5 ms·

The risk of anyone un-vaxxed going to the hospital after catching covid is 0.89% (source: https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/354938/adults-estimates-covid-h

The risk of anyone un-vaxxed going to the hospital after catching covid is 0.89% (source: https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/354938/adults-estimates-covid-hospitalization-risk.aspx https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/354938/adults-estimat...) and it is even lower than that if you are vaxxed. It is incredibly unnecessary and risky to vax children, and probably most adults. The only people that this vax should be recommended to are people in high-risk categorizes.

cinntaile 5y ago
0,89% is a lot. That's why you vaccinate.
dv_dt 5y ago
There is an uncharacterized unknown risk in the long term post-sickness effects of Covid. Many may survive the immediate sickness but virus remains in the most for at least months, and there could be long term tissue damage or other changes. Also I’m not sure why you say the vaccine is such a risk for children. It’s currently undergoing study and an even younger age range is close to being approved. In general we are talking about a vaccine with some minuscule portion of the dna pattern of the virus vs getting exposed to the virus itself which includes the same pattern, and will get multiplied to millions of times higher exposure - along with many many other sequences of the full virus - all with unknown long term effects.
petmon 5y ago
To be clear the 0.89% figure was obtained by dividing hospitalizations by population, so it includes many unvaccinated people who have not caught COVID (yet). The chance that an unvaccinated person who is COVID-positive will require hospitalization is around 3%.
- cinntaile 5y ago
  Are these numbers for the US?
  - petmon 5y ago
    Yes. You can do a quick and dirty estimate working backwards from the article's own figure of 2.6 million COVID hospitalizations in the US. If you very generously assume 1/3 of Americans have been infected, you get a hospitalization rate of 2.3%. If you assume the vaccines prevent hospitalizations, then the risk to the unvaccinated must be higher.
    - MatteoFrigo 5y ago
      I wouldn't call 1/3 "generous". https://covidestim.org/ https://covidestim.org/ has some estimates of the fraction of people ever infected by US state. I can't seem to find an US aggregate figure, but by clicking on a few random states they all seem to be at least 50%. California (the most populous state) is around 60% even before omicron. Your estimate is likely off by a factor of two.
- newbamboo 5y ago
  What’s the risk for non-obese people? Not that obese people should be considered less healthy, just curious because much of America, outside of San Francisco, is obese.
  - wwtrv 5y ago
    But they are obviously less healthy?
  - jokethrowaway 5y ago
    Obese people are less healthy, that's a fact.
criley2 5y ago
Others have called out various bits of misinformation/lies in your post but I'll call out another. We vaccinate children against a wide variety of things on a routine basis and a pre-requisite for attending school, and the covid vaccine is literally no more risky than those, and they aren't risky. It honestly feels straight anti-vax to make up lies calling it unnecessary and risky, especially with our health care systems once again succumbing to mainly unvaccinated covid idiots.
- CoastalCoder 5y ago
  > It honestly feels straight anti-vax to make up lies calling it unnecessary and risky ... I suggest that we charitably assume that everyone here is discussing in good faith. Otherwise it's hard to have productive arguments on contentious topics.
  - HWR_14 5y ago
    At what point do you stop assuming people are arguing in good faith? Because it seems unbelievable that everyone is.
    - CoastalCoder 5y ago
      I don't have a great answer. But I'm guessing that typically we'll have better discussions if we set a high bar for assuming bad intent.
      - HWR_14 5y ago
        While I agree it's a good default to assume good faith, there has to be a point where we assume a specific person is arguing in bad faith. I'm not advocating assuming everyone who disagrees with me is disingenuous, but merely that it seems some people are.
- kerneloftruth 5y ago
  How many other medications do you take, or more specifically _require your children to take_ that: 1. were invented 18 months ago, have been available for only a year, and were hurried through the FDA's processes 2. underwent limited clinical trials 3. the manufacturers and providers are immune from lawsuits 4. the effectiveness was cited as 95% 8 months ago, but has proven to be much less. ... I'm betting that the number is 0. One has to admit, these vaccines and their rollout is all very unusual and against normal order. People having hesitation and skepticism is actually very healthy.
yibg 5y ago
How much is 0.89% of 7.7 billion?
lokar 5y ago
No, not "anyone", just average healthy people. 3-5% of the adult population have serious immune deficiency and are at very high risk (the vaccine has limited to zero impact on them). Everyone else (including children) getting vaccinated protects them.

cinntaile 5y ago

0,89% is a lot. That's why you vaccinate.

dv_dt 5y ago

There is an uncharacterized unknown risk in the long term post-sickness effects of Covid. Many may survive the immediate sickness but virus remains in the most for at least months, and there could be long term tissue damage or other changes. Also I’m not sure why you say the vaccine is such a risk for children. It’s currently undergoing study and an even younger age range is close to being approved. In general we are talking about a vaccine with some minuscule portion of the dna pattern of the virus vs getting exposed to the virus itself which includes the same pattern, and will get multiplied to millions of times higher exposure - along with many many other sequences of the full virus - all with unknown long term effects.

petmon 5y ago

To be clear the 0.89% figure was obtained by dividing hospitalizations by population, so it includes many unvaccinated people who have not caught COVID (yet). The chance that an unvaccinated person who is COVID-positive will require hospitalization is around 3%.

cinntaile 5y ago
Are these numbers for the US?
- petmon 5y ago
  Yes. You can do a quick and dirty estimate working backwards from the article's own figure of 2.6 million COVID hospitalizations in the US. If you very generously assume 1/3 of Americans have been infected, you get a hospitalization rate of 2.3%. If you assume the vaccines prevent hospitalizations, then the risk to the unvaccinated must be higher.
  - MatteoFrigo 5y ago
    I wouldn't call 1/3 "generous". https://covidestim.org/ https://covidestim.org/ has some estimates of the fraction of people ever infected by US state. I can't seem to find an US aggregate figure, but by clicking on a few random states they all seem to be at least 50%. California (the most populous state) is around 60% even before omicron. Your estimate is likely off by a factor of two.
newbamboo 5y ago
What’s the risk for non-obese people? Not that obese people should be considered less healthy, just curious because much of America, outside of San Francisco, is obese.
- wwtrv 5y ago
  But they are obviously less healthy?
- jokethrowaway 5y ago
  Obese people are less healthy, that's a fact.

criley2 5y ago

Others have called out various bits of misinformation/lies in your post but I'll call out another. We vaccinate children against a wide variety of things on a routine basis and a pre-requisite for attending school, and the covid vaccine is literally no more risky than those, and they aren't risky. It honestly feels straight anti-vax to make up lies calling it unnecessary and risky, especially with our health care systems once again succumbing to mainly unvaccinated covid idiots.

CoastalCoder 5y ago
> It honestly feels straight anti-vax to make up lies calling it unnecessary and risky ... I suggest that we charitably assume that everyone here is discussing in good faith. Otherwise it's hard to have productive arguments on contentious topics.
- HWR_14 5y ago
  At what point do you stop assuming people are arguing in good faith? Because it seems unbelievable that everyone is.
  - CoastalCoder 5y ago
    I don't have a great answer. But I'm guessing that typically we'll have better discussions if we set a high bar for assuming bad intent.
    - HWR_14 5y ago
      While I agree it's a good default to assume good faith, there has to be a point where we assume a specific person is arguing in bad faith. I'm not advocating assuming everyone who disagrees with me is disingenuous, but merely that it seems some people are.
kerneloftruth 5y ago
How many other medications do you take, or more specifically _require your children to take_ that: 1. were invented 18 months ago, have been available for only a year, and were hurried through the FDA's processes 2. underwent limited clinical trials 3. the manufacturers and providers are immune from lawsuits 4. the effectiveness was cited as 95% 8 months ago, but has proven to be much less. ... I'm betting that the number is 0. One has to admit, these vaccines and their rollout is all very unusual and against normal order. People having hesitation and skepticism is actually very healthy.

yibg 5y ago

How much is 0.89% of 7.7 billion?

lokar 5y ago

No, not "anyone", just average healthy people. 3-5% of the adult population have serious immune deficiency and are at very high risk (the vaccine has limited to zero impact on them). Everyone else (including children) getting vaccinated protects them.