I disagree. I think it is a serious public health risk, at a certain probability, and you've provided no sources or math to explain what the probability is. Can you enlighten us as to what the probability of vaccine escape is?
Is the risk of vaccine escape 50%? 5%? .5%? .00005%? I have no idea what the OOM of possibilities is (I am attempting to model it). I appreciate all literature that explores that.
Clearly we've seen a significant drop in VE. I think that's pretty good evidence that the possibility of full vaccine escape needs to at least be considered. And certainly if the probability is ascertained to be above a threshold, then it is a serious public health risk.
I think vaccines should be Bayesian (very good bet if over 30 and never had COVID). But there is zero precedent for mass vaccination in the midst of a pandemic, and some people think things could go wrong. I am very very curious what people who model it think the probability of that happening is.
I appreciate the links and position put forward by the commenter, and sad to see that flagged.
I'd prefer to see links to models/code/data that offers arguments to support that odds of vaccine escape are low.
To repeat what I've said several times now (how can I be more clear?), the risk of vaccine escape does not imply a particular public health policy. There is no procedure that tells us what policy we should choose based on vaccine escape risk, because it isn't the only consideration. It is irresponsible to make authoritative pronouncements on a complex public health policy issue when you're completely fixated on one particular risk. Unless you're willing to describe EVERY possible action as a public health risk, in which case you should be honest and upfront about the obscure, misleading choice of language.
> the risk of vaccine escape does not imply a particular public health policy
It does have major ramifications for public health policy - you're disagreeing with many experts in the field when you make these claims.
> There is no procedure that tells us what policy we should choose based on vaccine escape risk, because it isn't the only consideration
Of course it isn't the only consideration - no one claimed that it was. This is a straw man.
> It is irresponsible to make authoritative pronouncements on a complex public health policy issue when you're completely fixated on one particular risk.
We are in agreement on this in general, and I admit my comment could have been worded less strongly.
But again, these ideas are being espoused by experts publishing peer-reviewed literature. They are not "fixated on one particular risk", and if you take the time to read the cited literature you'll find rich discussion of many subtle nuances and tradeoffs. That is as authoritative as it gets. There is nothing irresponsible about sharing the knowledge and opinions put forth by world class researchers.
I agree that vaccine escape risk has real implications. I meant to say it doesn't determine whether mass vaccination is prudent. I explained what is missing to make that determination in another comment. Do we agree on that?
FWIW, there is precedent both in 1918 (when the Supreme Court ruled it was constitutional), and during the revolutionary war (when George Washington made history by vaccinating his troops with a new experiment technique called a vaccine)
When discussing vaccine escape (unlike antibacterial mutation pressure) I seem to usually see it described as an issue for diseases which already have many strains:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antigenic_escape. Which wouldn’t yet apply to COVID. And is not a problem for the mRNA technique (which can simply change the target sequence and give a new/booster shot).
Is the risk of vaccine escape 50%? 5%? .5%? .00005%? I have no idea what the OOM of possibilities is (I am attempting to model it). I appreciate all literature that explores that.
Clearly we've seen a significant drop in VE. I think that's pretty good evidence that the possibility of full vaccine escape needs to at least be considered. And certainly if the probability is ascertained to be above a threshold, then it is a serious public health risk.
Massachusetts now is reporting ~40% of COVID deaths now in fully vaccinated individuals (https://www.mass.gov/doc/daily-covid-19-vaccine-report-augus...).
I think vaccines should be Bayesian (very good bet if over 30 and never had COVID). But there is zero precedent for mass vaccination in the midst of a pandemic, and some people think things could go wrong. I am very very curious what people who model it think the probability of that happening is.
I appreciate the links and position put forward by the commenter, and sad to see that flagged.
I'd prefer to see links to models/code/data that offers arguments to support that odds of vaccine escape are low.