Claim: A preprinted paper by the famous Oxford University Clinical Research Group, released at Lancet on August 10, found that vaccinated individuals had 251 times more nostrils than unvaccinated individuals. Discovered to carry the COVID-19 virus.
AP rating: Incorrect. The study is misrepresented.It found a healthcare worker vaccinated against a breakthrough infection caused by Coronavirus delta mutant The viral load (the amount of virus detected in humans) was higher than in patients infected with previous strains of virus. In addition, another study comparing viral load between vaccinated and unvaccinated delta patients found similar levels of viral load in the two groups.
Fact: The Defender, a website published by anti-vaccine organization Children’s Health Defense, posted an article this week distorting the results of a recent study of breakthrough delta infections among Vietnamese vaccinated hospital staff. Did.
A misleading article written by Dr. Peter A. McCullough and posted online on August 23 states that vaccinated individuals “COVID-19 in the nostrils compared to unvaccinated patients. It is 251 times more expensive than the virus. ” Threats to unvaccinated patients and colleagues. This article erroneously condemns the delta-led surge in new COVID-19 cases for vaccinated people who “act as a superspreader of powerful typhoid fever-style infections.”
With Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Founder and Chairman of Children’s Health Defense Has a history of posting false alarms on vaccines, Tweeted the article in a post shared 3,000 times.
However, according to the Oxford University Clinical Research Unit in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, which conducted the study in partnership with the Tropical Diseases Hospital, articles and related social media posts distort the results of the study.
“It’s a shame that our research was completely misinterpreted and miscited by the anti-vaxx website,” ChiNgo, senior communications director for the research unit, emailed the Associated Press.
Ngo said the research unit does not support the “any statement” shared in McCullough’s article and is working to report social media posts sharing false information.
Shared online by The Lancet as a preprint for research purposes, this study has not yet been peer-reviewed as required by scientific journals. We did not compare vaccinated people infected with the delta mutant with their unvaccinated counterparts. Rather, we compared the viral load of vaccinated hospital workers infected with the highly contagious delta variant with viral load data from the early stages of the pandemic.
Healthcare workers in this study, who had previously been vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine, were infected with a groundbreaking case in June.
“The viral load in breakthrough delta variant-infected cases was 251 times higher than in cases infected with older strains detected between March and April 2020,” the preprint paper said. ..
Although it is true that vaccines were not available at the time, this study was designed to compare how different strains of coronavirus affected viral load rather than vaccination status.
Lead authors of the study, Dr. Nguyen van Vinh Chau, Dr. Guy Thwaites, Dr. Le Van Tan, Make a statement At the end of Friday to clarify this point further.
“The difference in viral load was caused by the ability of delta mutants to cause higher viral load. They had nothing to do with the immunization status of infected individuals,” the author writes. “Therefore, the claim that vaccinated individuals carry 251 times the load of SARS-CoV-2 in the airways compared to unvaccinated people is a misrepresentation of the data.”
According to Ngo, this study shows that delta mutants are more contagious and dangerous compared to early strains of the virus. Therefore, even among vaccinated people, safety measures such as wearing masks, washing hands and social distance are still recommended.
“We strongly support vaccination as an important tool for the horrific consequences of COVID-19 and the pandemic,” the author wrote in a statement. And death due to COVID-19.
The authors also found that other recent studies comparing delta infections between vaccinated and unvaccinated people did not mean that vaccinated people carry more virus. He pointed out that he found that the two groups had similar viral loads.
Dave O’Connor, a professor of pathology and laboratory medicine at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and School of Public Health, who studied this topic, agreed.
“Existing data from multiple studies on multiple continents show similar amounts of delta genetic material measured in the nose between those who are not vaccinated and those who are infected despite vaccination. That’s what O’Connor said.
And, contrary to the false claim in McCullough’s article, experts say that vaccinated people infected with the delta mutant can infect other people compared to unvaccinated people. There is evidence of low sex.
Jennifer Nuzzo, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Health and Security Center, said that vaccinated people who catch delta variants of the virus can get rid of the infection faster than unvaccinated patients. Said.
“This helps reduce the chances of an infected person getting infected, but it also reduces the chances of transmitting the infection to others compared to not being vaccinated.” Said Nuzzo.
Kennedy told AP on Friday that his organization had reviewed McCullough’s article in the light of comments from the Oxford University Clinical Research Unit. “We are confident that all of our articles are accurate,” Kennedy said. “But we’ll also add a link to a recent article showing comparable viral load in vaccinated and unvaccinated cohorts.”
Earlier on Saturday, a statement below McCullough’s article acknowledged that the study compared two different mutants of coronavirus and that “the difference between these two groups is not just the result of vaccination status.” Appeared. The memo also included links to two studies in which comparable viral loads were found between vaccinated and unvaccinated Delta patients.
McCullough did not respond to a request for comment.
