6 ms·

Vaccines are probably 3 orders of magnitude more effective at reducing the spread of covid than vitamin d. Not 3 times, 3 orders of magnitude, probably more th

Vaccines are probably 3 orders of magnitude more effective at reducing the spread of covid than vitamin d. Not 3 times, 3 orders of magnitude, probably more than that really. Imperfect as they are it is still an amazing and wonderful thing we were able to create and get them out so quickly, likely millions of lives saved and millions more would have been if not for morons spreading lies

ravenstine 5y ago
For sure, I don't deny that at all. My point is that these things are reflections of society (civilization?) as a whole. If society is being fractionated, you'll see it with vitamins and vaccines. From what I've seen, few things haven't seen some amount of fractionation for my whole life. It doesn't really matter whether or not any of this stuff works if the establishment isn't widely considered to be legitimate. You will inevitably end up with two camps, or possibly an entire loss of control. The point of actually doing things to instill confidence is to give few to no reasons for society to fractionate down the middle. Like, if you want people to take vaccination seriously, you probably don't want to tell the public you won't take the vaccine because you don't like the current president. You also probably want to level with them and at least tell them some of the truth as opposed to using omission and indirection, and no coercion, to get them to do what you want them to do. Oh, and it would also be a good idea to not villainize skeptics, because there will always be people who are wrong, instead favoring giving them reason to come to your side. All of the above that I just mentioned happened, at least in the United States. It's not hard to find sound-bites of establishment top-brass saying that they wouldn't take the vaccines because they didn't trust Trump. When people on both sides see this indignance and then see these politicians make a complete 180 once they've restored their power, why in the hell would you expect anyone to trust them with their health? A skeptical person is going to start wondering what else those politicians have lied about and why the establishment health experts haven't told people to improve their health as part of the fight against the pandemic. If mainstream news comes out trying to downplay Vitamin D, they might think "heck, if they're saying that then I should probably believe the opposite". I'm sure I'll be misunderstood by what I've said there, but hopefully someone reads this and considers it if they haven't before. I've never been anti-vaccine, and if I ever said anything in the past that came off that way, either I misspoke or I was wrong.
- watwut 5y ago
  I like how the you manage to blame primary pro-vaccine people for not promoting them perfectly for vaccine skepticism ... while completely ignoring pure FUD and lies routinely used by anti-vaccine movements. And how it is only democrats who are responsible for some anti-vaccine claims despite massive anti-vaccine, anti-masks campaigns from republican politicians.
  - ravenstine 5y ago
    I could have addressed that side as well, but I didn't think it was necessarily relevant to the point. There's also now diverging definitions of what defines "anti-vaxx". Anti-vaxxers might be against all vaccines, or anti-vaxx might mean being against the mRNA vaccines for SARS-CoV2, and then sometimes I get labeled as such (or as a sympathizer) because I think there are valid concerns about these vaccines. In terms of the OG anti-vaxxers, I agree that they did and perhaps do still play a significant role in fostering distrust. In my opinion, that's just too easy a point to make. Did I really need to make a point about it? It's not really a controversial opinion to state on HN that people who are out of touch with reality share responsibility for vaccine hesitancy. What's more important is that we recognize that this issue doesn't exist in isolation. I do not buy that the extreme anti-vaxxers share the bulk of responsibility here. The authorities had a chance to get everyone on board, and they totally blew it. Anti-vaxxers could have not existed before this pandemic and they would have still been created as a part of the radical shifts in global societies and how power structures have used tactics that appear to rather intentionally create divisions. > And how it is only democrats who are responsible for some anti-vaccine claims despite massive anti-vaccine, anti-masks campaigns from republican politicians. Yes, that is true, and I corrected myself before I even saw your comment.
    - watwut 5y ago
      You framed or as whole society explanation of universal sociological truth of things splitting to two sides down inthe middle. And in subsequent analysis you completely ignore active and large campaigns to make people distrust vaccines or that covid exists. > The point of actually doing things to instill confidence is to give few to no reasons for society to fractionate down the middle. The expectation is that group you dislike for unrelated reasons have to be perfect. The group you like for unrelated reasons is not responsible for anything they say or do. > do not buy that the extreme anti-vaxxers share the bulk of responsibility here People believing anti-vaxxers are responsibility of loud anti-vaxxers. There was no magic happening, it was people believing what those said. > The authorities had a chance to get everyone on board, and they totally blew it. Large political movements were anti vaccers for political reasons. There was no chance to get everyone on board, when actual politicians and party operatives actively openly and frequently opposed vaccines. And your analysis completely misses these people.
cosmiccrisp 5y ago
>likely millions of lives saved and millions more would have been if not for morons spreading lies This did not reflect what happened in the Pfizer 6-month trial involving 44,000 participants. All-cause mortality ended up higher on the vaccine group than the placebo group, perhaps something was offsetting the benefit of the vaccine.
- msrenee 5y ago
  You mind linking a source for that statement?
  - beagle3 5y ago
    I am on phone now and can’t search, but: the original Pfizer report at 6 months listed 15:14 vaccine:placebo deaths (of which 1:2 were attributed to covid). It was updated on the FDA website to say 21:17 (still 1:2 Covid) which is surprising, because the data collection supposedly stopped 2 months before the original publication date. Regardless, the only double blind RCT ever for the Pfizer vaccine found 2 Covid related deaths in the placebo arm, and 1 in the vaccine arm - over 22,000 participants each. Make of it why you will. Additionally, the all cause mortality of the vaccine arm is 24% higher than the placebo arm. Again, make of that what you will.
    - msrenee 5y ago
      If you could get me the sources you're drawing these conclusions from. Your summary isn't exactly helpful.
      - beagle3 5y ago
        See 2nd paragraph of pg. 23 of https://www.fda.gov/media/151733/download https://www.fda.gov/media/151733/download for the 21:17 numbers. I can't find the death breakdown for this right now (perhaps it's in this doc, but a quick scan didn't see it), but you can see the previous revision on https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261159v1.supplementary-material https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261159v... - following the supplemental material link to https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/07/28/2021.07.28.21261159/DC1/embed/media-1.pdf?download=true https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/07/28/202... , Table S4 on page 12 gives a cause-of-death breakdown.
brianwawok 5y ago
Right, and of course - why not both? Low vitamin D causes other problems, easy to happen in the cold months…
- ravenstine 5y ago
  My stance might be very different if the state and the mainstream decided to encourage the public to not only get vaccinated but also do things to be healthy. Losing weight, restricting calories, choosing to eat lentils instead of Macaroni and Cheese, going on daily/nightly walks, getting sun exposure, all shouldn't be ignored or treated as obsolete. What exactly is the reason, other than keeping the junk food industry afloat, that we not all be encouraging ourselves? Do we really need a bunch of studies to be performed to conclude that being generally healthy is either helpful against infection or at least won't make infection worse? If we had a campaign of "do your part, eat right, get some walking in, and help the fight against COVID", I'd be like "Hell yeah! Now's our chance to see if we can beat this thing! Get the vaccines, get healthy, and join the fight!" And now look. :( https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/09/fitness-companies-surge-in-demand-as-americans-rush-to-lose-covid-weight.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/09/fitness-companies-surge-in-d... I've come across some data supposedly contesting the idea that obesity is a big driver in hospitalizations, but I'm not sure how much I buy it yet, and it certainly doesn't seem like a good reason to just do nothing at all.
  - kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
    It isn't the government's job to endorse someone's regimen of virtue.
    - dls2016 5y ago
      Yet we tax vices.
    - datameta 5y ago
      It depends on if you think the government exists for the betterment of society as a whole or for the betterment of the individual.
pdonis 5y ago
What are you basing your numbers on?

ravenstine 5y ago

For sure, I don't deny that at all. My point is that these things are reflections of society (civilization?) as a whole. If society is being fractionated, you'll see it with vitamins and vaccines. From what I've seen, few things haven't seen some amount of fractionation for my whole life. It doesn't really matter whether or not any of this stuff works if the establishment isn't widely considered to be legitimate. You will inevitably end up with two camps, or possibly an entire loss of control. The point of actually doing things to instill confidence is to give few to no reasons for society to fractionate down the middle. Like, if you want people to take vaccination seriously, you probably don't want to tell the public you won't take the vaccine because you don't like the current president. You also probably want to level with them and at least tell them some of the truth as opposed to using omission and indirection, and no coercion, to get them to do what you want them to do. Oh, and it would also be a good idea to not villainize skeptics, because there will always be people who are wrong, instead favoring giving them reason to come to your side. All of the above that I just mentioned happened, at least in the United States. It's not hard to find sound-bites of establishment top-brass saying that they wouldn't take the vaccines because they didn't trust Trump. When people on both sides see this indignance and then see these politicians make a complete 180 once they've restored their power, why in the hell would you expect anyone to trust them with their health? A skeptical person is going to start wondering what else those politicians have lied about and why the establishment health experts haven't told people to improve their health as part of the fight against the pandemic. If mainstream news comes out trying to downplay Vitamin D, they might think "heck, if they're saying that then I should probably believe the opposite". I'm sure I'll be misunderstood by what I've said there, but hopefully someone reads this and considers it if they haven't before. I've never been anti-vaccine, and if I ever said anything in the past that came off that way, either I misspoke or I was wrong.

watwut 5y ago
I like how the you manage to blame primary pro-vaccine people for not promoting them perfectly for vaccine skepticism ... while completely ignoring pure FUD and lies routinely used by anti-vaccine movements. And how it is only democrats who are responsible for some anti-vaccine claims despite massive anti-vaccine, anti-masks campaigns from republican politicians.
- ravenstine 5y ago
  I could have addressed that side as well, but I didn't think it was necessarily relevant to the point. There's also now diverging definitions of what defines "anti-vaxx". Anti-vaxxers might be against all vaccines, or anti-vaxx might mean being against the mRNA vaccines for SARS-CoV2, and then sometimes I get labeled as such (or as a sympathizer) because I think there are valid concerns about these vaccines. In terms of the OG anti-vaxxers, I agree that they did and perhaps do still play a significant role in fostering distrust. In my opinion, that's just too easy a point to make. Did I really need to make a point about it? It's not really a controversial opinion to state on HN that people who are out of touch with reality share responsibility for vaccine hesitancy. What's more important is that we recognize that this issue doesn't exist in isolation. I do not buy that the extreme anti-vaxxers share the bulk of responsibility here. The authorities had a chance to get everyone on board, and they totally blew it. Anti-vaxxers could have not existed before this pandemic and they would have still been created as a part of the radical shifts in global societies and how power structures have used tactics that appear to rather intentionally create divisions. > And how it is only democrats who are responsible for some anti-vaccine claims despite massive anti-vaccine, anti-masks campaigns from republican politicians. Yes, that is true, and I corrected myself before I even saw your comment.
  - watwut 5y ago
    You framed or as whole society explanation of universal sociological truth of things splitting to two sides down inthe middle. And in subsequent analysis you completely ignore active and large campaigns to make people distrust vaccines or that covid exists. > The point of actually doing things to instill confidence is to give few to no reasons for society to fractionate down the middle. The expectation is that group you dislike for unrelated reasons have to be perfect. The group you like for unrelated reasons is not responsible for anything they say or do. > do not buy that the extreme anti-vaxxers share the bulk of responsibility here People believing anti-vaxxers are responsibility of loud anti-vaxxers. There was no magic happening, it was people believing what those said. > The authorities had a chance to get everyone on board, and they totally blew it. Large political movements were anti vaccers for political reasons. There was no chance to get everyone on board, when actual politicians and party operatives actively openly and frequently opposed vaccines. And your analysis completely misses these people.

cosmiccrisp 5y ago

>likely millions of lives saved and millions more would have been if not for morons spreading lies This did not reflect what happened in the Pfizer 6-month trial involving 44,000 participants. All-cause mortality ended up higher on the vaccine group than the placebo group, perhaps something was offsetting the benefit of the vaccine.

msrenee 5y ago
You mind linking a source for that statement?
- beagle3 5y ago
  I am on phone now and can’t search, but: the original Pfizer report at 6 months listed 15:14 vaccine:placebo deaths (of which 1:2 were attributed to covid). It was updated on the FDA website to say 21:17 (still 1:2 Covid) which is surprising, because the data collection supposedly stopped 2 months before the original publication date. Regardless, the only double blind RCT ever for the Pfizer vaccine found 2 Covid related deaths in the placebo arm, and 1 in the vaccine arm - over 22,000 participants each. Make of it why you will. Additionally, the all cause mortality of the vaccine arm is 24% higher than the placebo arm. Again, make of that what you will.
  - msrenee 5y ago
    If you could get me the sources you're drawing these conclusions from. Your summary isn't exactly helpful.
    - beagle3 5y ago
      See 2nd paragraph of pg. 23 of https://www.fda.gov/media/151733/download https://www.fda.gov/media/151733/download for the 21:17 numbers. I can't find the death breakdown for this right now (perhaps it's in this doc, but a quick scan didn't see it), but you can see the previous revision on https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261159v1.supplementary-material https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.28.21261159v... - following the supplemental material link to https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/07/28/2021.07.28.21261159/DC1/embed/media-1.pdf?download=true https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/07/28/202... , Table S4 on page 12 gives a cause-of-death breakdown.

brianwawok 5y ago

Right, and of course - why not both? Low vitamin D causes other problems, easy to happen in the cold months…

ravenstine 5y ago
My stance might be very different if the state and the mainstream decided to encourage the public to not only get vaccinated but also do things to be healthy. Losing weight, restricting calories, choosing to eat lentils instead of Macaroni and Cheese, going on daily/nightly walks, getting sun exposure, all shouldn't be ignored or treated as obsolete. What exactly is the reason, other than keeping the junk food industry afloat, that we not all be encouraging ourselves? Do we really need a bunch of studies to be performed to conclude that being generally healthy is either helpful against infection or at least won't make infection worse? If we had a campaign of "do your part, eat right, get some walking in, and help the fight against COVID", I'd be like "Hell yeah! Now's our chance to see if we can beat this thing! Get the vaccines, get healthy, and join the fight!" And now look. :( https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/09/fitness-companies-surge-in-demand-as-americans-rush-to-lose-covid-weight.html https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/09/fitness-companies-surge-in-d... I've come across some data supposedly contesting the idea that obesity is a big driver in hospitalizations, but I'm not sure how much I buy it yet, and it certainly doesn't seem like a good reason to just do nothing at all.
- kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
  It isn't the government's job to endorse someone's regimen of virtue.
  - dls2016 5y ago
    Yet we tax vices.
  - datameta 5y ago
    It depends on if you think the government exists for the betterment of society as a whole or for the betterment of the individual.

pdonis 5y ago

What are you basing your numbers on?