5 ms·

I don’t see how the conclusion is vaccination “risks” may outweigh benefits when there appear to be nearly 0 risks to vaccination and even upon breakthrough inc

I don’t see how the conclusion is vaccination “risks” may outweigh benefits when there appear to be nearly 0 risks to vaccination and even upon breakthrough incredible benefits of vaccination (stated in his own article). The only logical response to the data he presents is get vaccinated so the deleterious effects of breakthrough infection are lessened and you get the benefits of both vaccine and natural immunity from the eventuality of the disease becoming endemic. And yes, SARS-CoV-2 is becoming endemic…

criticaltinker 5y ago
> our position is the vaccines do induce a strong immune response against their target. They save lives, and this is clear in the lower death rate associated with the Delta variant wave. > This makes vaccination very important in high-risk groups, such as elderly, and those with obesity, diabetes or cardiovascular disease. > The number of adverse cardiac events in young people, especially males, is high. The vaccine seems, in some cases, to be causing heart issues in some men under 29 years old (22-27 myocarditis events per million doses). > Due to the high COVID-19 survival rate in the under 29-year-old age cohort, it is reasonable to question the risk vs benefit of vaccination. > vaccines carry risks, and a core concept in medicine is to do no more intervention than is necessary. Without evidence of failed natural immunity after infection, the risks of vaccination may outweigh the benefits. The OP article was well-written and provided an extremely balanced and accurate interpretation of current scientific consensus. Because the infection fatality rate is extremely low for young healthy adults, and the protection afforded by immunity acquired through previous infection is so effective, the risk-reward calculus changes. I see you've rounded down to "nearly 0 risk", but the fact is the risk is non-zero - that's why the CDC is actively investigating & monitoring the unexpectedly high number of myocarditis cases in in young males, particularly children. > The only logical response to the data he presents is get vaccinated As of now the scientific literature has demonstrated that the impact of further vaccination on top of naturally acquired immunity may be marginal and potentially insignificant, especially for young healthy adults. This is relevant to public health policy and vaccination strategy, because we have a limited supply of vaccine doses. It is "logical" to prioritize those doses to people who are immunologically naive, or vulnerable due to age and comorbidities.
- liamwestray 5y ago
  The incident rates of these side effects are lower than OTC pain and cold medication. That’s near zero risk.

criticaltinker 5y ago

> our position is the vaccines do induce a strong immune response against their target. They save lives, and this is clear in the lower death rate associated with the Delta variant wave. > This makes vaccination very important in high-risk groups, such as elderly, and those with obesity, diabetes or cardiovascular disease. > The number of adverse cardiac events in young people, especially males, is high. The vaccine seems, in some cases, to be causing heart issues in some men under 29 years old (22-27 myocarditis events per million doses). > Due to the high COVID-19 survival rate in the under 29-year-old age cohort, it is reasonable to question the risk vs benefit of vaccination. > vaccines carry risks, and a core concept in medicine is to do no more intervention than is necessary. Without evidence of failed natural immunity after infection, the risks of vaccination may outweigh the benefits. The OP article was well-written and provided an extremely balanced and accurate interpretation of current scientific consensus. Because the infection fatality rate is extremely low for young healthy adults, and the protection afforded by immunity acquired through previous infection is so effective, the risk-reward calculus changes. I see you've rounded down to "nearly 0 risk", but the fact is the risk is non-zero - that's why the CDC is actively investigating & monitoring the unexpectedly high number of myocarditis cases in in young males, particularly children. > The only logical response to the data he presents is get vaccinated As of now the scientific literature has demonstrated that the impact of further vaccination on top of naturally acquired immunity may be marginal and potentially insignificant, especially for young healthy adults. This is relevant to public health policy and vaccination strategy, because we have a limited supply of vaccine doses. It is "logical" to prioritize those doses to people who are immunologically naive, or vulnerable due to age and comorbidities.

liamwestray 5y ago
The incident rates of these side effects are lower than OTC pain and cold medication. That’s near zero risk.