I’ve never had an MLT, but I bet it’s tasty.
I hope you got the R that was not explicitly N’d.
2 Likes
Yes, I watched that movie recently.
Yes, I have been seeing the comment about higher viral loads online in the last couple weeks, but as of yet (in the last hour of lackadaisical Google searching) haven’t found whatever paper people might be basing that on. The closest I’ve found appear to be papers that compare the viral loads of breakthrough infections during delta with infections during previous strains when almost all people were still unvaccinated.
I hadn’t really looked into it much before because I don’t put a lot of stock in the viral load concept to begin with.
ETA: For example, I think comments like the one from Leana Wen in the clip in this tweet get misinterpreted (& no, she’s not a “CDC doc”):
https://twitter.com/phyxx/status/1441782809933205507?s=19
I believe she’s talking about higher viral loads with Delta than with previous strains, but this person thought she was saying higher than unjabbed.
That’s fair. The “viral load” isn’t a single number. It can be more in the nose and less in the lungs. Or more in the arteries and less in the respiratory system. And while I suspect that more virus → more infectious, a single measurement at a point in time likely isn’t very meaningful, at least for an individual.
A large difference on average over lots people probably is, but whatever is driving that difference might be driving other important differences, too.
1 Like
Yeah, I was going to guess that was the source of the meme – a misunderstanding of a legitimate comment that people with Delta carry a higher viral load than people did earlier in the pandemic.
So I suppose if you include all unvaccinated folks, including those before the vaccines existed, then on average the vaccinated may have higher viral loads due to the fact that delta makes up a greater share of breakthrough cases than it does of total cases.
Totally dishonest to imply that this is a valid reason to not get vaccinated… one of those “how to lie with statistics” / correlation is not causation things.
1 Like
I just found out my parish priest is not vaccinated and is anti-vaxx: the diocese has given him an ultimatum. 
Isn’t there a massive priest shortage? I’m surprised they’re forcing the issue.
The Pope is requiring anyone at the Vatican to be vaccinated
2 Likes
So, based on the exchange between Marcie and Lucy, this statement by Marcie is another complete lie pushing their antivax dishonesty?
Marcie said “conditional on being infected” though and you’re less likely to be infected if you’re vaccinated. I’m not sure there is anything wrong with that statement.
Maybe I misunderstood what Lucy was saying, but Marcie statement doesn’t appear to contain anything truthful at all, but just continues to misrepresent the study.
The problem is that there is no evidence that being vaccinated makes you have a higher viral load under any circumstances. It is not accurate to say “as high or higher.” It is more accurate to say “maybe as high or not much lower.”
And again, this with respect to the nose and spreading it.
It makes absolutely no sense that the vaccine would give people higher viral loads. The vaccine doesn’t help the virus replicate or anything. It is just more internet nonsense.
As far as I know, it could be that a future virus that bypasses the vaccine might produce higher viral loads in the vaccinated compared to the unvaccinated who got covid, which when averaged over the population might result in the unvaccinated have an average lower load overall. That is the only way i know of that being vaccinated could give a higher viral load.
1 Like
I just thought it meant that if you’re vaccinated, you need a higher viral load to get infected at all, thus if you are sick with covid and vaccinated, on average your viral load is higher.
I don’t entirely know how vaccines work though, and if this is a valid theory at all.
I think you need to be exposed to a higher viral load to be infected. This is because your body does a better job fighting the virus. So the net effect is not that your viral load is higher.
ah that might make sense, so it nets out to a lower viral load with the vaccine.
Right, what’s important to your viral load is how well it reproduces in your body. Evidently, the vaccinated don’t have a lot of antibodies in their nose, and delta does better in the nose, so it can set up shop there even in the vaccinated. And they can spread it. However, there are lots of antibodies in the lungs, so the vaccinated do not tend to get critically ill.
Quite likely.
Which “study” exactly do I allegedly “continue” to “misrepresent” and how so? Please be specific, if you can.
Source for this?