4 ms·

> If that's not enough, change the definition of "vaccines" If “vaccine” meant “thing that 100% stops you from ever even getting infected”, most vaccines throu

> If that's not enough, change the definition of "vaccines" If “vaccine” meant “thing that 100% stops you from ever even getting infected”, most vaccines throughout the history of vaccination wouldn’t meet that definition. But that’s not, and has never been, the definition – so nothing needs to be changed. >> Vaccine: A product that stimulates a person’s immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, protecting the person from that disease. That doesn’t mean what you seem to think it means (so-called “sterilizing immunity”). A 20-fold reduction in hospitalization is by any read protecting you from a disease.

moralestapia 5y ago
>If “vaccine” meant “thing that 100% stops you from ever even getting infected” Not taking sides but that's exactly how most people think about vaccines.
- msbarnett 5y ago
  An unsourced “I claim most people have this misunderstanding, therefore the claim that vaccines work must be responsive to this incorrect understanding (plus some vague mishmash of implications about conspiracies to change the definition of vaccination, or something)” doesn’t strike me as a terribly productive line of argument to be honest.
  - moralestapia 5y ago
    Hmm ... yeah I'm sorry my HN comments have low ROI.
- typon 5y ago
  Most people have a yearly interaction with the flu vaccine, where it's made perfectly clear that you can still get the flu, but it will be mild and the efficacy is something like 60-80%. (At least this is what my pharmacist has told me every time I get the flu shot)
  - mbg721 5y ago
    Outside of healthcare institutions, there's little pressure to get it, and popular opinion is that it's not very effective.
    - soco 5y ago
      Yet it's still fairly popular, even with that mentioned popular opinion. According to CDC, 63.8% of under 17yo got it, and 48.4% over 18yo (season 2019-2020). These are numbers with little pressure.
      - mbg721 5y ago
        That is popular in isolation (when was the last time 64% of Americans agreed on anything??), but not for something that some feel should have a universal mandate.
        typon 5y ago
        For something that doesn't really hospitalize most people and the vaccine isn't 95%+ effective? I'd say it's a great success given how popular it actually is

moralestapia 5y ago

>If “vaccine” meant “thing that 100% stops you from ever even getting infected” Not taking sides but that's exactly how most people think about vaccines.

msbarnett 5y ago
An unsourced “I claim most people have this misunderstanding, therefore the claim that vaccines work must be responsive to this incorrect understanding (plus some vague mishmash of implications about conspiracies to change the definition of vaccination, or something)” doesn’t strike me as a terribly productive line of argument to be honest.
- moralestapia 5y ago
  Hmm ... yeah I'm sorry my HN comments have low ROI.
typon 5y ago
Most people have a yearly interaction with the flu vaccine, where it's made perfectly clear that you can still get the flu, but it will be mild and the efficacy is something like 60-80%. (At least this is what my pharmacist has told me every time I get the flu shot)
- mbg721 5y ago
  Outside of healthcare institutions, there's little pressure to get it, and popular opinion is that it's not very effective.
  - soco 5y ago
    Yet it's still fairly popular, even with that mentioned popular opinion. According to CDC, 63.8% of under 17yo got it, and 48.4% over 18yo (season 2019-2020). These are numbers with little pressure.
    - mbg721 5y ago
      That is popular in isolation (when was the last time 64% of Americans agreed on anything??), but not for something that some feel should have a universal mandate.
      - typon 5y ago
        For something that doesn't really hospitalize most people and the vaccine isn't 95%+ effective? I'd say it's a great success given how popular it actually is