Quote:
Originally Posted by mdj930
Do you mean interpretation ?
Exactly which part?
Considering who wrote it I think it's fairly accurate.
Population and Development Studies
Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences
Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, Cambridge, MA, USA
S. V. Subramanian
Department of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
S. V. Subramanian
Mike
|
I said the paper seemed fine. It compared two one week periods. It said cases in both groups were similar within the time frame. Nothing about severety of cases. He said vaccines should be a part of an overall plan and not an end all.
I tend to agree with his take. From the paper.
The sole reliance on vaccination as a primary strategy to mitigate COVID-19 and its adverse consequences needs to be re-examined, especially considering the Delta (B.1.617.2) variant and the likelihood of future variants. Other pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions may need to be put in place alongside increasing vaccination rates. Such course correction, especially with regards to the policy narrative, becomes paramount with emerging scientific evidence on real world effectiveness of the vaccines.
Importantly, other non-pharmacological prevention efforts (e.g., the importance of basic public health hygiene with regards to maintaining safe distance or handwashing, promoting better frequent and cheaper forms of testing) needs to be renewed in order to strike the balance of learning to live with COVID-19 in the same manner we continue to live a 100 years later with various seasonal alterations of the 1918 Influenza virus.