5 ms·

> The vaccine only reduces symptoms (and might thus save yourself, or others, when extended with the hospital-bed-limit-thought), but it wouldn't stop you from

by uh_uh 5y ago

> The vaccine only reduces symptoms (and might thus save yourself, or others, when extended with the hospital-bed-limit-thought), but it wouldn't stop you from transmitting the disease if you are infected (and vaccinated) but you aren't aware Are you sure about that? Even this article refers to a study which says that vaccinated people are 5 times less likely to test positive than non-vaccinated. _Some_ asymptotic transmission will still occur in the vaccinated but it's reasonable to expect that it happens to a lesser degree. I'd be very curious to see studies that claim that there's no difference in asymptomatic transmission between the vaccinated and unvaccinated.

matwood 5y ago
Correct. Whenever people talk about the vaccine not slowing spread they forget that vaccinated people are 5x less likely to catch covid to start with. They only seem to focus on viral loads of break through infections.
- native_samples 5y ago
  Those stats are all point-in-time and the result of very brittle analysis. Not surprisingly, you can therefore find stats that state the opposite. In the UK this weekend there was a little blowup on Twitter because a TV journalist had his own breakthrough case, which caused him to do some journalism and download the data tables from Public Health England. He was surprised to discover that in the UK the proportion of vaccinated people getting infected is now higher than the proportion of unvaccinated people, i.e. the UK is experiencing the exact opposite of what your stat claims. Actually he was so surprised by this he posted it on Twitter and openly wondered why there was no debate about it, at which point he found out why not: he was mobbed, shouted down and ended up posting a grovelling apology. https://dailysceptic.org/2021/09/12/robert-peston-shocked-by-lack-of-debate-on-vaccine-effectiveness-before-caving-to-critics-and-apologising-for-questioning-vaccine-effectiveness/ https://dailysceptic.org/2021/09/12/robert-peston-shocked-by... Part of the problem was that his Twitter followers are innumerate. They assumed that this stat was overall percentage of people getting infected, but it's not. It's proportions of both groups. Therefore, the fact that more people are vaccinated than not in the UK is irrelevant. The vaccinated are - at this point in time - getting it more often than the rest. And journalists are afraid to report on it because they get attacked so you just don't know about it. Reasons? Unclear. Scientists also seem to mostly refuse to do studies that might undermine vaccine messaging. Most likely the vaccine protection wanes so fast that it simply split the delta wave in two, with the unvaccinated getting it first, leading to lots of headlines about "pandemics of the unvaccinated" etc, and then the vaccinated wave coming second, leading to stats like this one which are simply ignored.
  - nradov 5y ago
    If everyone wears seatbelts then 100% of the vehicle crash victims in hospitals will be seatbelt users. But seatbelts are still highly effective at reducing injuries and deaths.
    - native_samples 5y ago
      That's not what the stat is saying. You seem to be mis-interpreting it in the same way some of the other people were. Take 1000 people who are vaccinated. Measure how many get infected in a time span T. Calculate the ratio. Take 1000 people who are not vaccinated. Measure how many get infected in a time span T. Calculate the ratio. In the UK the infected:non-infected ratio is higher for the first group than the second. That should be impossible as it implies effectiveness is now negative. Possible root cause - the (relatively small) group of people who refuse to take the vaccine are refusing because they know they already got it, and thus have natural immunity, but the vaccine doesn't build immunity that lasts, so as time goes on the vaccinated group ends up getting infected anyway and having to fall back on building their own natural immunity. That's just speculation but otherwise it's hard to explain what is going on here.
  - poopypoopington 5y ago
    But those numbers don't account for severe disease, hospitalization, and death which are the whole point of the vaccines. You're latching onto this dramatic exchange because of some stupid idea that vaccines are this magic shield against any infection, and while they do reduce risk of infection they are mostly meant to prevent severe disease, hospitalization, and death. Also you don't account for possible explanations for the UK data. For example, maybe unvaccinated people in the UK are more likely to have previously contracted COVID. More likely I think, the vaccinated are taking much more risk than the unvaccinated, leading to their higher case counts. Many unvaccinated are immunocompromised (or know that they are at higher risk for severe complications from COVID because they are unvaccinated) so I assume many of them are taking higher precautions than the vaccinated, i.e. wearing N-95's, not leaving their houses while many vaccinated people I know in the UK are going to 50k person festivals.

by uh_uh 5y ago

matwood 5y ago

Correct. Whenever people talk about the vaccine not slowing spread they forget that vaccinated people are 5x less likely to catch covid to start with. They only seem to focus on viral loads of break through infections.

native_samples 5y ago
Those stats are all point-in-time and the result of very brittle analysis. Not surprisingly, you can therefore find stats that state the opposite. In the UK this weekend there was a little blowup on Twitter because a TV journalist had his own breakthrough case, which caused him to do some journalism and download the data tables from Public Health England. He was surprised to discover that in the UK the proportion of vaccinated people getting infected is now higher than the proportion of unvaccinated people, i.e. the UK is experiencing the exact opposite of what your stat claims. Actually he was so surprised by this he posted it on Twitter and openly wondered why there was no debate about it, at which point he found out why not: he was mobbed, shouted down and ended up posting a grovelling apology. https://dailysceptic.org/2021/09/12/robert-peston-shocked-by-lack-of-debate-on-vaccine-effectiveness-before-caving-to-critics-and-apologising-for-questioning-vaccine-effectiveness/ https://dailysceptic.org/2021/09/12/robert-peston-shocked-by... Part of the problem was that his Twitter followers are innumerate. They assumed that this stat was overall percentage of people getting infected, but it's not. It's proportions of both groups. Therefore, the fact that more people are vaccinated than not in the UK is irrelevant. The vaccinated are - at this point in time - getting it more often than the rest. And journalists are afraid to report on it because they get attacked so you just don't know about it. Reasons? Unclear. Scientists also seem to mostly refuse to do studies that might undermine vaccine messaging. Most likely the vaccine protection wanes so fast that it simply split the delta wave in two, with the unvaccinated getting it first, leading to lots of headlines about "pandemics of the unvaccinated" etc, and then the vaccinated wave coming second, leading to stats like this one which are simply ignored.
- nradov 5y ago
  If everyone wears seatbelts then 100% of the vehicle crash victims in hospitals will be seatbelt users. But seatbelts are still highly effective at reducing injuries and deaths.
  - native_samples 5y ago
    That's not what the stat is saying. You seem to be mis-interpreting it in the same way some of the other people were. Take 1000 people who are vaccinated. Measure how many get infected in a time span T. Calculate the ratio. Take 1000 people who are not vaccinated. Measure how many get infected in a time span T. Calculate the ratio. In the UK the infected:non-infected ratio is higher for the first group than the second. That should be impossible as it implies effectiveness is now negative. Possible root cause - the (relatively small) group of people who refuse to take the vaccine are refusing because they know they already got it, and thus have natural immunity, but the vaccine doesn't build immunity that lasts, so as time goes on the vaccinated group ends up getting infected anyway and having to fall back on building their own natural immunity. That's just speculation but otherwise it's hard to explain what is going on here.
- poopypoopington 5y ago
  But those numbers don't account for severe disease, hospitalization, and death which are the whole point of the vaccines. You're latching onto this dramatic exchange because of some stupid idea that vaccines are this magic shield against any infection, and while they do reduce risk of infection they are mostly meant to prevent severe disease, hospitalization, and death. Also you don't account for possible explanations for the UK data. For example, maybe unvaccinated people in the UK are more likely to have previously contracted COVID. More likely I think, the vaccinated are taking much more risk than the unvaccinated, leading to their higher case counts. Many unvaccinated are immunocompromised (or know that they are at higher risk for severe complications from COVID because they are unvaccinated) so I assume many of them are taking higher precautions than the vaccinated, i.e. wearing N-95's, not leaving their houses while many vaccinated people I know in the UK are going to 50k person festivals.