I think the key reason that there isn’t more uptick in vaccination is that the FDA make it very clear that updating the booster was very unimportant to them and that it was unimportant to give everyone who’s infected Paxlovid.
If you don’t recommend people to use Paxlovid when they get infected to reduce their symptoms, telling them to get vaccinated to reduce their symptoms is going to be a hard sell.
That’s definitely asking the wrong questions. I see no reason I should care about what portion of deaths are X. I care about my chance of dying from X. Wrong denominator, sir.
If people die for 10 different reasons and die at twice the rate for one of those reasons, you need a smaller sample size to detect a significant effect for the specific reason than when you look at the overall death rate. That’s why most drugs that are given to prevent people from dying don’t focus on overall death rates but measure the effect on a specific illness in their clinical trials.
To me, it sounds like it’s a study that P-hacked a result with relatively little data.
I think the key reason that there isn’t more uptick in vaccination is that the FDA make it very clear that updating the booster was very unimportant to them and that it was unimportant to give everyone who’s infected Paxlovid.
If you don’t recommend people to use Paxlovid when they get infected to reduce their symptoms, telling them to get vaccinated to reduce their symptoms is going to be a hard sell.
If people die for 10 different reasons and die at twice the rate for one of those reasons, you need a smaller sample size to detect a significant effect for the specific reason than when you look at the overall death rate. That’s why most drugs that are given to prevent people from dying don’t focus on overall death rates but measure the effect on a specific illness in their clinical trials.
To me, it sounds like it’s a study that P-hacked a result with relatively little data.