4 ms·
It seems like your argument is [value of vaccine] = [reduction in death] - [unknown long term risks of vaccine] And if you're risk of death is low enough that
by JamesBarney 3y ago
It seems like your argument is [value of vaccine] = [reduction in death] - [unknown long term risks of vaccine]
And if you're risk of death is low enough that swamps the third term. But I think you're modeling this incorrectly. It's actually [value of vaccine] = [reduction in death] - [unknown long term risks of vaccine] + [unknown long term risks of novel virus]
And this case it almost always makes sense to take the vaccine.
- rayiner 3y agoYour equation assumes the vaccine prevents you from getting covid, which it doesn’t. Many people I know got covid multiple times after being vaccinated. So the risk of long term effects from covid are baked in. On top of that, you add any additional risks from the vaccine.
- JamesBarney 3y agoIt assumes that the vaccine greatly reduces your risk of sequelae from Covid because the infection is much milder.
- runsWphotons 3y agoThe vaccines are certainly more harmful for certain groups, like young men and more likely to cause certain conditions (like retinal occlusion).
- baseballdork 3y agoCitation needed.