Via Google translate: "Update: The RKI made a significant change in the weekly report 4 days after publication (see below). Now there are 1097 instead of 186 unvaccinated people, so the proportion of those who have been vaccinated is significantly lower. // @world"

Edit: Update of the OA: https://twitter.com/holmenkollin/status/1477970997638676483

* 30.12.2021 RKI Wochenbericht reads "1.097 Patientinnen und Patienten waren ungeimpft, 4.020 waren vollständig geimpft, von diesen wurde für 1.137 eine Auffrischimpfung angegeben."

* 23.12.2021 RKI Wockenbericht reads "186 Patientinnen und Patienten waren ungeimpft, 924 waren vollständig geimpft, von diesen wurde für 161 eine Auffrischimpfung angegeben".

* The OA screenshots a line that reads "186 Patientinnen und Patienten waren ungeimpft, 4.020 waren vollständig geimpft, von diesen wurde für 1.137 eine Auffrischimpfung angegeben." Either they doctored the data, or the 30.12.2021 RKI Wochenbericht perhaps contained an error that was since corrected and the OA panicked seeing the initial version?

One more thing. Using omicron data from 30.12.2021 RKI Wochenbericht and vaccination data from https://impfdashboard.de/en, the omicron incidence rates don't look too good. This is difficult to do correctly in absence of data explicitly broken down by age because <18yo have significantly smaller vaccination rates (thus more "unvaccinated" at virtually no risk) compared to the adult population, but even so:

           total  unvax    vax  2-vax  3-vax
    pop    83.2M  21.5M  61.7M  26.9M  32.3M
    cases   5117   1097   4020   2883   1137
    /100k    6.1    5.1    6.5   10.7    3.5

https://covid19danmark.dk/#gennembrudsinfektioner

https://files.ssi.dk/covid19/omikron/statusrapport/rapport-o...

Based in prior variant data, it is likely the vaccines do work to prevent severe omicron cases. Feel free to clarify what is it that the vaccines work for, and which of Marjorie Taylor Greene tweets fell afoul of that.

PS. This post is in no way an endorsement of Marjorie Taylor Greene political activities, of which I know very little other than her being a Republican Congresswoman.

https://covid19danmark.dk/#gennembrudsinfektioner

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29765351

https://world.hey.com/dhh/should-you-vaccinate-your-kids-169...

Couple of related notes:

* Covid statistics without a breakdown by age / date / vaccination status are garbage. Possibly BMI and/or immunosuppressed status should also be added to the mix. The authorities failure to publish this data breakdown 2 years into the pandemic is going beyond incompetence.

* Focusing on "cases" beyond a coarse "going up or going down" is largely useless. Observed "cases" are more likely to indicate test penetration than actual case numbers, and test penetration may significantly vary between age groups, institutionalization settings, etc.

https://twitter.com/BallouxFrancois/status/14765074434966364...

"Those results provide no evidence for SARS-CoV-2 being a neurotropic virus, it doesn't inform us on long-covid. SARS-CoV-2 is not expected to be commonly found in the brain of patients except in a subset of extremely severe, often lethal, infections. 3/"

https://www.ucl.ac.uk/biosciences/people/francois-balloux

> "But the other important thing is that if you look at the children who are hospitalized, many of them are hospitalized with COVID as opposed to because of COVID," Fauci continued. "And what we mean by that — if a child goes in the hospital, they automatically get tested for COVID. And they get counted as a COVID-hospitalized individual. When in fact, they may go in for a broken leg or appendicitis or something like that. So it’s overcounting the number of children who are, quote, 'hospitalized with COVID,' as opposed to because of COVID."

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/healthcare/broken-...

This is technically correct, yet fundamentally misleading. The same statement, bracketed by time since triggering event:

"We've measured the position of iron balls thrown at different speeds from a 56m tall tower, 0.1 seconds after throwing, and found they were 90% likely to be found flying in the air."

Even better, show the plot of position by time, or at least clarify you are merely doing a point-in-time measurement. Time is a fundamental component of the vaccine effectiveness equation.

1. Do boosters work at all?

2. Do boosters wane over time, just like the original shots did?

They answer only 1. They didn't even attempt to shed light on 2, which is a serious letdown. Given known waning vaccine effectiveness, at a minimum claims on booster effectiveness should be bracketed by time since boosting event.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6824120/

"Original antigenic sin has the advantage that a response can be rapidly mobilized from memory. However, the downside is that in some cases, such as dengue, the response is dominated by inferior-quality antibody. In influenza, original antigenic sin has been shown to reduce the effectiveness of vaccination (13, 34, 51). In dengue, the effect of original antigenic sin has considerable bearing on vaccine strategies. Once a response has been established, it is unlikely that repeat boosting will be able to change its scope, meaning that balanced responses against the four virus serotypes will need to be established with the first vaccine dose."

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3014204

The argument that no incremental change is ever possible because it has to update every related legacy usage is a recipe for organizational paralysis.