Read on Twitter
Strong agree. Linking a couple examples in the replies. https://twitter.com/ArisKatzourakis/status/1351917274396057600
We often discuss challenges for flu vaccination posed by antigenic evolution. But those aren't the only challenges: https://twitter.com/dylanhmorris/status/1351916646252892161
Prevention of symptomatic disease for flu may be a fairly hard problem—it may require blocking transmission https://twitter.com/dylanhmorris/status/1349363125770973188
This has some interesting potential consequences for flu evolution https://twitter.com/dylanhmorris/status/1349363518215172103
None of this means we *can't* use flu to inform our thinking. But we have to use it carefully, with attention to the mechanistic ways in which it is similar and different https://twitter.com/dylanhmorris/status/1351656121526792197
One way we *definitely* shouldn't use flu: we should not describe a 10x drop in neutralization titer as "almost a new virus". There is substantial practical immune cross-protection between a new flu vaccine strain and its immediate predecessor https://twitter.com/friedberg/status/1351789902065590273
"Almost a new virus"—complete or near-complete immune escape—would be more cause for alarm. I don't think it's likely. But even if it happened, we'd know what to do: https://twitter.com/dylanhmorris/status/1351814269927632896
