10 ms·
I don't understand, if the vaccines work then why the issue? However the vaccines don't stop you catching or spreading the virus, so why is this banning of the
by b3nji 5y ago
I don't understand, if the vaccines work then why the issue? However the vaccines don't stop you catching or spreading the virus, so why is this banning of the unvaccinated a thing?
Very odd.
- scrollaway 5y ago> However the vaccines don't stop you catching or spreading the virus Vaccines reduce spread. Even if it doesn’t stop spread completely it’s still a significant factor.
- moralestapia 5y ago>Vaccines reduce spread. In this case, they don't.
- whimsicalism 5y agoUh, source? Media very much likes to simplify these things, but if you think of this in a probabilistic/continuous manner, rather than a "yes spread vs no spread" approach, the vaccines obviously reduce spread?
- moralestapia 5y agohttps://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risk-of-vaccinated-covid-transmission-is-not-low/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risk-of-vacci... You're right that there's no definite answer to this, but the general consensus among doctors is that it doesn't prevent the virus from spreading.
- scrollaway 5y ago“Doesn’t prevent” isn’t the same thing as “doesn’t reduce”.
- moralestapia 5y agoNo one really knows, actually, and the reduction (if it's there) could be marginal. OTOH, the measures that are being implemented for vaccinated vs. unvaccinated are out of proportion based on the evidence we have.
- MiroF 5y agoYou really don't see how you're playing into exactly the fallacy they're critiquing?
- omarhaneef 5y agoFrom the article you post: “ In a November press conference, Tedros Ghebreyesus, the director-general of the WHO, said that the vaccines were 60 percent protective against spreading the virus prior to the arrival of the delta variant. That number has dropped to 40 percent post-Delta. Omicron may worsen the problem, if, as suspected, it is more transmissible and leads to many more breakthrough infections.”
- calebm 5y ago
- whimsicalism 5y agoWhat kind of reasoning is this? Is this the sort of logic you would use on the job?
- micromacrofoot 5y agoyou seem to be ignoring the fact that we’ve ended up with 2 variants that are more contagious… with the purpose of implying vaccines are to blame? complete nonsense
- kolanos 5y agohttps://www.healthline.com/health-news/leaky-vaccines-can-produce-stronger-versions-of-viruses-072715 https://www.healthline.com/health-news/leaky-vaccines-can-pr...
- micromacrofoot 5y agook now where’s the link that provides evidence of this happening with covid? or are you just guessing?
- kolanos 5y agoI'm just pointing out that your claim that a vaccine making a virus more virulent being "nonsense" is not supported by >50 years of scientific research. Especially if that vaccine is leaky, which the current vaccines appear to be.
- micromacrofoot 5y agoit’s nonsense on the current subject, which is covid… not sure we need the gymnastics of “technically it could happen” here
- 5y ago
- crisdux 5y agoIt is fairly clear that is it not a significant factor, even before omicron. I don't know how these claims that lack a solid scientific basis still continue. You cannot attribute a capability to a vaccine that has not been confirmed through high quality evidence.
- xxpor 5y agoit's not clear at all. Where I live, unvaccinated people are >7x likely to test positive.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- whimsicalism 5y agohttps://khub.net/documents/135939561/390853656/Impact+of+vaccination+on+household+transmission+of+SARS-COV-2+in+England.pdf/35bf4bb1-6ade-d3eb-a39e-9c9b25a8122a?t=1619601878136 https://khub.net/documents/135939561/390853656/Impact+of+vac... There are a number of studies both identifying a mechanism for covid to have reduced spread due to vaccine and verifying that this occurs empirically. The difference is decreased with newer variants but: 1. Hybrid immunity is even stronger at reducing spread and only possible with prior vaccination 2. There is still non-negligible reduced spread which can be impactful.
- VoodooJuJu 5y ago
- throwaway55421 5y agoMoving from 100% infected to 100% infected is not a reduction. At some point, there is no realistic difference between R=10 and R=7. Everyone is getting this. Some of us have known that since March 2020. If your theory includes "avoid being infected with coronavirus" and you live in a democratic country it is a flawed theory. Only full home isolation or hazmat suit rituals will suffice.
- jquery 5y agoOverwhelmed ICUs and hospitals beg to differ that reducing transmission rate is useless. Reducing virulence is absolutely worthwhile even if eventually everyone will get infected at some point.
- throwaway55421 5y agoIn fact the opposite is true. If everyone gets coronavirus in a two week period, ICU is less overwhelmed for the rest of the year. A lot of susceptible people die, of course. If you attempt to spread it out and succeed, you're at 100% capacity basically all of the time, plus 99% of people get to deal with the fact that coronavirus restrictions are utterly miserable. Omicron has probably made all of this irrelevant anyway, it's so contagious that effectively everyone who goes outside is getting it this month. 1 in 15 in London right now and that's only the confirmed cases I believe.
- scrollaway 5y agoI'm vaccinated and effectively boosted. I've been going out tons and not being careful at all. I kissed my girlfriend recently who had as it turns out Omicron at the time. I have yet to catch it. "Everyone" is a significant stretch. Yeah its seriously contagious but you, an engineer, should know better than deal with such absolutes. Viruses burn out long before they infect everyone, even without vaccines and even if they're extremely contagious.
- throwaway55421 5y ago
- andrewclunn 5y ago"Odd" only if the policies are driven by public health concerns. Now ask for what motivations / goals would this approach not be "odd."
- Ardon 5y agoIf a seatbelt doest stop you from dying in 100% of car crashes, I don't understand why they're mandatory?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- furgooswft13 5y agoThey are mandatory only in the sense you might get a small fine if you happen to be caught and pulled over without one. You still keep your drivers license, and your car, and your job. Also you can take the seatbelt off when you get out of the car. It's still nonsense (click it or ticket laws), but you gotta pick your battles. Though I'm ready to murder the people who invented/mandated "beep incessantly if the seatbelt is not clicked, even if the car is stationary".
- newsclues 5y agoDo we ban people from driving if they refuse to wear seatbelts?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago…yes? I thought that’s what license penalties are for.
- messe 5y agoDepending on country, yes?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- whimsicalism 5y agoIn some places, yes (Northern Ireland), otherwise we just repeatedly fine. A better example would be driving drunk, given that you are at an increased risk of injuring others.
- newsclues 5y agoMy understanding is that it’s either, control, money or both. It is not logical public health policy so greed and tyranny are the other possible explanations.
- whimsicalism 5y agoWhy is it "not logical" apriori?
- micromacrofoot 5y agoit’s not logical health policy to enforce a mandate that reduces hospitalization rate? is today opposite day or something?
- SamoyedFurFluff 5y agoMy understanding is that the vaccines aren’t completely effective at stopping you catching/spreading, but they are a whole lot better than being immune naive altogether. Casual googling has given me some Washington state pdf data that says even in the most robust cohort (13-29 year olds) unvaccinated folks get Covid at 3x the rate of unvaccinated and the differences only get more dramatic from there. If you have more robust information though I’d like to know of it. Edit: please note this was published in dec 29 2021, with data up to that point, and therefore also incorporates omicron. https://www.doh.wa.gov/Portals/1/Documents/1600/coronavirus/data-tables/421-010-CasesInNotFullyVaccinated.pdf https://www.doh.wa.gov/Portals/1/Documents/1600/coronavirus/...
- NoblePublius 5y agoThere’s an Antarctic research station of entirely triple vaxxed people that is on complete lockdown now because most of them have Covid. I know 22 people who have gotten positive tests in the last two weeks, all vaccinated. Sports leagues practically 100% vaccinated and dozens and dozens and dozens of players out for Covid. I do not believe for one second any public health data today claiming only 1/5 new cases are vaccinated.
- moneywoes 5y agoRip the nba has been decimated by the virus. At what point do we just accept it?
- klyrs 5y agoAcceptance is not just giving up. Minimizing harm is the current goal.
- SamoyedFurFluff 5y agoWait, do I understand this correctly that because you have heard of cases happening in vaccinated people, without studying them as broad populations, you think there isn’t a statistical difference in vaccinated and unvaccinated people as a population? Why?
- tdrdt 5y ago
- simonh 5y agoThis is obvious dangerous rubbish. Most people contracting the virus don’t do so in offices anyway, so this can’t possibly be true even if it eliminated office transmission completely.
- darknessmonk 5y agoVaccines reduce spread because of lower viral load. Also reduces severity. Antivaxxers can be execrated for all I care - dumbest way to enforce your freedom
- cft 5y agoI was sick with 101.5F for a week, excruciating headaches, confirmed by a positive PCR after Moderna vaccination. My girlfriend as well, two months after the second dose. How much higher would our viral load be without Moderna?
- scott_w 5y agoIt’s hard to say, maybe the vaccine didn’t work on you. Or maybe it saved yours and your girlfriend’s life. It’s hard to say on a case-by-case basis which is why we depend on population-level data.
- cft 5y agoMy girlfriend is 29. Maybe it saved her life, but the COVID mortality at that age is very very low.
- jquery 5y agoWhatever your experience with the virus was, it would’ve been a lot worse if you were unvaccinated.
- kbelder 5y agoProbably. Don't overstate your certainty. It's an error and moves you farther from the truth, not closer.
- xienze 5y ago> Vaccines reduce spread because of lower viral load. Also reduces severity. And yet, case counts have never been higher than now, a year into vaccines and infections. Ah, but Omicron you may say. Well doesn’t that imply that the vaccine isn’t terribly effective against that strain? Yet the answer seem to be “just keep getting more injections of the same vaccine formulation.” Perhaps one or more of our fundamental assumptions are wrong. Maybe the vaccines aren’t actually that effective (Israel is on dose number 4 within a calendar year…). Or maybe PCR tests cranked to an absurd number of cycles aren’t actually detecting what we think they are (an actual infection versus some dead cells in the nasal passage).
- VoodooJuJu 5y agoThe vaccines do work by diminishing severity of symptoms and thus reducing rate of hospitalization. The unvaccinated are banned as means to put social and financial pressure on individuals to get the vaccine. It is an unfortunate misconception that any of the currently-approved intramuscular vaccines reduce transmission to a meaningful degree. This social and financial pressure is placed on individuals because urban hospitals do not have the money or resources to deal with the rate at which they're admitting patients for severe Covid-19, and most of the patients they're admitting are unvaccinated.
- bhickey 5y ago> The unvaccinated are banned as means to put social and financial pressure on individuals to get the vaccine. It is an unfortunate misconception that any of the currently-approved intramuscular vaccines reduce transmission to a meaningful degree. Vaccination reduces the infection rate. [0] You can't transmit the virus if you aren't infected in the first place. Other studies have shown that people with breakthrough infections have a shorter period in which they can transmit. [0] BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine in a Nationwide Mass Vaccination Setting https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2101765 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2101765
- kitd 5y agoIt is an unfortunate misconception that any of the currently-approved intramuscular vaccines reduce transmission to a meaningful degree. Vaccines absolutely do reduce transmission from the vaccinated outward. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newscientist.com/article/2294250-how-much-less-likely-are-you-to-spread-covid-19-if-youre-vaccinated/amp/ https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newscientist.com/article/22...
- hannob 5y agoYour problem seems to be that you don't understand the concept of probabilities. Something can work 80-90% of the time, but not 100%.
- superkuh 5y agoAnd the greater problem with science communication regarding intramuscular vaccines, and the political theater surrounding it, is that neither "side" actually gives the full story because they worry nuance would be lost and facts without context used against them. Yes, intramuscular vaccines for sars-cov-2 work, for about 6 months, to significantly reduce the likelyhood of serious disease in the internal organs. They do this by getting your body to produce serum igG antibodies against the shape of the spike protein produced, or delivered, by whatever mechanism. They also train your T cells to recognize more broad coronavirus epitopes that hold up longer against changes in spike coding. But the igG antibodies in the body serum produced by intramuscular vaccination do not appear in any useful quantity in the upper respiratory mucosa (a different immune compartment). And the T cells definitely do not get there. The upper respiratory mucosa is where respiratory viral diseases infect. Intramuscular vaccination does not protect against sars-cov-2 infection of the upper respiratory mucosa. It just means that your lungs, which have some serum igG antibodies seep in, are protected and your body organs are protected. You can and do still get infected and transmit the virus to others at the same rate as the un-intramuscularly vaccinated. The intramuscularly vaccinated should not be exempted from any mask requirements and people really, really have to become aware of this if we're going to stop the pandemic. It's either that or intranasal vaccination, the smart move, like India is pushing towards. Enough of the intramuscular boosters. We need intranasal to stop the spread. Pretending intramuscular vaccination is some be all end all that stops spread is stupid and deadly. It is only the first partial step.
- jrs235 5y agoThis is also why if one wishes to mandate weekly tests, those tests should be required of everyone, not just the unvaccinated. Mandating tests for just the unvaccinated is more punitive than scientific and doesn't slow the spread.
- 5y ago
- casion 5y agoBrakes on your vehicle don't stop you either. They just slow you down, hopefully when you want... but not always.
- scott_w 5y agoThis is incorrect. Vaccines DO reduce (to different extents based on people and variant) infection and transmission: 1. It’s harder for the virus to enter your body 2. If it gets in, you will get less sick (lower chance of symptoms) 3. Your body will fight it off faster 4. The virus has a harder time replicating in your body Due to 2, 3 and 4, the ability to transmit virus to others goes down.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- max_ 5y agoBig American corporations have often made their money through subsidies. Enforcing everyone to take the jabs increases those subsidies (this enforcement is persistent in all countries submissive to USA). That's what makes sense. However, don't assert altruism because there isn't any. The 'save lives' campaign is just a coating to make things easy for the general public to swallow.
- MiroF 5y agoyes, and the anti-vaxx crowd is funded by Big Hospital, which wants more people in the ICU so they can rake in those sweet sweet intubation $s.
- grepfru_it 5y agohot take, never thought of it that way
- throw0101a 5y ago> I don't understand, if the vaccines work then why the issue? Vaccines work the same way car seat belts and airbags do: they improve the/your odds. They make you much less likely to be infected, and because less likely to be infected, less likely to pass it on. > If seatbelt-wearers outnumber non-wearers by four to one, but account for roughly the same number of deaths, it suggests seatbelt-wearers are about one-fourth as likely to die in an accident as non-wearers. That shocking statistic turns out to be not so shocking as all that. * https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-is-the-case-for-vaccine-mandates-like-the-case-for-seatbelt-laws-no/ https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-is-the-case-... * https://archive.fo/ayjkf https://archive.fo/ayjkf (for paywall) "Unvaccinated 60 times more likely to end up in ICU with COVID-19, Ontario data shows" * https://globalnews.ca/news/8230051/covid-vaccine-hospitalization-risk-ontario/ https://globalnews.ca/news/8230051/covid-vaccine-hospitaliza...
- Daishiman 5y agoThis is garbage reasoning.