4 ms·

There is no way that we could know whether that's a myth simply because the vaccines have not existed long enough to know for sure.

organsnyder 5y ago
By that logic, we could also argue—with the same degree of certainty—that the virus itself causes fertility issues, and therefore the vaccine prevents them.
- Huwyt_Nashi_068 5y ago
  The vaccine does not prevent transmission of the virus though. I'm not entirely sure what it supposedly does, in truth (reduce serious symptoms by a statistically-insignificant amount in over-80s?).
  - organsnyder 5y ago
    It doesn't bring transmission to zero, but it significantly reduces it. It also sharply reduces the chance of infection, the severity of symptoms if infection does occur, and the chance of hospitalization or death. The head of a local hospital system called this vaccine among the most effective medical interventions—of any type—he's seen in his career.
- ghoward 5y ago
  True, except that there's a 100% chance of risk with taking the vaccine and a much less chance than that of actually getting COVID before it mutates into something less deadly and serious, as all plagues have done.
  - yongjik 5y ago
    > there's a 100% chance of risk with taking the vaccine ... Probability doesn't work that way. That's like saying I should buy lottery tickets instead of index funds, because with lottery there's a 100% chance of getting a chance of getting the first prize.
    - ghoward 5y ago
      No, I'm saying that electing to not take the vaccine means I have to multiply the probabilities of complications from COVID by the chance I'll get COVID, while if I take the vaccine, I multiply the probabilities of complications from the vaccine by 100%.
      - Gibbon1 5y ago
        > I multiply the probabilities of complications from the vaccine by 100%. 0% times 100% is 0%
        ghoward 5y ago
        By that same math, there is 0% chance of complications from COVID. There is not a 0% chance of complications from vaccines. If you believe that, you need to look at the CDC's own data, as well as data from other countries.

organsnyder 5y ago

By that logic, we could also argue—with the same degree of certainty—that the virus itself causes fertility issues, and therefore the vaccine prevents them.

Huwyt_Nashi_068 5y ago
The vaccine does not prevent transmission of the virus though. I'm not entirely sure what it supposedly does, in truth (reduce serious symptoms by a statistically-insignificant amount in over-80s?).
- organsnyder 5y ago
  It doesn't bring transmission to zero, but it significantly reduces it. It also sharply reduces the chance of infection, the severity of symptoms if infection does occur, and the chance of hospitalization or death. The head of a local hospital system called this vaccine among the most effective medical interventions—of any type—he's seen in his career.
ghoward 5y ago
True, except that there's a 100% chance of risk with taking the vaccine and a much less chance than that of actually getting COVID before it mutates into something less deadly and serious, as all plagues have done.
- yongjik 5y ago
  > there's a 100% chance of risk with taking the vaccine ... Probability doesn't work that way. That's like saying I should buy lottery tickets instead of index funds, because with lottery there's a 100% chance of getting a chance of getting the first prize.
  - ghoward 5y ago
    No, I'm saying that electing to not take the vaccine means I have to multiply the probabilities of complications from COVID by the chance I'll get COVID, while if I take the vaccine, I multiply the probabilities of complications from the vaccine by 100%.
    - Gibbon1 5y ago
      > I multiply the probabilities of complications from the vaccine by 100%. 0% times 100% is 0%
      - ghoward 5y ago
        By that same math, there is 0% chance of complications from COVID. There is not a 0% chance of complications from vaccines. If you believe that, you need to look at the CDC's own data, as well as data from other countries.