The theories that the virus originated in the wild do not to me explain that the epicenter was in the same city with the leading virology lab. Mere coincidence?
As the son of a philosopher and former biology teacher, I have to harp on a nomenclature and taxonomy matter. (There's a weird sentence!)
Referring to "vaccination" in this context, unqualified, can mislead. Vaccination with US-approved vaccines? AstraZeneca? Sputnik 5? Covovax? CORBEVAX? One of the Chinese vaccines? Cuban? Turkey's homegrown entry?
I speculate from your reference to "one-dose" vaccination not being efficacious, and that the results are from the UK, that it might be US-approved mRNA vaccines plus AstraZeneca, but I don't know. So now I'll check.
[checks]
"Being vaccinated was defined as having two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech, Oxford-AstraZeneca, or Moderna vaccine or one dose of the Janssen vaccine." So that's a very heterogeneous population, then. The link appears to be a very quick review of 8 studies using the UK's NIH dataset. They don't appear to compare between people who received different vaccines--their result is compatible with, say, AstraZeneca being twice as effective in preventing long-term symptoms as Moderna. (Presumably the underlying studies would have caught that, but it isn't discussed in this particular article that I saw.) There's no mention of people given two different vaccines (booster not matching original shots, say), and obviously they haven't studied any of the newly approved vaccines like Covovax.
Something else I noticed: "The review found that vaccine effectiveness against most post-covid symptoms in adults was highest in people over 60 and lowest in those aged 19 to 35." Interesting. Also weird. Is this perhaps because older folks like me would be more likely to have Long COVID in the first place?
The theories that the virus originated in the wild do not to me explain that the epicenter was in the same city with the leading virology lab. Mere coincidence?
As the son of a philosopher and former biology teacher, I have to harp on a nomenclature and taxonomy matter. (There's a weird sentence!)
Referring to "vaccination" in this context, unqualified, can mislead. Vaccination with US-approved vaccines? AstraZeneca? Sputnik 5? Covovax? CORBEVAX? One of the Chinese vaccines? Cuban? Turkey's homegrown entry?
I speculate from your reference to "one-dose" vaccination not being efficacious, and that the results are from the UK, that it might be US-approved mRNA vaccines plus AstraZeneca, but I don't know. So now I'll check.
[checks]
"Being vaccinated was defined as having two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech, Oxford-AstraZeneca, or Moderna vaccine or one dose of the Janssen vaccine." So that's a very heterogeneous population, then. The link appears to be a very quick review of 8 studies using the UK's NIH dataset. They don't appear to compare between people who received different vaccines--their result is compatible with, say, AstraZeneca being twice as effective in preventing long-term symptoms as Moderna. (Presumably the underlying studies would have caught that, but it isn't discussed in this particular article that I saw.) There's no mention of people given two different vaccines (booster not matching original shots, say), and obviously they haven't studied any of the newly approved vaccines like Covovax.
Something else I noticed: "The review found that vaccine effectiveness against most post-covid symptoms in adults was highest in people over 60 and lowest in those aged 19 to 35." Interesting. Also weird. Is this perhaps because older folks like me would be more likely to have Long COVID in the first place?