COVID-19 (Aka China Virus)

[pawnman]

16 minutes ago, HeloDude said:

I’m still waiting for motorcycles to be banned…you know, for public safety.

Why are you bringing up motorcycles in the thread about Covid vaccines?

Equating motorcycles to Covid is apples and oranges...to borrow your phrase.

[busdriver]

Polio/TB: much much worse than COVID.

Measle/Mumps/Rubella/Chickenpox:  Not nearly as bad as COVID normally, disproportionately affects kids however.

A COVID vaccine requirement for public schools/military, is perfectly in line with normal practice in America.

Mandatory vaccines generally is less common.  Smallpox the last time?  I honestly don't know.

 

Question for the "anti-vaxxers," something I've been thinking about a bit:

If the Faucis of the world had been completely transparent instead of shaping their comments to the public to get a desired behavior.  If the politicians hadn't been completely hypocritical.  If the public had reimbursed businesses for loss due to public action.         Etc.  

Would you be as vehemently against the vaccine?  a mandate?

In other words, how much of your position is based on "not one more fucking inch" vs opposition to this specific thing?

Being honest with myself, I don't think I would have sneezed if all that went away, and this was solely about a mandatory, free vaccine.

[BashiChuni]

17 minutes ago, pawnman said:

Why are you bringing up motorcycles in the thread about Covid vaccines?

Equating motorcycles to Covid is apples and oranges...to borrow your phrase.

If you think COVID and polio have the same risk factors for children then you’re an idiot. I’m sorry but you are. 

[FLEA]

1 hour ago, pawnman said:

Yes, yes, we know that you oppose vaccinations in spite of a wealth of data.

Any argument in favor of vaccines won't make sense to you.

But I'm not.... So you apparently are unable to follow what's going on. 

I have every vaccine in the DoD inventory, including COVID which I got in February of 21. (One of the earliest) I'm making a stand on ethics and morality and you are simply stuck in a black and white worldview thats selfishly interested in removing bodily autonomy from everyone else so you can go about a normal life again. Get over yourself bro. 

[McJay Pilot]

So... after 102 pages of discussion and back and forth... does using a seatbelt increase or decrease my odds of getting COVID?

Edited September 6, 2021 by McJay Pilot
spellin'

[pawnman]

34 minutes ago, McJay Pilot said:

So... after 102 pages of discussion and back and forth... does using a seatbelt increase or decrease my odds of getting COVID?

You use a seatbelt?  How can you let the government compromise your autonomy like that?  So few people die in car accidents, seat belts don't even help anyway...

[Lord Ratner]

2 hours ago, busdriver said:

Polio/TB: much much worse than COVID.

Measle/Mumps/Rubella/Chickenpox:  Not nearly as bad as COVID normally, disproportionately affects kids however.

A COVID vaccine requirement for public schools/military, is perfectly in line with normal practice in America.

Mandatory vaccines generally is less common.  Smallpox the last time?  I honestly don't know.

 

Question for the "anti-vaxxers," something I've been thinking about a bit:

If the Faucis of the world had been completely transparent instead of shaping their comments to the public to get a desired behavior.  If the politicians hadn't been completely hypocritical.  If the public had reimbursed businesses for loss due to public action.         Etc.  

Would you be as vehemently against the vaccine?  a mandate?

In other words, how much of your position is based on "not one more fucking inch" vs opposition to this specific thing?

Being honest with myself, I don't think I would have sneezed if all that went away, and this was solely about a mandatory, free vaccine.

Shack. I'm vaccinated, but I'm completely against the mandatory programs because once your leaders demonstrate they are perfectly comfortable lying to you, trusting them is foolish. 

 

We still don't have hard numbers for ending lockdowns and mask mandates after 20 MONTHS! Really? You have to be intentionally blind to think there's a plan. There isn't. Just like the military, the people who desire and achieve leadership positions in government bureaucracies are largely incapable of operating in an unfamiliar situation. Our system prioritizes individual liberty because the incompetence of leaders in large organizations is an old and persistent phenomenon. 

 

Just look at the totality of the pandemic, not just the mandates you like or the actions that made sense, but the whole timeline, and tell me you want more government control over our lives.

No thanks.

[Guest LumberjackAxe]

I’m perpetuating some shitty internet practices right now, but Sam Harris had an excellent podcast on this topic (https://samharris.org/subscriber-rss/?uid=109560) and his guest brought up a curious point: that even if you take the worst-case scenario numbers of adverse events from the vaccine (these numbers not coming from the CDC, but from anti-vax sources), and then compare that risk to the risk of an adverse reaction to COVID-19, then it’s still a no brainer to get the vaccine.

 

I know the thread has veered toward whether a mandate is good or not, but what do folks think about comparing the risk of getting COVID/hospitalization, versus the an adverse vaccine reaction? Is it even possible?

[pawnman]

22 minutes ago, LumberjackAxe said:

I’m perpetuating some shitty internet practices right now, but Sam Harris had an excellent podcast on this topic (https://samharris.org/subscriber-rss/?uid=109560) and his guest brought up a curious point: that even if you take the worst-case scenario numbers of adverse events from the vaccine (these numbers not coming from the CDC, but from anti-vax sources), and then compare that risk to the risk of an adverse reaction to COVID-19, then it’s still a no brainer to get the vaccine.

 

I know the thread has veered toward whether a mandate is good or not, but what do folks think about comparing the risk of getting COVID/hospitalization, versus the an adverse vaccine reaction? Is it even possible?

Bingo!

[brabus]

33 minutes ago, LumberjackAxe said:

I know the thread has veered toward whether a mandate is good or not, but what do folks think about comparing the risk of getting COVID/hospitalization, versus the an adverse vaccine reaction? Is it even possible?

I already did that, with the data that’s available (my risk from COVID vs. VAERS). It’s about equal risk, slightly favoring not taking the vaccine, for the < 50 age group with no underlying med conditions. The bigger elephant in the room is what are the potential long term adverse reactions? Nobody knows, and that’s the biggest factor for many. No one can make any statistically significant argument that immediate adverse reactions equal the driving decision to not get the vaccine, but why get a vaccine that does so little for you (again, the healthy/young crowd specifically) in trade for an unknown longterm risk (could be very low, but could be bad). Also, if you’ve had COVID, you are significantly better protected than if you just had the vaccine, so no scientific reason to get the vaccine if you’ve managed to already have COVID. 

None of this is a “no brainer;” it’s dependent on many variables that differ from person to person. To say COVID vaccination is a blanket “obvious,” “no brainer,” etc. decision one way or the other for everyone out there is ignorant, selfish, or both.

Edited September 6, 2021 by brabus

[Guest LumberjackAxe]

1 hour ago, brabus said:

I already did that, with the data that’s available (my risk from COVID vs. VAERS). It’s about equal risk, slightly favoring not taking the vaccine, for the < 50 age group with no underlying med conditions. 

You may want to rerun your numbers. I just did now, using the CDC’s numbers, and came up with the following:

There have been 39,831,318 total COVID cases thus far, and 644,848 of them have died (a 1.6% fatality rate). I got the data for two age groups:

30-39: 5,175,077 cases, 7,162 deaths (0.1% fatality rate)

40-49: 4,579,472 cases, 17,057 deaths (0.4% fatality rate)

There have been 162,027,175 COVID vaccinations fully administered, and 7,086 of them have died (a 0.004% fatality rate)  

25-39: 32,689,055 vaccinations, 162 deaths for 30-39 (0.0005% fatality rate) and 96 deaths for 18-29 (0.0008% fatality rate) (they only had vaccinated rates for 25-39, so I have to estimate the actual rate)

40-49: 22,952,343 vaccinations, 263 deaths (0.001% fatality rate)

You don’t have a choice about contracting COVID, but if you do, you (in your age group) have a 0.4% chance of dying. You do have a choice about getting the vaccine, and if you do, you have a 0.001% chance of dying. That’s a 400-fold difference in favor of getting the vaccine.

For me personally, walking around without the vaccine in the US there’s a very high probability that I’ll contract COVID and if I do a .1% chance of dying. If I get the vaccine, I have a ~.0005% chance of dying. What if I get covid after vaccination? We’ll the only data I could find is that the fatality rate is less than .00%, so I’m open to interpretations there.

COVID kills 0.1%, the vaccine kills .0008%. That’s the no brainer from me.

Maybe you’re interpreting this differently? If so, please educate me.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 7, 2021 by LumberjackAxe

[Lord Ratner]

2 hours ago, LumberjackAxe said:

I’m perpetuating some shitty internet practices right now, but Sam Harris had an excellent podcast on this topic (https://samharris.org/subscriber-rss/?uid=109560) and his guest brought up a curious point: that even if you take the worst-case scenario numbers of adverse events from the vaccine (these numbers not coming from the CDC, but from anti-vax sources), and then compare that risk to the risk of an adverse reaction to COVID-19, then it’s still a no brainer to get the vaccine.

 

I know the thread has veered toward whether a mandate is good or not, but what do folks think about comparing the risk of getting COVID/hospitalization, versus the an adverse vaccine reaction? Is it even possible?

I used to make this point about autism. Even if you believe that vaccines cause autism (which I don't), the number of autistic kids is way lower than the number of kids killed/ruined by measles, polio, etc. So isn't autism better?

[brabus]

@LumberjackLet me clarify, I have a higher risk of an adverse reaction from the vaccine than the gain in protection I receive from the vaccine. I was not comparing fatality rate. Though in either case, we’re splitting hairs. So how important is something that you’re arguing takes you from 99.9% to 99.99% survival, but comes with an unknown price tag (long term affects)? Point is, very reasonable to not get it, or get it, depends on the person and their situation. The only insane thing is not accepting that both answers can be right, and it’s a personal choice in which is right for an individual. 

[Guardian]

There have been 39,831,318 total COVID cases….

How many covid cases weren’t reported or didn’t have symptoms enough to go get tested or no symptoms at all?

[jazzdude]

I used to make this point about autism. Even if you believe that vaccines cause autism (which I don't), the number of autistic kids is way lower than the number of kids killed/ruined by measles, polio, etc. So isn't autism better?

The hard part in all those is that from the aggregate, as a society, it makes sense to vaccinate given the low likelihood of adverse affects. The benefits to the overall society out weighs the risk to a few within the population.

However, at the individual level, you bear the risk and burden of any realized risk, and society might not (probably won't) step in to assist you. But at the same time, it makes sense for your neighbor to get the vaccine and breast the risk, because you get to read the societal benefit of them getting vaccinated.

So this puts individual choice ("freedom") at odds with what is good for society, even if that societal good benefits the individual. This notion is amplified in the US because we're a very individualistic society.

Like you vaccines and autism example, from a (previous to COVID) antivaxxer, even a small chance of vaccines causing autism (which they don't) is a risk they don't want to take, given that the diseases being vaccinated having been largely eradicated in modern countries (ironically, because of vaccine mandates). The threat of the disease isn't real to them (who gets the measles any more?), but the perceived consequences of taking a preventative action to protect against the disease is viewed as real.

[busdriver]

Here's some fun math:

Assuming an infection fatality rate of .4-.7, and going off reported deaths, the virus has penetrated into the US population in the neighborhood of 30-45%.  The population write large is ~53% fully vaccinated.  Obviously neither natural or vaccine immunity is 100% (thanks mutations).  A recent initial study indicated the Delta variant R0 mean was 5 (range 3.2-8) which would mean we'd need somewhere around 80% (range, 69-88%) immunity for herd protection.

Doesn't take into account state by state vaccination rates, or area under the exposure curve (NY got shellacked initially, CA/FL not so much).

Maybe my cynical prediction of another year of this shit was too cynical......

[ViperMan]

8 hours ago, pawnman said:

Right...public health protections that use vaccines to reduce risk are entirely incomparable.

4 hours ago, pawnman said:

You use a seatbelt?  How can you let the government compromise your autonomy like that?  So few people die in car accidents, seat belts don't even help anyway...

Dude, Polio is significantly worse than COVID - significantly. Like, your chances of dying or being maimed by Polio do make it a non-starter. Consequences matter. And seat belts have no adverse, or potentially adverse affect on you. Vaccines do. It's not more complicated than that, so don't try to make it so.

3 hours ago, LumberjackAxe said:

I’m perpetuating some shitty internet practices right now, but Sam Harris had an excellent podcast on this topic (https://samharris.org/subscriber-rss/?uid=109560) and his guest brought up a curious point: that even if you take the worst-case scenario numbers of adverse events from the vaccine (these numbers not coming from the CDC, but from anti-vax sources), and then compare that risk to the risk of an adverse reaction to COVID-19, then it’s still a no brainer to get the vaccine.

I know the thread has veered toward whether a mandate is good or not, but what do folks think about comparing the risk of getting COVID/hospitalization, versus the an adverse vaccine reaction? Is it even possible?

Leaving aside the fact that Sam Harris is a total pseudo-intellectual, hell yeah, the vaccine is going to diminish your symptoms and the chances you wind up in the ER substantially, so there really is no question from a risk perspective which you should do. Consideration of long-term affects are unknown for both the disease itself and the vaccine, so arguments that rest on that distinction are null. We don't know in either case, and there is no reason to think one would be worse than the other.

1 hour ago, LumberjackAxe said:

You may want to rerun your numbers. I just did now, using the CDC’s numbers, and came up with the following:

There have been 39,831,318 total COVID cases thus far, and 644,848 of them have died (a 1.6% fatality rate). I got the data for two age groups:

30-39: 5,175,077 cases, 7,162 deaths (0.1% fatality rate)

40-49: 4,579,472 cases, 17,057 deaths (0.4% fatality rate)

There have been 162,027,175 COVID vaccinations fully administered, and 7,086 of them have died (a 0.004% fatality rate)  

25-39: 32,689,055 vaccinations, 162 deaths for 30-39 (0.0005% fatality rate) and 96 deaths for 18-29 (0.0008% fatality rate) (they only had vaccinated rates for 25-39, so I have to estimate the actual rate)

40-49: 22,952,343 vaccinations, 263 deaths (0.001% fatality rate)

You don’t have a choice about contracting COVID, but if you do, you (in your age group) have a 0.4% chance of dying. You do have a choice about getting the vaccine, and if you do, you have a 0.001% chance of dying. That’s a 400-fold difference in favor of getting the vaccine.

For me personally, walking around without the vaccine in the US there’s a very high probability that I’ll contract COVID and if I do a .1% chance of dying. If I get the vaccine, I have a ~.0005% chance of dying. What if I get covid after vaccination? We’ll the only data I could find is that the fatality rate is less than .00%, so I’m open to interpretations there.

COVID kills 0.1%, the vaccine kills .0008%. That’s the no brainer from me.

Maybe you’re interpreting this differently? If so, please educate me.

All these numbers. A couple things. One, as precise as that "total" number looks and feels, the total number of infections is unknown and we have good reason to think it is MUCH higher - note that many infections are asymptomatic. Note that there was a recent study that found the presence of COVID antibodies to be 2x as prevalent than expected. 2X is huge. That's the denominator. For the numerator, plenty of context is missing - what % of these people had 1, 2, 3, or more underlying conditions? What percent were obese? COVID has been way more dangerous and detrimental to our politics, economy, and society than Fauci would have us believe.

[ViperMan]

8 hours ago, busdriver said:

Question for the "anti-vaxxers," something I've been thinking about a bit:

If the Faucis of the world had been completely transparent instead of shaping their comments to the public to get a desired behavior.  If the politicians hadn't been completely hypocritical.  If the public had reimbursed businesses for loss due to public action.         Etc.  

Would you be as vehemently against the vaccine?  a mandate?

In other words, how much of your position is based on "not one more fucking inch" vs opposition to this specific thing?

Being honest with myself, I don't think I would have sneezed if all that went away, and this was solely about a mandatory, free vaccine.

I'm not an anti-vaxxer, but yes, to answer your question. Had Fauci stood up at the beginning and told everyone not to buy masks because the people who need them more than you would not be able to get them, then yeah, I would trust him more, and so would a lot of other people. For many people, trusting the government in a situation like this probably figures pretty heavily in their decision matrix. Instead, he lied to us. It was a "noble" lie, but it was a lie none-the-less. At the end of the day it's hard to trust someone who secretly thinks you're stupid, but is also simultaneously and constantly stepping all over their own dick.

For me it's about not one more fucking inch. Vaccine passports in NYC? Get fucked.

[Swizzle]

Watching this conversation-action makes for a snack bar trip...

[Swizzle]

And, oh yeah...

[Swizzle]

[pawnman]

9 hours ago, ViperMan said:

Dude, Polio is significantly worse than COVID - significantly. Like, your chances of dying or being maimed by Polio do make it a non-starter. Consequences matter. And seat belts have no adverse, or potentially adverse affect on you. Vaccines do. It's not more complicated than that, so don't try to make it so.

Leaving aside the fact that Sam Harris is a total pseudo-intellectual, hell yeah, the vaccine is going to diminish your symptoms and the chances you wind up in the ER substantially, so there really is no question from a risk perspective which you should do. Consideration of long-term affects are unknown for both the disease itself and the vaccine, so arguments that rest on that distinction are null. We don't know in either case, and there is no reason to think one would be worse than the other.

All these numbers. A couple things. One, as precise as that "total" number looks and feels, the total number of infections is unknown and we have good reason to think it is MUCH higher - note that many infections are asymptomatic. Note that there was a recent study that found the presence of COVID antibodies to be 2x as prevalent than expected. 2X is huge. That's the denominator. For the numerator, plenty of context is missing - what % of these people had 1, 2, 3, or more underlying conditions? What percent were obese? COVID has been way more dangerous and detrimental to our politics, economy, and society than Fauci would have us believe.

I'm curious, then.

What is your cutoff point for making a vaccine mandatory.  You're clearly all for mandatory polio vaccines, because "polio is worse than Covid".  OK...how about measles?  TB?  Rubella?

Where is your line in the sand where you say "it's OK to mandate these vaccines for kids going to school, it's not OK to mandate these other vaccines for adults in the military"?

Bonus points if, in all your number-crunching, you want to propose a public health solution that the CDC and FDA haven't already pushed.

[Lord Ratner]

1 hour ago, pawnman said:

I'm curious, then.

What is your cutoff point for making a vaccine mandatory.  You're clearly all for mandatory polio vaccines, because "polio is worse than Covid".  OK...how about measles?  TB?  Rubella?

Where is your line in the sand where you say "it's OK to mandate these vaccines for kids going to school, it's not OK to mandate these other vaccines for adults in the military"?

Bonus points if, in all your number-crunching, you want to propose a public health solution that the CDC and FDA haven't already pushed.

At least 10 years of real-world data using voluntarily vaccinated as the sample. Then mandates must be proportional to the threat, so only mandates where they make sense. Hospitals and schools. Children when the disease actually threatens children.

 

The severity of the disease is the true regulator of vaccination rates. If COVID-19 was killing people like SARS or MERS(10-30%), people would line up for the vaccine, just like they did in Feb/March when it came out and all the fat/old people who were most at risk went and got it. 

 

After 10 years of studying the vaccine effects, then you can make it mandatory as well as punish people on their insurance premiums if they won't get it.

 

Disclaimer, I'm voluntarily vaccinated, so your stupid and hysterical arguments are not just ridiculous-sounding to the anti-vax crowd.

[TheNewGazmo]

I'm curious, then.
What is your cutoff point for making a vaccine mandatory.  You're clearly all for mandatory polio vaccines, because "polio is worse than Covid".  OK...how about measles?  TB?  Rubella?
Where is your line in the sand where you say "it's OK to mandate these vaccines for kids going to school, it's not OK to mandate these other vaccines for adults in the military"?
Bonus points if, in all your number-crunching, you want to propose a public health solution that the CDC and FDA haven't already pushed.

In 2018-19, about 35,000,000 people in the US got the flu. 35,000 died. The DoD mandates a vaccine for a virus with a .1% death rate. Death isn't everything. Immobilization is just as significant of a factor.

[Scooter14]

In 2018-19, about 35,000,000 people in the US got the flu. 35,000 died. The DoD mandates a vaccine for a virus with a .1% death rate. Death isn't everything. Immobilization is just as significant of a factor.

So is permanent lung damage and all the other stuff we don’t know.