6 ms·

> COVID-19, on the other hand, has an overall 1.66% chance of killing someone (38,043,754 cases, 629,644 deaths). An honest, apples to apples statistical compa

> COVID-19, on the other hand, has an overall 1.66% chance of killing someone (38,043,754 cases, 629,644 deaths). An honest, apples to apples statistical comparison here would compare 18-24 year old death rates to 18-24 year old heart problems risk, not lumping all deaths regardless of age together. > I would rather take a 0.002% non-fatal risk than a 1.66% fatal risk. Statistical problems aside, I’m happy if you take a vaccine or boosters that you feel is necessary for your health. I think all the unvaccinated want is the same absolute right to decide the same for themselves.

jyounker 5y ago
The unvaccinated are volunteering themselves as breeders for the next stronger and nastier version of covid, and they pose an active danger to those who cannot be vaccinated.
- munk-a 5y ago
  And, honestly, those who have been vaccinated. Covid-19 has been observed to spread more easily in populations with large unvaccinated proportion and end up infecting (and killing) a larger number of vaccinated people. Additionally, I am extremely concerned that their irresponsible actions are going to let Covid-19 mutate enough that it can work out a variant that the vaccine will be ineffective against.
- strenholme 5y ago
  Agreed. The main COVID-19 mutations of concern right now are happening in other countries where the vaccine is not widely available yet. The Delta variant was first seen in India, the Beta variant was first seen in South Africa, and the Gamma variant was first seen in Brazil. We need to make sure the entire world is vaccinated to stop these mutations from coming out of the woodwork. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variants_of_SARS-CoV-2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variants_of_SARS-CoV-2 for sources and discussion)
- incrudible 5y ago
  This is speculation. I might as well speculate that a vaccine that does not prevent infection or spread, but also puts selective pressure on the virus to escape vaccine immunity, is likely to lead to a vaccine-escape mutation when administered to a large population. This mutation then poses a risk to those who would need the vaccine that has now become ineffective. The fact that we currently see mutations coming out populations that aren't vaccinated is a number's game. Most of the world population is not vaccinated. Vaccinating the last 30% in developed nations will not change that.
  - logicalmonster 5y ago
    Speaking of speculation, I would strongly speculate that the vaccine will greatly increase the spread of illness. If the vaccines dull the symptoms to the point that vaccinated people don't readily know that they're sick, then vaccinated people aren't going to be staying home when they're carriers. In contrast, it seems far likelier that unvaccinated people will feel ill and stay home.
    - munk-a 5y ago
      That is a very real danger with constant medication and vaccination - however the observed effect has been the opposite. The lowered impact of sickness leads to shorter periods of contagiousness which has lowered the spread rate. The vaccine is effectively lowering the r-value. A large proportion of unvaccinated persons is strongly correlated with higher case rates.
      - incrudible 5y ago
        > the observed effect has been the opposite Did you really observe that? There's many highly vaccinated countries that have seen spikes with extremely high r-values.
strenholme 5y ago
That was a reasonable back of the envelope calculation, and I notice that the criticism of my figures was done without providing better figures. However, I am willing to come up with more suitable figures. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-from-covid-by-age-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-... says there have been 2,630 deaths from COVID-19 for 18-29 year olds (never mind the suffering COVID-19 causes people in this age range). Something that causes 2,630 deaths is more risky than something causing 229 non-fatal hospital visits. > I think all the unvaccinated want is the same absolute right to decide the same for themselves. In terms of freedom of choice, I think we would be a lot better off just giving our extra vaccines to Mexico until that have a higher vaccination rate; Mexico has, last time I looked, a 25% vaccination rate compared to the 50% vaccination rate in the US. Once Latin America is well vaccinated, we can circle back to the vaccine hesitant here in the US. There was recently a rather morbid conversation on Reddit speculating about how much vaccine hesitancy might help Democrats in future elections: https://old.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/pbeigk/desantiss_poll_numbers_plummet_as_florida_deals/habvbcj/ https://old.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/pbeigk/desantiss_... Not to mention this graph: https://i.redd.it/4o4i7arucpj71.png https://i.redd.it/4o4i7arucpj71.png (Discussion: https://old.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/pbzaeg/oc_usa_covid_cases_per_100k_stratified_by_county/ https://old.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/pbzaeg/oc_... )
- incrudible 5y ago
  I have remarked upon your numbers in another comment. Why do your own math based on outdated newspaper articles and statistics websites when there are scientific publications and FDA documents to draw upon? Calculating the crude chance of death based on population averages is misleading, because those will have risk groups massively over-represented.
  - strenholme 5y ago
    The CDC figure for number of COVID-19 deaths among 18-29 year olds is 2,761. https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Deaths-by-Sex-and-Age/9bhg-hcku/data https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Deaths-by-Sex... So, guess what, those “newspaper articles and statistics websites” have the same general numbers as more official sources like the FDA; indeed, the CDC’s own numbers are higher than the number I used for COVID-19 deaths among young adults. (And, oh, if you think the CDC’s figures are faulty, I have nothing more to say to you; you’re not looking too good after insinuating that https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.23.21260998 https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.23.21260998 didn’t attempt to measure total COVID-19 infections, when, in fact, a cursory reading of the paper shows they did) With something as fast moving as COVID-19, the press often times gets accurate figures before they’re formally published. If you want to convince me the numbers I used are wrong, please give me up to date numbers from reliable sources which contradict my figures. Not estimates from a paper written a few months ago. Finally, I need to flat out ask you: Have you gotten the COVID-19 vaccine yet? I got mine months ago. I will not respond to you again until I know your vaccination status.
munk-a 5y ago
> I think all the unvaccinated want is the same absolute right to decide the same for themselves. And I, personally, refuse to grant them that courtesy. If you want to smoke twelve packs a day (while living in a country with no healthcare) then feel free buddy - but not getting vaccinated effects everyone - including those who choose to help move us past this pandemic by getting vaccinated. This isn't a question of individual rights vs. the authoritarianism in the same way that wanting to be a thief isn't an individual decision. You can't be a thief without stealing from other people so we've agreed as a society to make it illegal - the same goes for vaccination. The US is currently tip-toeing on a knifes edge trying to avoid an open revolt of stupid people while also trying to make the vaccine mandatory - that open revolt would result in a severe jump in case count... but the government is facing facts that simply coddling people won't make the pandemic go away.
- incrudible 5y ago
  Poor analogies and collectivist arguments aside, from a medical ethics standpoint, if my personal risk from being vaccinated outweighs the personal risk of infection, you do not have a right to impose it on me. Despite this being parroted as obviously true, these analyses at this point are based on statistical modeling and conjecture with no regard to personal disposition beyond "age cohort"[1]. [1] https://www.fda.gov/media/151733/download https://www.fda.gov/media/151733/download (Page 24)
- logicalmonster 5y ago
  > And I, personally, refuse to grant them that courtesy. Inalienable human rights are not a courtesy for you to grant.
  - munk-a 5y ago
    Refusing vaccination is not an inalienable right in America - the Supreme Court has ruled many times that compelled vaccination is perfectly legal for the government. In fact the anti-vax crowd isn't particularly new in the US - it was present when both polio and MMR were being removed as common causes of death. The only real difference this time around is that anti-vax is considered a political tool by one of the US parties and thus has garnered a false legitimacy.

jyounker 5y ago

The unvaccinated are volunteering themselves as breeders for the next stronger and nastier version of covid, and they pose an active danger to those who cannot be vaccinated.

munk-a 5y ago
And, honestly, those who have been vaccinated. Covid-19 has been observed to spread more easily in populations with large unvaccinated proportion and end up infecting (and killing) a larger number of vaccinated people. Additionally, I am extremely concerned that their irresponsible actions are going to let Covid-19 mutate enough that it can work out a variant that the vaccine will be ineffective against.
strenholme 5y ago
Agreed. The main COVID-19 mutations of concern right now are happening in other countries where the vaccine is not widely available yet. The Delta variant was first seen in India, the Beta variant was first seen in South Africa, and the Gamma variant was first seen in Brazil. We need to make sure the entire world is vaccinated to stop these mutations from coming out of the woodwork. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variants_of_SARS-CoV-2 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variants_of_SARS-CoV-2 for sources and discussion)
incrudible 5y ago
This is speculation. I might as well speculate that a vaccine that does not prevent infection or spread, but also puts selective pressure on the virus to escape vaccine immunity, is likely to lead to a vaccine-escape mutation when administered to a large population. This mutation then poses a risk to those who would need the vaccine that has now become ineffective. The fact that we currently see mutations coming out populations that aren't vaccinated is a number's game. Most of the world population is not vaccinated. Vaccinating the last 30% in developed nations will not change that.
- logicalmonster 5y ago
  Speaking of speculation, I would strongly speculate that the vaccine will greatly increase the spread of illness. If the vaccines dull the symptoms to the point that vaccinated people don't readily know that they're sick, then vaccinated people aren't going to be staying home when they're carriers. In contrast, it seems far likelier that unvaccinated people will feel ill and stay home.
  - munk-a 5y ago
    That is a very real danger with constant medication and vaccination - however the observed effect has been the opposite. The lowered impact of sickness leads to shorter periods of contagiousness which has lowered the spread rate. The vaccine is effectively lowering the r-value. A large proportion of unvaccinated persons is strongly correlated with higher case rates.
    - incrudible 5y ago
      > the observed effect has been the opposite Did you really observe that? There's many highly vaccinated countries that have seen spikes with extremely high r-values.

strenholme 5y ago

That was a reasonable back of the envelope calculation, and I notice that the criticism of my figures was done without providing better figures. However, I am willing to come up with more suitable figures. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-from-covid-by-age-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-... says there have been 2,630 deaths from COVID-19 for 18-29 year olds (never mind the suffering COVID-19 causes people in this age range). Something that causes 2,630 deaths is more risky than something causing 229 non-fatal hospital visits. > I think all the unvaccinated want is the same absolute right to decide the same for themselves. In terms of freedom of choice, I think we would be a lot better off just giving our extra vaccines to Mexico until that have a higher vaccination rate; Mexico has, last time I looked, a 25% vaccination rate compared to the 50% vaccination rate in the US. Once Latin America is well vaccinated, we can circle back to the vaccine hesitant here in the US. There was recently a rather morbid conversation on Reddit speculating about how much vaccine hesitancy might help Democrats in future elections: https://old.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/pbeigk/desantiss_poll_numbers_plummet_as_florida_deals/habvbcj/ https://old.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/pbeigk/desantiss_... Not to mention this graph: https://i.redd.it/4o4i7arucpj71.png https://i.redd.it/4o4i7arucpj71.png (Discussion: https://old.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/pbzaeg/oc_usa_covid_cases_per_100k_stratified_by_county/ https://old.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/pbzaeg/oc_... )

incrudible 5y ago
I have remarked upon your numbers in another comment. Why do your own math based on outdated newspaper articles and statistics websites when there are scientific publications and FDA documents to draw upon? Calculating the crude chance of death based on population averages is misleading, because those will have risk groups massively over-represented.
- strenholme 5y ago
  The CDC figure for number of COVID-19 deaths among 18-29 year olds is 2,761. https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Deaths-by-Sex-and-Age/9bhg-hcku/data https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Deaths-by-Sex... So, guess what, those “newspaper articles and statistics websites” have the same general numbers as more official sources like the FDA; indeed, the CDC’s own numbers are higher than the number I used for COVID-19 deaths among young adults. (And, oh, if you think the CDC’s figures are faulty, I have nothing more to say to you; you’re not looking too good after insinuating that https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.23.21260998 https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.07.23.21260998 didn’t attempt to measure total COVID-19 infections, when, in fact, a cursory reading of the paper shows they did) With something as fast moving as COVID-19, the press often times gets accurate figures before they’re formally published. If you want to convince me the numbers I used are wrong, please give me up to date numbers from reliable sources which contradict my figures. Not estimates from a paper written a few months ago. Finally, I need to flat out ask you: Have you gotten the COVID-19 vaccine yet? I got mine months ago. I will not respond to you again until I know your vaccination status.

munk-a 5y ago

> I think all the unvaccinated want is the same absolute right to decide the same for themselves. And I, personally, refuse to grant them that courtesy. If you want to smoke twelve packs a day (while living in a country with no healthcare) then feel free buddy - but not getting vaccinated effects everyone - including those who choose to help move us past this pandemic by getting vaccinated. This isn't a question of individual rights vs. the authoritarianism in the same way that wanting to be a thief isn't an individual decision. You can't be a thief without stealing from other people so we've agreed as a society to make it illegal - the same goes for vaccination. The US is currently tip-toeing on a knifes edge trying to avoid an open revolt of stupid people while also trying to make the vaccine mandatory - that open revolt would result in a severe jump in case count... but the government is facing facts that simply coddling people won't make the pandemic go away.

incrudible 5y ago
Poor analogies and collectivist arguments aside, from a medical ethics standpoint, if my personal risk from being vaccinated outweighs the personal risk of infection, you do not have a right to impose it on me. Despite this being parroted as obviously true, these analyses at this point are based on statistical modeling and conjecture with no regard to personal disposition beyond "age cohort"[1]. [1] https://www.fda.gov/media/151733/download https://www.fda.gov/media/151733/download (Page 24)
logicalmonster 5y ago
> And I, personally, refuse to grant them that courtesy. Inalienable human rights are not a courtesy for you to grant.
- munk-a 5y ago
  Refusing vaccination is not an inalienable right in America - the Supreme Court has ruled many times that compelled vaccination is perfectly legal for the government. In fact the anti-vax crowd isn't particularly new in the US - it was present when both polio and MMR were being removed as common causes of death. The only real difference this time around is that anti-vax is considered a political tool by one of the US parties and thus has garnered a false legitimacy.