A recent interview with Professor Didier Raoult is circulating on social networks. She suggests that the vaccination campaign would have increased the number of cases, in other words it would have helped SARS-CoV-2 to spread. It’s wrong.
Professor Raoult still gives himself a show despite . In an interview given to Sud (which we will not hypertext to avoid granting it more referencing than it already has), it asserts a lot of things, in particular that the vaccinated people would be, in reality, a preponderant vector of the . He supports his point with several arguments that are supposed to be factual: ” a significant proportion of vaccinees who test positive for IHU would test positive within a short period of time after a vaccine dose ” Where ” the more a population is vaccinated in a country, the greater the number of cases currently “. For , the conclusion is clear: the facilitates infection with SARS-CoV-2 by producing “facilitating” antibodies. Let’s see why all of these claims are incorrect.
A significant proportion of those vaccinated would be positive for SARS-CoV-2 soon after a dose of vaccine
This claim is not supported by any published data. In fact, we do not currently find anything in the scientific literature that compares the positivity rate of different groups of the population as a function of the distance separating them from a dose of vaccine. It therefore only concerns what Didier Raoult believes he observes at the Institut Hospitalo-Universitaire (IHU) in Marseille. An observation that can be marred by many biases.
First, the vaccinated represent the majority of the population and the recently vaccinated as well, given the ongoing campaign for booster doses. It is therefore not surprising that more of them are positive in absolute terms. To corroborate Professor Raoult’s hypothesis, it would be necessary to demonstrate that, with a comparable population, recent vaccines (again it is necessary to define the group “recently vaccinated” and not . Second, even if this hypothesis were corroborated, it would not necessarily mean that the vaccine is involved. There are auxiliary hypotheses: for example, knowing that you are vaccinated and better protected against severe forms of , it is possible that we relax and that we try to : going out, seeing friends, in short respecting barrier gestures. Finally, recent data suggests that , which contradicts the hypothesis of Didier Raoult.) are more positive than non-recent and unvaccinated vaccines. For hospitalizations and severe cases, we know very well that
The countries that have vaccinated the most are the countries with the most cases
This assertion is misleading. Some of the most vaccinated countries like the United States are actually in . However, this is not the case in some countries . But Professor Raoult’s hypothesis is more refined and consists in saying that it is the recent which promotes the circulation of the virus. However, other assumptions much more parsimonious like or the brewing in schools can probably explain the rise in cases. Indeed, there are few publications dealing with “facilitating” antibodies in the context of Covid-19. on advances in the management of Covid-19 mentions them as a hypothetical risk after the administration of monoclonal antibodies. A 2020 article published in the journal explains, meanwhile, that the presence and role of these antibodies in SARS-CoV-2 infection are still poorly understood. Also, the hypothesis of these antibodies is .
Currently, the severe forms are well reduced by vaccination and the mere hypothetical presence of these antibodies cannot call into question the clinical benefits of the available vaccines. Even if this situation changes, this will not be enough to demonstrate that vaccination is a major cause of the spread of SARS-CoV-2, nor that it is not clinically beneficial.