5 ms·

your comment is basically "no" which isn't a great foot hold from which to form rebuttals , i feel like id have to drink different flavors of kool aid to respon

your comment is basically "no" which isn't a great foot hold from which to form rebuttals , i feel like id have to drink different flavors of kool aid to respond adequately , eg if one prioritized national interests over some elderly dying then your point of broad negative vs broad positive outcomes is invalid

rstuart4133 8mo ago
He's correct, even so. Odds of dying from the AstraZeneca vaccine is about 1 in 50,000, or about 0.002% [0] for people over 60. In the USA there were 434,779 excess deaths [1] in the over 60 age group of 55M people, implying about 0.008% were killed by COVID. So taking AstraZeneca was the lower risk option, in the USA anyway. In countries like Australia that largely managed to suppress COVID through quarantine and mass vaccination (using other vaccines), perhaps it wasn't the best option, and indeed Australia did opt to wait once the risks became evident. If you were in Peru or Mexico (both did a very bad job of managing COVID), if you were over 60 you would be mad not to have got the AstraZeneca jab if it was the only one on offer. [0] https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/covid-19-vaccines/advice-for-providers/clinical-guidance/tts?language=en https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/covid-19-vaccines/advice-... [1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9304075/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9304075/
- Aeglaecia 8mo ago
  i read a study from sweden where a full three quarters of covid deaths were in the bracket of those aged 80 plus. to me this definitely impacts your proposed model of comparing vaccine vs covid deaths. thanks for introducing the constraint of governance, its a fantastic challenge and shows that my initially proposed idea isn't necessarily universally applicable.
  - rstuart4133 8mo ago
    > i read a study from sweden where a full three quarters of covid deaths were in the bracket of those aged 80 plus. For the USA you can see the excess mortality for different age groups here: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-p-scores-projected-baseline-by-age?time=earliest..2021-01-03&country=USA~SWE~AUS https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-p-scores... There isn't much difference between 60-74, 74-84 and 85+. As you can see that site doesn't have data broken down by age for Sweden so it would be interesting to see where they paper you mention got their data from. Sweden's excess deaths across all ages followed a similar curve to the USA, so it would be surprising if the age group breakdown wasn't similar too. You can also see how well Australia managed COVID in comparison. "Excess deaths" in Australia's was driven into reverse by their management strategies. That wasn't due to vaccines. Australian couldn't buy vaccines for love nor money (aside form AstraZeneca which unlike the others could be manufactured there - but it was withdrawn very early), ironically because its other measurement strategies were so successful countries like Mexico were deemed more worthy. Those strategies were also very successful financially, with Australia emerging earlier and faster than just about all countries in the OECD. They did however cause immense friction within Australia, as some citizens deeply resented the temporary restrictions put on travel, mask mandates and the like.
    - Aeglaecia 8mo ago
      your dataset is valid in the context of the argument. its hard for me as a layman to trust claims formed from such widespread sources, when i could hand wave the results away by assuming that deaths from all causes will proportionally increase among all age groups after a populace exits lockdown. anyway that is not a real argument so ill backtrack a bit to provide a government source [0] for my previous claim. as opposed to australia, sweden let it rip. therefore of all countries, this particular dataset is the most universally applicable, since it most accurately reflects a baseline. and that baseline is an overwhelming majority of covid deaths among the elderly. my original point was to compare conscription with a mandate forcing untested chemicals on the populace. if the chemicals were tested or if some other mandate was imparted (eg. your example of australia's management strategies), i acknowledge that this would be less apt of a comparison. [0] https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/en/statistics-and-data/statistics/statistics-subjects/statistics-on-covid-19/ https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/en/statistics-and-data/statis...
      - rstuart4133 8mo ago
        > https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/en/statistics-and-data/statistics/statistics-subjects/statistics-on-covid-19/ https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/en/statistics-and-data/statis... Hmm. Official statistics from an OECD government. A very trustworthy source. According to AI's it is "not* an outlier, the figures are the same for most OECD countries. However the metric is different. I was quoting excess deaths, Sweden figures are deaths attributed to COVID. While it may true COVID caused a lot of deaths, in the elderly with a lot of comorbidities doctors had to put something on the death certificate and COVID was a popular choice at the time. But did it matter if they were going to die away? COVID killing me when I had a many good years left would be very unfortunate. Dying from COVID when I had only a few months because of other reasons doesn't concern me so much. This means excess deaths measures something more relevant to me than measuring deaths attributed to COVID. > with a mandate forcing untested chemicals on the populace. I wasn't aware that any modern vaccine from an OECD country not being tested before used on a human. All COVID vaccines certainly were. The testing was necessarily accelerated, but it's unlikely the normal regime would have caught the issue with AstraZeneca. Mandated vaccination is tricky. A healthly majority of the population with 80+ year old family members in homes is going to want the workers in those facilities to take every possible precaution, including alcohol disinfectants, masks and be vaccinated. Some of that majority were taking those same precautions in their own homes. The same reasoning was applied to populations at less risk, at extreme kindergartens enforcing vaccination and quarritines. Where to draw the line is problematic, but in all OECD countries it was drawn well before mandatory vaccination of the entire population. That didn't happen.

rstuart4133 8mo ago

He's correct, even so. Odds of dying from the AstraZeneca vaccine is about 1 in 50,000, or about 0.002% [0] for people over 60. In the USA there were 434,779 excess deaths [1] in the over 60 age group of 55M people, implying about 0.008% were killed by COVID. So taking AstraZeneca was the lower risk option, in the USA anyway. In countries like Australia that largely managed to suppress COVID through quarantine and mass vaccination (using other vaccines), perhaps it wasn't the best option, and indeed Australia did opt to wait once the risks became evident. If you were in Peru or Mexico (both did a very bad job of managing COVID), if you were over 60 you would be mad not to have got the AstraZeneca jab if it was the only one on offer. [0] https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/covid-19-vaccines/advice-for-providers/clinical-guidance/tts?language=en https://www.health.gov.au/our-work/covid-19-vaccines/advice-... [1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9304075/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9304075/

Aeglaecia 8mo ago
i read a study from sweden where a full three quarters of covid deaths were in the bracket of those aged 80 plus. to me this definitely impacts your proposed model of comparing vaccine vs covid deaths. thanks for introducing the constraint of governance, its a fantastic challenge and shows that my initially proposed idea isn't necessarily universally applicable.
- rstuart4133 8mo ago
  > i read a study from sweden where a full three quarters of covid deaths were in the bracket of those aged 80 plus. For the USA you can see the excess mortality for different age groups here: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-p-scores-projected-baseline-by-age?time=earliest..2021-01-03&country=USA~SWE~AUS https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/excess-mortality-p-scores... There isn't much difference between 60-74, 74-84 and 85+. As you can see that site doesn't have data broken down by age for Sweden so it would be interesting to see where they paper you mention got their data from. Sweden's excess deaths across all ages followed a similar curve to the USA, so it would be surprising if the age group breakdown wasn't similar too. You can also see how well Australia managed COVID in comparison. "Excess deaths" in Australia's was driven into reverse by their management strategies. That wasn't due to vaccines. Australian couldn't buy vaccines for love nor money (aside form AstraZeneca which unlike the others could be manufactured there - but it was withdrawn very early), ironically because its other measurement strategies were so successful countries like Mexico were deemed more worthy. Those strategies were also very successful financially, with Australia emerging earlier and faster than just about all countries in the OECD. They did however cause immense friction within Australia, as some citizens deeply resented the temporary restrictions put on travel, mask mandates and the like.
  - Aeglaecia 8mo ago
    your dataset is valid in the context of the argument. its hard for me as a layman to trust claims formed from such widespread sources, when i could hand wave the results away by assuming that deaths from all causes will proportionally increase among all age groups after a populace exits lockdown. anyway that is not a real argument so ill backtrack a bit to provide a government source [0] for my previous claim. as opposed to australia, sweden let it rip. therefore of all countries, this particular dataset is the most universally applicable, since it most accurately reflects a baseline. and that baseline is an overwhelming majority of covid deaths among the elderly. my original point was to compare conscription with a mandate forcing untested chemicals on the populace. if the chemicals were tested or if some other mandate was imparted (eg. your example of australia's management strategies), i acknowledge that this would be less apt of a comparison. [0] https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/en/statistics-and-data/statistics/statistics-subjects/statistics-on-covid-19/ https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/en/statistics-and-data/statis...
    - rstuart4133 8mo ago
      > https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/en/statistics-and-data/statistics/statistics-subjects/statistics-on-covid-19/ https://www.socialstyrelsen.se/en/statistics-and-data/statis... Hmm. Official statistics from an OECD government. A very trustworthy source. According to AI's it is "not* an outlier, the figures are the same for most OECD countries. However the metric is different. I was quoting excess deaths, Sweden figures are deaths attributed to COVID. While it may true COVID caused a lot of deaths, in the elderly with a lot of comorbidities doctors had to put something on the death certificate and COVID was a popular choice at the time. But did it matter if they were going to die away? COVID killing me when I had a many good years left would be very unfortunate. Dying from COVID when I had only a few months because of other reasons doesn't concern me so much. This means excess deaths measures something more relevant to me than measuring deaths attributed to COVID. > with a mandate forcing untested chemicals on the populace. I wasn't aware that any modern vaccine from an OECD country not being tested before used on a human. All COVID vaccines certainly were. The testing was necessarily accelerated, but it's unlikely the normal regime would have caught the issue with AstraZeneca. Mandated vaccination is tricky. A healthly majority of the population with 80+ year old family members in homes is going to want the workers in those facilities to take every possible precaution, including alcohol disinfectants, masks and be vaccinated. Some of that majority were taking those same precautions in their own homes. The same reasoning was applied to populations at less risk, at extreme kindergartens enforcing vaccination and quarritines. Where to draw the line is problematic, but in all OECD countries it was drawn well before mandatory vaccination of the entire population. That didn't happen.