk due to socioeconomic status, so very difficult to assess.

@ColinDotNet@stancil_jordan@mikiebarb@DLeonhardt很快就会变得复杂。在某些明显的方面，肥胖者更容易受到伤害（老年人中的肥胖率更高），但由于社会经济地位的原因，他们也可能更谨慎或风险更低，因此很难评估。

@stancil_jordan @mikiebarb @DLeonhardt Yes, that's what it meant. I agree it is mathematically dubious terminology.

@stancil_jordan@mikiebarb@DLeonhardt是的，这就是它的意思。我同意这个术语在数学上是可疑的。

@stancil_jordan @mikiebarb @DLeonhardt Boosters were offered in October and November.

@stancil_jordan@mikiebarb@DLeonhardt助推器于10月和11月推出。

@ColinDotNet @stancil_jordan @mikiebarb @DLeonhardt Car deaths are only 2.4 per million so don't even worry about it.

@ColinDotNet@stancil_jordan@mikiebarb@DLeonhardt的汽车死亡率仅为百万分之2.4，所以不用担心。

@ColinDotNet @stancil_jordan @mikiebarb @DLeonhardt Booster seats?

@ColinDotNet@stancil_jordan@mikiebarb@DLeonhardt增压座椅？

@stancil_jordan @mikiebarb @DLeonhardt I do think it is meaningless and disingenuous on his part (and others doing the same thing, including CDC) to be reporting pre-Omicron data at this point. It is clear there is a large reduction in vaccine efficacy. How that shakes out w/severity and contagion remains to be seen.

@stancil_jordan@mikiebarb@DLeonhardt我确实认为他（以及其他做同样事情的人，包括CDC）在此时报告Omicron之前的数据是毫无意义和虚伪的。很明显，疫苗的效力大大降低。这种情况如何在严重性和传染性方面得到缓解还有待观察。

@stancil_jordan @mikiebarb @DLeonhardt Pre-omicron boosters reduced severe outcome by about 10x or a bit more.

@stancil_jordan@mikiebarb@DLeonhardt-Pre-omicron助推器将严重后果降低约10倍或更多。

@stancil_jordan @mikiebarb @DLeonhardt You assessment of the motivation and "reasoning" process may be accurate, but the numbers are the numbers. Your numbers of auto deaths vs breakthroughs deaths in Michigan aren't measuring the same thing at all.

@stancil_jordan@mikiebarb@DLeonhardt你对动机和“推理”过程的评估可能是准确的，但数字就是数字。你在密歇根州的汽车死亡人数与突破性死亡人数根本不是一回事。

@stancil_jordan @mikiebarb @DLeonhardt He's comparing boosted deaths with automobile deaths.
It may have also been true for original vaccination before waning and variants.
If you're suggesting a (less favorable) prediction based on ongoing waning and future variants, that's fair, but not his claim.

@stancil_jordan@mikiebarb@DLeonhardt他将增加的死亡与汽车死亡进行了比较。
在减弱和变异之前，最初的疫苗接种可能也是如此。
如果你是在持续衰退和未来变异的基础上提出（不太有利的）预测，这是公平的，但不是他的说法。

@stancil_jordan @mikiebarb @DLeonhardt He's comparing with boosted, not just "breakthrough" (which is any vaxed).

@stancil_jordan@mikiebarb@DLeonhardt他在与boosted进行比较，而不仅仅是“突破”（这是任何吹嘘）。

@perdidostschool @mikiebarb @DLeonhardt Many are injured, disfigured, etc., often severely. I don't know the relative numbers.

@perdidostschool@mikiebarb@DLeonhardt许多人受伤、毁容等，通常情况严重。我不知道相关数字。

@shabbytigers @bi_gendian @BenWWeston @Craig_A_Spencer @reconfigurthing @interpretantion Also important. Still roughly 10x in terms of health burden which aligns with the original tweet.
https://twitter.com/jburnmurdo...

@shabbytigers@bi_gendian@BenWWeston@Craig_A_Spencer@Reconfigulation@interpretation也很重要。就健康负担而言，仍然是原来推文的10倍左右。
https://twitter.com/jburnmurdo...

@jburnmurdoch When this was last updated in June of 2021 (based on pre-delta data I think), the ratios were much higher.
https://github.com/mbevand/cov... https://t.co/NtQHJBZiIN

当JurnMurdoCH在2021六月最后更新时（基于前三角洲数据，我认为）的比率要高得多。
https://github.com/mbevand/cov... https://t.co/NtQHJBZiIN

@jmcrookston @watermelonpunch @fitterhappierAJ @ChristosArgyrop Hotez was pushing the theory of three and done, although he never said he was sure, only hopeful.

@jmcrookston@watermelonpunch@fitterhappierAJ@ChristosArgyrop-Hotez正在推动三人理论并成功了，尽管他从未说过自己是肯定的，只是充满希望。