4 ms·

2-4x reduction doesn't mean anything unless you know the original risk probability. For a low 30s person that isn't obese... The original risk is already probab

by umvi 5y ago

2-4x reduction doesn't mean anything unless you know the original risk probability. For a low 30s person that isn't obese... The original risk is already probably a tiny number. It's like saying because an anti shark ointment that makes you break out in itchy rashes reduces your risk of getting attacked by a shark by 2-4x, therefore everyone at the beach should use it.

pxmpxm 5y ago
Buying 4 lotto tickets quadruples your chance of winning.
ajross 5y ago
I'm 50. The original risk, while surely a tiny number, looks rather different to me than it likely does to you.
- yuliyp 5y ago
  It's "quite different" but still a tiny number even at 50: 0.4 deaths / 100k per week for the entire 50-64 age group (https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#rates-by-vaccine-status https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#rates-by-vaccine-s...): that translates to .02% chance of death per year from COVID while vaccinated at all. To contrast, overall mortality rate for the 45-54 age group per year in the US is just under 400 / 100k = 0.4% (page 27 of https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr70/nvsr70-08-508.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr70/nvsr70-08-508.pdf).
  - ajross 5y ago
    Right, so that potentially 4x increase from skipping the booster takes it to 0.08% total mortality risk, which is 20% of my total overall risk. You're saying you don't think trading vaccine side effects for a 20% lower risk of death is a good trade? I mean, this seems like a no brainer to me. Are you really saying this is a bad choice?
    - yuliyp 5y ago
      It's .02% -> .005%, not .08 -> .02. In other words, a few days of life expectancy. I certainly understand your decision, and I made the same decision, but I can also understand reaching an alternative decision about a booster (especially for those younger than you, or those who had worse reactions to the initial vaccine), where the discomfort and hassle might not be worth the small increase in life expectancy.

by umvi 5y ago

pxmpxm 5y ago

Buying 4 lotto tickets quadruples your chance of winning.

ajross 5y ago

I'm 50. The original risk, while surely a tiny number, looks rather different to me than it likely does to you.

yuliyp 5y ago
It's "quite different" but still a tiny number even at 50: 0.4 deaths / 100k per week for the entire 50-64 age group (https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#rates-by-vaccine-status https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#rates-by-vaccine-s...): that translates to .02% chance of death per year from COVID while vaccinated at all. To contrast, overall mortality rate for the 45-54 age group per year in the US is just under 400 / 100k = 0.4% (page 27 of https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr70/nvsr70-08-508.pdf https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr70/nvsr70-08-508.pdf).
- ajross 5y ago
  Right, so that potentially 4x increase from skipping the booster takes it to 0.08% total mortality risk, which is 20% of my total overall risk. You're saying you don't think trading vaccine side effects for a 20% lower risk of death is a good trade? I mean, this seems like a no brainer to me. Are you really saying this is a bad choice?
  - yuliyp 5y ago
    It's .02% -> .005%, not .08 -> .02. In other words, a few days of life expectancy. I certainly understand your decision, and I made the same decision, but I can also understand reaching an alternative decision about a booster (especially for those younger than you, or those who had worse reactions to the initial vaccine), where the discomfort and hassle might not be worth the small increase in life expectancy.