6 ms·

Are you equally critical of the obese? Or those who ride motorcycles on the highway? As someone who is vaxxed, I struggle to see how the harm done by the unva

Are you equally critical of the obese? Or those who ride motorcycles on the highway? As someone who is vaxxed, I struggle to see how the harm done by the unvaccinated is categorically worse than the risks taken by others at society's expense. I imagine you have none of the disdain for motorcycle riders that you do for the unvaccinated. Edit: For those replying to my comment, please note the comment I replied to listed the cost of hospitalization and the crowding out of ICU beds for others as costs society has to bear; if you are crowded out of an ICU bed, whether it be from someone who is unvaccinated or someone who is obese, you are dead nonetheless.

wilde 5y ago
The obese can’t kill me from across the room. A better analogy would be smokers, who I am also frustrated with but at least nicotine is addictive.
- jules 5y ago
  A vaccinated person can still spread the disease. Perhaps at a lower rate, but a lot of lifestyle choices affect that rate. The singular focus on that one choice is irrational and the obsession with what other people inject into their bodies is unethical, since the free choice of a person to inject or not inject a substance into their body is more fundamental than many of the other choices that affect the rate of spread. I have personally been vaccinated but I feel a pang of guilt whenever I use the government mandated vaccine passport to make use of restaurants and so on. So I stop using those facilities that require a vaccine passport, with the exception of the gym.
  - guimplen 5y ago
    not only can, but there is evidence that current covid vaccines can only higher you chances of milder disease. The probability of you getting infection and being a spreader is the same whether you are or not vaccinated.
  - wilde 5y ago
    The rate is what matters. Vaccination is one of the easiest things we can do to affect that rate. In terms of ethics, yeah I care what other people do. I also care that they stop at red lights so they don’t murder me with their car. We set rules as a society when individual decisions can affect group outcomes.
    - jules 5y ago
      The rate only becomes highly relevant if it makes the difference between R>1 and R<1. Otherwise the disease will still exponentially expand, just over a more spread out period of time. Even countries with very high vaccination rates now have R much above 1, so the idea that COVID can be stopped by vaccines is unfortunately not tenable any more. We have traditionally not violated bodily autonomy for very low probability of benefit to other people, and I think the precedent that some countries have set is a grave mistake. I understand that you are upset and afraid of death, but I would encourage you to look at the statistics. If you are vaccinated then COVID is a very survivable disease. Without vaccination, the average person's risk of dying of COVID is approximately 0.5%. The vaccine trial showed that it is 98% effective, so it cuts your risk by another factor of 50. As a point of comparison, if you are unvaccinated then COVID is ~10x more dangerous than the flu. Vaccination changes that picture. Consider whether your reaction is proportionate, when compared to what your reaction to "people murdering you from across the room with the flu" would have been. Ethical violations have historically happened quite often when people are irrationally afraid. It is true that the vaccines are less effective against Omicron, but on the other hand Omicron is a milder disease than Delta. Current data is looking like we are net very lucky to have Omicron displace Delta.
      - Izkata 5y ago
        > Without vaccination, the average person's risk of dying of COVID is approximately 0.5%. The vaccine trial showed that it is 98% effective, so it cuts your risk by another factor of 50. As a point of comparison, if you are unvaccinated then COVID is ~10x more dangerous than the flu. Also covid is heavily weighted towards the elderly, the flu is not (or at least not as much). IIRC ages 30-50 have around the same risk as the flu, and under 30 have more risk from the flu.
- hackinthebochs 5y ago
  This is a bad argument. Omicron is massively spreading among the vaccinated as well as the unvaccinated. The difference in likelihood of catching COVID from a vaxxed vs unvaxxed is negligible over any decent time interval. You're not catching COVID from the unvaxxed, you're catching it from other people. Given this reality, how do you justify a vaccine mandate?
  - wilde 5y ago
    You got data on that? The studies I’ve seen show that boosters help slow the rate of infection. Ex. https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-provide-update-omicron-variant https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-deta...
    - peteradio 5y ago
      Slow the rate of infection means I'm infected tomorrow instead of today. There is no stopping it.
    - hackinthebochs 5y ago
      Yes, being boosted helps, but a vaccine mandate should be in service to very clear and significant public health goals. Herd immunity is such a goal, but that was likely impossible once Delta hit, let alone Omicron. At this point what is the goal? At best we can only delay infection, but not for very long. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.30.21268565v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.30.21268565v... This study shows that being boosted gives you 37% protection from infection over a period of maybe a month. But this means at peak spread, you can expect an infection rate among the boosted population of 63% of the unvaxxed infection rate. If we assume we can get every vaxxed person boosted, you're still more likely to get infected by a fully boosted individual since the vaccination rates are something like 70%. That is, for every 70 vaxxed people there are 30 unvaxxed, and 70 * .63 > 30. If we assume we can get everyone vax+boosted instantly, the estimated infection rate drops to .85 percent of the current rate. With an estimated r0 of 10 for Omicron, such a small reduction in infections has no chance of substantially slowing the spread. At this point mandates are merely a punitive measure against those the majority have deemed moral degenerates.
bityard 5y ago
A motorcyclist can (realistically) only risk themselves with their choice to ride on the highway. The vaccines are not 100% effective and not everyone can safely take the vaccine. The unvaccinated put others at risk, not just themselves. I think it's perfectly fair to scorn those who _can_ be vaccinated but choose not to out of ignorance or religious/political ideology.

wilde 5y ago

The obese can’t kill me from across the room. A better analogy would be smokers, who I am also frustrated with but at least nicotine is addictive.

jules 5y ago
A vaccinated person can still spread the disease. Perhaps at a lower rate, but a lot of lifestyle choices affect that rate. The singular focus on that one choice is irrational and the obsession with what other people inject into their bodies is unethical, since the free choice of a person to inject or not inject a substance into their body is more fundamental than many of the other choices that affect the rate of spread. I have personally been vaccinated but I feel a pang of guilt whenever I use the government mandated vaccine passport to make use of restaurants and so on. So I stop using those facilities that require a vaccine passport, with the exception of the gym.
- guimplen 5y ago
  not only can, but there is evidence that current covid vaccines can only higher you chances of milder disease. The probability of you getting infection and being a spreader is the same whether you are or not vaccinated.
- wilde 5y ago
  The rate is what matters. Vaccination is one of the easiest things we can do to affect that rate. In terms of ethics, yeah I care what other people do. I also care that they stop at red lights so they don’t murder me with their car. We set rules as a society when individual decisions can affect group outcomes.
  - jules 5y ago
    The rate only becomes highly relevant if it makes the difference between R>1 and R<1. Otherwise the disease will still exponentially expand, just over a more spread out period of time. Even countries with very high vaccination rates now have R much above 1, so the idea that COVID can be stopped by vaccines is unfortunately not tenable any more. We have traditionally not violated bodily autonomy for very low probability of benefit to other people, and I think the precedent that some countries have set is a grave mistake. I understand that you are upset and afraid of death, but I would encourage you to look at the statistics. If you are vaccinated then COVID is a very survivable disease. Without vaccination, the average person's risk of dying of COVID is approximately 0.5%. The vaccine trial showed that it is 98% effective, so it cuts your risk by another factor of 50. As a point of comparison, if you are unvaccinated then COVID is ~10x more dangerous than the flu. Vaccination changes that picture. Consider whether your reaction is proportionate, when compared to what your reaction to "people murdering you from across the room with the flu" would have been. Ethical violations have historically happened quite often when people are irrationally afraid. It is true that the vaccines are less effective against Omicron, but on the other hand Omicron is a milder disease than Delta. Current data is looking like we are net very lucky to have Omicron displace Delta.
    - Izkata 5y ago
      > Without vaccination, the average person's risk of dying of COVID is approximately 0.5%. The vaccine trial showed that it is 98% effective, so it cuts your risk by another factor of 50. As a point of comparison, if you are unvaccinated then COVID is ~10x more dangerous than the flu. Also covid is heavily weighted towards the elderly, the flu is not (or at least not as much). IIRC ages 30-50 have around the same risk as the flu, and under 30 have more risk from the flu.
hackinthebochs 5y ago
This is a bad argument. Omicron is massively spreading among the vaccinated as well as the unvaccinated. The difference in likelihood of catching COVID from a vaxxed vs unvaxxed is negligible over any decent time interval. You're not catching COVID from the unvaxxed, you're catching it from other people. Given this reality, how do you justify a vaccine mandate?
- wilde 5y ago
  You got data on that? The studies I’ve seen show that boosters help slow the rate of infection. Ex. https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-provide-update-omicron-variant https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-deta...
  - peteradio 5y ago
    Slow the rate of infection means I'm infected tomorrow instead of today. There is no stopping it.
  - hackinthebochs 5y ago
    Yes, being boosted helps, but a vaccine mandate should be in service to very clear and significant public health goals. Herd immunity is such a goal, but that was likely impossible once Delta hit, let alone Omicron. At this point what is the goal? At best we can only delay infection, but not for very long. https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.30.21268565v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.12.30.21268565v... This study shows that being boosted gives you 37% protection from infection over a period of maybe a month. But this means at peak spread, you can expect an infection rate among the boosted population of 63% of the unvaxxed infection rate. If we assume we can get every vaxxed person boosted, you're still more likely to get infected by a fully boosted individual since the vaccination rates are something like 70%. That is, for every 70 vaxxed people there are 30 unvaxxed, and 70 * .63 > 30. If we assume we can get everyone vax+boosted instantly, the estimated infection rate drops to .85 percent of the current rate. With an estimated r0 of 10 for Omicron, such a small reduction in infections has no chance of substantially slowing the spread. At this point mandates are merely a punitive measure against those the majority have deemed moral degenerates.

bityard 5y ago

A motorcyclist can (realistically) only risk themselves with their choice to ride on the highway. The vaccines are not 100% effective and not everyone can safely take the vaccine. The unvaccinated put others at risk, not just themselves. I think it's perfectly fair to scorn those who _can_ be vaccinated but choose not to out of ignorance or religious/political ideology.