4 ms·
Even given (for the sake of argument) that there was cause for hope at some point, that's not an excuse to cling to that hope indefinitely, especially when it d
by _0ffh 5y ago
Even given (for the sake of argument) that there was cause for hope at some point, that's not an excuse to cling to that hope indefinitely, especially when it demands the violation of other people's bodily autonomy. That hope is dead, and people must let it rest.
- mikeyouse 5y agoMore Americans died in the last month from Covid than died in the Vietnam war… to me, that’s an unacceptable toll. I get that people differ in that opinion but it can’t be too surprising that people really aren’t okay with that level of sustained death as the “end game” of this.
- _0ffh 5y agoIt won't keep up like this. It is inevitable that sooner or later everybody will have been infected at least once. Covid-19 will have become just another seasonal respiratory infection that everyone catches for the first time when they're young and the few bad cases will almost all be successfully handled with medicine. Some people may keep getting yearly vaccinations, like so many do with influenza. Most probably won't. Life will largely return to what it was, except for what our experiences during this time has done to our outlook in life.
- hallway_monitor 5y agoThis is the conclusion I have come to for myself. I got the initial COVID vaccine but the flu vaccine doesn't seem worth it for me and I won't be getting any boosters or further vaccines.
- mikeyouse 5y agoIt's astonishing how bad people's risk assessments are.
- mattbuilds 5y agoIt really is amazing, especially from a group that likes to think of themselves as scientific. Full of bias and cherry picking data.
- mullingitover 5y ago> but the flu vaccine doesn't seem worth it for me Such a confusing, yet common stance. The flu vaccine is free, risk is essentially nil, and it reduces your chance of death across the board[1]: > At a median follow‐up duration of 19.5 months, influenza vaccine was associated with a lower risk of all‐cause mortality (RR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.60–0.93 [P=0.01]), cardiovascular mortality (RR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.80–0.84 [P<0.001]), and major adverse cardiovascular events (RR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.80–0.94 [P<0.001]) compared with control. The use of the influenza vaccine was not associated with a statistically significant reduction of myocardial infarction (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.49–1.09 [P=0.12]) compared with control. It's the biggest no-brainer since seatbelts. [1] https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.120.019636 https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/JAHA.120.019636
- Ntrails 5y ago> It's the biggest no-brainer since seatbelts. What if I told you I don't wear a seatbelt?
- darkerside 5y agoParticipants' mean age was 69.2±7.01 years This tells me, when I'm 65, I should definitely be getting flu shots.
- jacquesm 5y agoThat's very much not what it tells you.
- darkerside 5y agoSo I shouldn't be getting flu shots when I'm 65? Care to expand?
- jacquesm 5y agoThe fact that the group of participants in the study was of a certain age range means that the study says nothing about the result for people outside of that age range. Much more and better explanation about flu shots here: https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/flu/in-depth/flu-shots/art-20048000 https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/flu/in-depth/...
- dekhn 5y agoagree 100% The one part you left out is that there is a genetic component, so the first few ways were a form of selection against people who couldn't handle covid. It seems likely the the remaining population is much less susceptible to dying in future waves. Flu would have looked like this the first time around, except when it arose, people didn't fly around the world or even really move a few miles from their home most of the time, which acted as a natural way to reduce outbreaks.