[Jimmc414]

I don't believe that is accurate. Several studies show no significant difference between the viral load of vaccinated and unvaccinated. Here is one https://www.ucdavis.edu/health/covid-19/news/viral-loads-sim...

Also, recent reports from Denmark seem to indicate that vaccinated at best have equal protection against Omicron. Too early to declare this as fact, but the initial data actually favors a slight negative efficacy.

[mmmrtl]

Confirmation bias is a tricky beast...

Even if Ct values are unchanged between vaccinated and unvaccinated cases, this is conditioned on being infected in the first place, and isn't the whole story. Duration of infectiousness matters.

Yes, boosters are necessary to reduce infection with Omicron, the antibodies from the original vaccine are just too big of a mismatch. That's not news. I'm glad to hear you're not taking those negative efficacy estimates at face value - it's almost certainly the result of missing confounders present at the start of their omicron wave. Unvaccinated individuals are probably less likely to live in urban areas, travel internationally, or even seek a covid test, for example.

[nojokes]

Ct value is just a proxy to viral load and it has been found that the same Ct value results in less cultivable virus for vaccinated.

This negative effect is really most likely because of some confounding factors as others have said. I have seen claimed ADE as always but for that to be true I would expect recent vaccination to offer less protection not more and boosting offer less protection and not more.

[mmmrtl]

Dropped the citation. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2102507 Thanks to the NBA for good time series data