4 ms·
> There's already lots of information about the details of what the fast tracking meant. I just read this: https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-pfizer-vac
by Ygg2 4y ago
> There's already lots of information about the details of what the fast tracking meant.
I just read this: https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-pfizer-vaccine-transmission-idUSL1N31F20E https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-pfizer-vaccine-tra...
> The same presentation slide describes “Other benefits likely uncertain at approval and only clearer after the vaccine is used” to include the vaccine’s “long term protection,” “prevention of infection (asymptomatic cases),” and “prevention of virus transmission in the community - needs specific studies post-approval necessary to show.”
This implies they only checked it reduces symptoms in affected. Transmission prevention and long term immunity would be tested at later point.
So what was then the point of getting everyone vaccinated? Weren't vaccines supposed to contain its spread?
When I got vaccinated for various diseases, it gave long term immunity, not 4 doses over months to lessen the symptoms.
- lern_too_spel 4y agoThe point was to reduce hospitalizations, which was a measured outcome. You can't let everyone get infected if the hospitals won't be able to handle it. The flu vaccine also does not grant long term immunity, but it has the same utility for public health.
- tekknik 4y agoThat was the point of isolation, to control the spread of the virus to not impact our hospitals. Vaccinations were first meant to eradicate, then when that didn’t happen it was to reduce transmission, then when that didn’t work it was to reduce the symptoms (which still doesn’t work).
- lern_too_spel 4y agoThe measured outcomes in the initial vaccine trials were over 90% reduction in hospitalizations and deaths. That is what was known for sure at the time vaccines were rolled out. A reduction in transmission would have been a nice additional benefit, but the trials were not set up to measure if it had happened. Since you got such a basic fact wrong, you might consider what else you've misunderstood and why. Then you can take steps to correct it.
- meetingthrower 4y agoUnbelievable huge win for humanity! And all that glory could have and should have been worn by the Trump administration. 90% reduction in deaths!!! Amazing! What a collosal stupid species we humans are to complain about this result.
- tekknik 4y agoWho’s complaining about the result? I’m specifically complaining about the forced vaccination. I’m a big boy and can isolate myself to avoid illness. Why force it on me?
- lern_too_spel 4y agoIf you were isolated, who was there to force vaccination on you? The point of society is that if you live with other people, you get to benefit from hospitals and schools, but you must also submit to the rules of society to let you access those benefits, including vaccination to not overrun the hospitals and taxes to fund the schools. If you live by yourself, nobody is going to bother you, but you don't get the benefits either.
- tekknik 4y agoMy job forced me, again I explained and like many other in tech I even worked from home. That still didn’t stop the mandates. And you’re still ignoring the many others that have lost their jobs. NY was forced to reinstate police officers recently. Also you do realize you’re contradicting yourself? You’re saying nobody forced anything but if you want to live in society you must follow the rules. There were no laws forcing me, it was my desire to keep my job. My job created the mandate, not society.
- lern_too_spel 4y agoWhere is the contradiction? Regarding your new argument, which doesn't seem to be pointing out a perceived contradiction in any interpretation I can make of it, your job created the requirement because society said it didn't want age discrimination in employment. If your employer forced only older employees to get the vaccine in order to keep its insurance costs low, there would have been lawsuits. Forcing all employees to get vaccinated has well-established legal precedent and has the benefit of reducing insurance costs slightly more.
- wolrah 4y ago> When I got vaccinated for various diseases, it gave long term immunity, not 4 doses over months to lessen the symptoms. Which works for some diseases. Others are only effective for shorter periods of time and/or against specific variants. The flu vaccine should be a familiar example to most people, needing periodic refreshers that are most effective against certain variants and not others. It's also worth noting that the diseases that are treated as a "one and done" are generally those where you're unlikely to be exposed in day to day life for a variety of reasons.
- tekknik 4y agoThe flu vaccine and mRNA vaccines are very different. One is much more proven than the other. How do you reconcile the heart issues some had?
- etchalon 4y agoEvery vaccine has side effects in a limited number of people. Even the flu vaccine has known potential side effects
- tekknik 4y agoYes but in general we don’t force the flu vaccine. Reports came out it cause heart issues and the guidance didn’t even change for the affected age group.
- etchalon 4y agoWe don’t “force” any vaccine. And guidance hasn’t changed because the benefits still outweighed the risks, though more studies are warranted and are in process in light of updated vaccines and mutating variants.
- tekknik 4y agoWe actually force a few, and there certainly was an attempt for COVID. How many people lost their jobs for not taking the shot? Why didn’t we wait until the studies could be complete? Isolate until then?
- viraptor 4y ago> When I got vaccinated for various diseases, it gave long term immunity, not 4 doses over months to lessen the symptoms. Please double check yours. There's a few common vaccines that people assume are "life long" but actually have a recommendation for boosters when you're an adult. But yeah, in general the length of immunity differs, some vaccines work forever, some not. It's a limitation of what we can produce. > So what was then the point of getting everyone vaccinated? Multiple reasons. Prevent many deaths, lower symptoms, make recover easier, lower emergency departments load, lower transmission, etc. None of those were going to be perfect or work independently of people's behaviours.
- jacobolus 4y ago> When I got vaccinated for various diseases, it gave long term immunity, not 4 doses over months to lessen the symptoms. Most vaccines are broadly comparable to the Covid vaccines in this respect, requiring multiple doses over months or years and often not entirely blocking infection. They are not perfect at preventing infections or symptoms in all recipients. Indeed, many important vaccines are significantly less effective than the Covid vaccines. Then consider the many viral diseases (e.g. human coronaviruses) that we do not yet have any vaccine for at all: this is because making vaccines is hard, not because we aren’t trying. Every virus and every vaccine is different, but in broad strokes the way vaccines work is by building herd immunity in the population, enough to drop the reproductive number of a virus below 1 and prevent exponential spread through the population. (Of course, they also protect people individually. But you are the only person vaccinated you end up much less protected than if everyone else also gets vaccinated.) Covid is a particularly tricky case because (a) we were starting from limited knowledge of a novel virus and designing vaccines based on new technology, (b) this virus has mutated quickly over time, evading antibodies from vaccines and past infections, (c) this virus, especially later variants, is exceptionally contagious making it hard to drop the reproductive number of the virus below 1 by any single intervention (including vaccines, masking, mass testing, ...), (d) Covid is a very serious diseases especially for the elderly, more than an order of magnitude more dangerous than the flu. > what was then the point of getting everyone vaccinated The point was saving literally tens of millions of lives.