The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
i definitely think recovery or having had natural infection has to always be taken into account always and so for example there's a study soon to be published they already actually published this in the med archives so i won't saying anything that we don't know that healthcare workers were equally likely to be reinfected if they had been vaccinated versus had natural immunity and severe disease was equally as protected
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.