Can you please give me a good response?
go to /r/nursing and sort by top of all time and just read the posts and the respective top comments, most of it is about covid patients and how absolutely awful the situation is
most people think that getting covid is a black and white case of either dying with a chance of around 2 % or surviving and being perfectly fine, when in reality you might get permanent lung damage, making a walk from your bed to the kitchen seem like running a maraphon
or get brain damage from hypoxia, so that you get what’s called brain fog, meaning that your consciousness will be clouded for an unknown time
or any number of yet undescovered side effects
tldr iirc there is a small chance to get sick from a vaccine, but there is an exponentially higher change to get sick without a vaccine and suffer much worse consequences
Covid vaccination is different from other vaccinations as being vaccinated doesn’t mean that you have become immune to covid, or that these “side effects” won’t happen. Thousands of double vaccinated people have already died from covid.
that’s how all of vaccines work: you can still get sick and suffer side effects even if you’re vaccined, but the chances are significantly reduced, which is the whole point
The covid vaccines actually increase the chances of getting covid in certain populations. Check last two columns of Table 2 on page 13 of 41st weekly review of covid vaccination for instance. Not how vaccines are expected to work.
Compare this with say polio vaccine which reduces chances of catching to less than 0.1%.
Lmao that’s how all vaccines work. Don’t spread misinformation.
Removed by mod
literally half to two thirds of the population in first world countries fall into this categories, and even if you don’t, just because the rists are lower doesn’t mean you still can’t suffer any number of terrible consequences from covid
Removed by mod
And the next Darwin award candidate is…
deleted by creator
Your argument would have been strong if mortality data corraborated it. But there is a problem - not one nation has published relevant data for 2020. In fact, for my nation, 2017 is the last year for which good data is available.
deleted by creator
First of all it doesn’t matter if you win this argument. Herd immunity does not require 100% of people to be vaccinated. That’s why it’s such solid public health policy, and why vaccine mandates are so controversial. It doesn’t matter one iota if this one guy and all his friends don’t get vaccinated.
Seconly, the first data I found was this.
As of January 8, 2021, 55 deaths were reported, and the mortality rate of COVID-19 vaccination was 8.2 per million population. A total of 37 deaths were reported among long-term care facility residents, and the mortality rate was 53.4 per million population. Top reported comorbidities associated with deaths included hypertension, dementia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), diabetes, and heart failure. In addition, dementia was more likely to be associated with deaths vaccinated at long-term care facilities than at other locations.
Fairly insignificant then. It’s less than the chance of being murdered each year (for an englishman). Less than the chance of randomly dying for some other reason that day. And it’s less than the chance of dying from running a marathon. Source
I didn’t do the sums, but I’d wager it’s also less than the chance of contracting and dying from covid.
Unless you are demented or diabetic etc, you’re probably fine. Anyway, it’s a free choice he can make. None of anyone else’s business, unless he’s unfortunate enough to live in Italy.
It does matter
?
i give statistics from an actual study, and you respond with a list of anecdotes?
you are the problem. you can convince yourself of anything, just by cherry picking the right anecdotes. you’ll believe exactly what you want to believe, with no consideration for the truth.
Dude, that pretty much proves you are parrotong what you have been fed by authorities.
What I gave you is much more than the statistical aggregates you are talking about. Newspapers have published the names, age, etc for each of them.
And I don’t know what is your exposure to the field of statistics, but 5000 “anecdotes” are statistically significant.
Antivaxxer arguments are so incredibly sad.
“You are parrotong(sp) what you have been fed by authorities” - Right - they’re authorities because they’re the top relevant medical experts and scientists involved. Reading a twitter thread doesn’t make you an authority. See the difference? What you are doing is parroting (spelling matters) typical antivax conjecture.
What you gave is, as previously mentioned, anecdotes. You could provide a million of them, they’re still anecdotes.
Exposure to the field of statistics? Would you like to talk to the experts involved with VAERS and the like so you can actually get educated about what they find significant?
They are authorities, because they are authorities. Good one. I am really convinced now.
Forget twitter. Mind reading something from the authorities? Check table 2, page number 13, of 41st week review of vaccination by PHE. Last two columns specifically. It states, statistically, that if you are over 30, and vaccinated, you are more likely to to get covid positive than if you are unvaccinated.
And remember, I am not yet referring you to any “antivax conjecture”.
And yet another problem with antivaxxers - refusal to read unless it fits their narrative.
Sorry, try again.
“Narrative” doesn’t come from anti-establishment folks like me. Our job is to point to holes in the narrative. Ontology 101.
And I don’t need to “try” anything, including vaccines. You can take your jab. Or jabs. Mix and match them, whatever.
post a link to your source. if you haven’t misunderstood it, that would be very interesting.
These quotes come immediately before and after the cited graph in the report, I’ve shortened them for clarity and brevity:
These data should be considered in the context of vaccination status of the population groups … The vaccination status of cases … is not the most appropriate method to assess vaccine effectiveness and there is a high risk of misinterpretation.
it is expected that a large proportion of cases, hospitalisations and deaths would occur in vaccinated individuals, simply because a larger proportion of the population are vaccinated than unvaccinated … This is especially true because vaccination has been prioritised in individuals who are more susceptible or more at risk of severe disease. Individuals in risk groups … thus may be hospitalised or die with COVID-19 rather than because of COVID-19.
Interpretation of the case rates in vaccinated and unvaccinated population is particularly susceptible to changes in denominators and should be interpreted with extra caution.
Because the elderly and the chronically sick are the most likely to get vaccinated, and the young and healthy are the least likely to get vaccinated, it distorts the numbers to look like getting the vaccine increases your chance of contracting covid.
The report you cited is overflowing with warnings not to misinterpret the data, but you missed all the warnings. Ironically, your own argument is an excellent example why we need authorities to interpret findings for the general public, and why those authorities are deserving of more trust than any stranger on social media.
All three of your quotes can be addressed:
-
Of course it is not the most appropriate way to assess vaccine effectiveness. The most appropriate way is isolate the vector (which hasn’t been done till date), then administer it to test subjects (good luck finding willing test subjects), both vaccinated and unvaccinated, and then check the covid positive rates for these test subjects. And then there have to be replication studies to verify results, etc. You’ll need no less than a dictator to get this done.
-
This is a generalised conjecture which can be refuted by one single appropriate example. As it happens, an appropriate example exists. Waterford, Ireland which has nearly 100% vaccination rate, became a covid positive hotbed soon after vaccination reached high percentage ( check here ).
-
As it happens, the denominators in the tables have been uniquely specified and rates given in proportion to them. If the PHE have not made any mistakes in making the table, it is highly unlikely that my interpretations have erred on this count.
As for your own interpretation about difference in vaccination rate by age and illness distorting rates of covid contraction, that cannot be addressed without more comprehensive data. But there are distortions from other side as well. For instance, those more likely to contract covid may also be taking more social distancing precautions and maintaining stricter personal hygeine, etc.
-
From what I’ve heard, this misconception comes from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). Pretty much any issues that come up after a vaccination are reported to the system. Using that data, the CDC can detect side effects with extremely low rates of occurrence. Since vaccines are administered to the entire population, it is critical to detect these issues because even problems that are unlikely to arise from an individual dose will result in widespread harm.
Unfortunately, people who don’t have an intuitive grasp of statistics have full access to VAERS. They will cry foul when they see thousands of deaths without realizing that those deaths have no relationship to the vaccine nor any particular similarity to each other. They are simply records that are there to ferret out any issues that were not detected in trials. That then goes viral on the Internet without even less context and reaches people like your friend.
Removed by mod
That’s not what it means at all. Go read the FAQ on VAERS. Go talk to your doctor.
Good question. Is this person someone who’s mind can be changed with facts? A loved one? An acquaintance? You could go for the slapback of how many people died and are continuing to die from getting coronavirus vs the alleged thousands that have died from the vaccines. Or you could point them to factual sources that they’ll reject as fake. You could lay down facts about hospital overcrowding due to Corona patients? Maybe tell them that not getting the vaccine is a liberal conspiracy to let republicans get sick all over each other? I dunno, good question.
Well, here’s the thing. Said anti-vaxxer supports Biden.
The one obvious problem in your scheme is that s/he can ask the same question about you: Can your mind be changed with facts? Here is a list of newspaper articles documenting deaths of over 5000 vaccinated Indians.
Just deaths. Less serious/less immediate effects are not even being documented because of sheer apathy.
I’m not sure if I quite believe what you’re posting there, but i will say that hospitals can’t keep up with the covid patients and folks with other serious issues can’t get proper medical treatment due to the overcrowding of unvaccinated folks. There’s only around 60 ER beds where i live, and they’re pretty consistently full of COVID patients. I live in the US, btw.
What exactly is the “proper medical treatment” of a covid patient? Do tell if the “authorities” in US have been able to decide anything.
I am in Delhi, India, and have seen what you are seeing 6 months ago, probably seen worse. For two months or so, there were too many patients for the system to handle. Beds weren’t there. Oxygen was in short supply. Ventilators were few. 20+ of my own family members were either positive or suffering with illness but not officially positive. The count of friends and coworkers, I didn’t bother with. For two months, no one cared for non-covid related news. A city with over 10 million residents, and people were dying regardless of their vaccination status. Many prominent people, some doctors, with double vaccination are already dead of covid.
Imagine if you gave almost every old person in this country a glass of water. The day after lots of them would be dead! Because old people die.
Punch him in the face.
Isn’t punching in the face supposed to spread the xhinese flu?
Referring to COVID-19 as “xhinese flu” is considered xenophobia. Further use of that term will result in a ban.
Even though I disagree with this rule whose basis appears to be reddit-like political correctness, I’ll follow.
Is there a place where one can formally contest this rule?
Nope. It’s up to me to interpret the rules, and that is the conclusion I’ve come to. Just use the terms agreed upon by the WHO and the scientific community more broadly and you’ll be fine.
jab him instead
deleted by creator
I am just suspiscious of what govt does. I still don’t know what kind of fear China put into politicians so that Chinese flu doesn’t exist, but Indian variant does.
according to conventional wisdom, you shouldn’t call it Indian variant just as you shouldn’t call it Wuhan flu. it’s delta variant and covid 19. there’s no hypocrisy there. they (the WHO i guess) are being sensible and consistent.
so there’s one less reason to be suspicious :)
deleted by creator
You got it the wrong way. Conventional wisdom says it should be chinese flu, just like spanish flu. Delta variant and covid19 come from the current fashionable wisdom.
Spanish flu is conventionally called Influenza A.
I guess all this stuff is debatable. In historical discussions, you might use the more geographical names, but never in medicine. No-one ever gets diagnosed with Spanish flu these days.
Conventional name is spanish flu only. Hardly anyone knows that Spanish flu was a type of Influenza A, actually this remains debateable if it was indeed Influenza A.
People do get Influenza A today, but not Spanish flu.
no response is needed, fascism is unsustainable, these people are bound to die soon enough, if not for the virus for the revolution that is to come
Username checks out.
just checked your comments history, gigantic yikes
reported and blocked
