4 ms·

Prior to the vaccine rollout (at least in the US), positive cases were used as a metric for public health officials to gauge whether the virus was spreading, wh

Prior to the vaccine rollout (at least in the US), positive cases were used as a metric for public health officials to gauge whether the virus was spreading, whether containment efforts were effective, and how to manage the presumable change in hospitalizations and fatalities. As vaccination efforts have rolled out, there is still a relationship between positive cases and deaths, however the ratio of cases to deaths has dropped dramatically. If you Google "uk covid cases" and flip between new cases and deaths you will notice that the "2nd wave" in December/January had an increase in deaths 2 weeks after the increase in cases. The "3rd wave" has had a large increase in cases but no resulting massive increase in deaths. The only metric the public should be concerned about is whether they have or have not been vaccinated.

forcry 5y ago
>The only metric the public should be concerned about is whether they have or have not been vaccinated. That would be quite stupid. Because if the risk of the disease is low, vaccines does not make sense when you do risk/benefit calculation. Hence the people should know about the cases. Of course, instead, if you are looking to push vaccines no matter what, you would say something like >The only metric the public should be concerned about is whether they have or have not been vaccinated.
- ianhawes 5y ago
  > That would be quite stupid. Because if the risk of the disease is low, vaccines does not make sense when you do risk/benefit calculation. The risk of symptomatic illness is low if you are vaccinated. The risk of symptomatic illness is high if you are unvaccinated. The risk of death is high if you are unvaccinated and have pre-existing conditions and are under the age of 65. The risk of death is very high if you are unvaccinated and over the age of 65.
  - forcry 5y ago
    Please cite studies with randomised control trials to justify these claims.
- nradov 5y ago
  Regardless of number of cases, most of us will be exposed to SARS-CoV-2 eventually. Just like with other endemic coronaviruses such as HCoV-OC43.
  - forcry 5y ago
    >Regardless of number of cases, most of us will be exposed to SARS-CoV-2 eventually. If the no of cases is nearly zero, that means the virus is no longer dangerous, so it does not really matter at that point.

forcry 5y ago

>The only metric the public should be concerned about is whether they have or have not been vaccinated. That would be quite stupid. Because if the risk of the disease is low, vaccines does not make sense when you do risk/benefit calculation. Hence the people should know about the cases. Of course, instead, if you are looking to push vaccines no matter what, you would say something like >The only metric the public should be concerned about is whether they have or have not been vaccinated.

ianhawes 5y ago
> That would be quite stupid. Because if the risk of the disease is low, vaccines does not make sense when you do risk/benefit calculation. The risk of symptomatic illness is low if you are vaccinated. The risk of symptomatic illness is high if you are unvaccinated. The risk of death is high if you are unvaccinated and have pre-existing conditions and are under the age of 65. The risk of death is very high if you are unvaccinated and over the age of 65.
- forcry 5y ago
  Please cite studies with randomised control trials to justify these claims.
nradov 5y ago
Regardless of number of cases, most of us will be exposed to SARS-CoV-2 eventually. Just like with other endemic coronaviruses such as HCoV-OC43.
- forcry 5y ago
  >Regardless of number of cases, most of us will be exposed to SARS-CoV-2 eventually. If the no of cases is nearly zero, that means the virus is no longer dangerous, so it does not really matter at that point.