• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 19:44
CEST 01:44
KST 08:44
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Serral wins EWC 202534Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 202510Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202580RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15
Community News
[BSL 2025] H2 - Team Wars, Weeklies & SB Ladder9EWC 2025 - Replay Pack4Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced50BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams10Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0
StarCraft 2
General
The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Serral wins EWC 2025 Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 2025 Classic: "It's a thick wall to break through to become world champ" Firefly given lifetime ban by ESIC following match-fixing investigation
Tourneys
LiuLi Cup Weeklies and Monthlies Info Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) TaeJa vs Creator Bo7 SC Evo Showmatch Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $10,000 live event
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 484 Magnetic Pull Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune
Brood War
General
BW General Discussion Scmdraft 2 - 0.9.0 Preview [BSL 2025] H2 - Team Wars, Weeklies & SB Ladder Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced Which top zerg/toss will fail in qualifiers?
Tourneys
[ASL20] Online Qualifiers Day 1 [ASL20] Online Qualifiers Day 2 [Megathread] Daily Proleagues Small VOD Thread 2.0
Strategy
[G] Mineral Boosting Muta micro map competition Does 1 second matter in StarCraft? Simple Questions, Simple Answers
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Beyond All Reason Total Annihilation Server - TAForever [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok)
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
Vanilla Mini Mafia TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread Canadian Politics Mega-thread Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
INnoVation Fan Club SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
Anime Discussion Thread [\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Gtx660 graphics card replacement Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
TeamLiquid Team Shirt On Sale The Automated Ban List
Blogs
ASL S20 English Commentary…
namkraft
The Link Between Fitness and…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 482 users

Coronavirus and You - Page 581

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 579 580 581 582 583 699 Next
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.

It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.

Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.

This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.

Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better.
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
Last Edited: 2022-02-02 03:45:02
February 02 2022 03:38 GMT
#11601
--- Nuked ---
BlackJack
Profile Blog Joined June 2003
United States10501 Posts
February 02 2022 04:33 GMT
#11602
On February 02 2022 09:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 02 2022 07:22 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 05:47 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 05:07 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 02:43 Slydie wrote:
On February 01 2022 07:09 Sermokala wrote:
On February 01 2022 05:14 Slydie wrote:
It is a proven fact that the vaccines do a surprisingly bad job at preventing transmission of Omnicron. So does natural immunity, as the Delta variant is not closely related to Omnicron, double infection is VERY normal, and can even happen if vaccinated on top of that! For serious illness and death, the story is very different.

There are 2 reasons for requiring vaccines:
#1: Require them in high risk situations as the vaccines should reduce the spread of the virus.
#2: Indirectly forcing people to get the vaccine by making not having them as unpractical as possible.

For Omnicron, policies are made for reason #2, but they are often masked as reason #1. If you do not want the vaccine, that obviously pisses people off. There were already vaccine requirements for all travelers to South-Africa when Omnicron broke out, but needless to say, they did a horrible job at containing that strain. I have still not seen any research confirming that vaccine passports etc. have any direct impact on this pandemic.

If you are conciously trying to make life difficult for unvaccinated to force them to get the shots, you have to be honest about it, and not wrap it in bullshit arguments.

There is a third reason for requiring vaccines: They cause less people to die and less people to take up hospital space for everyone else.

Do you think people aren't dieing because so much hospital space is being taken up by people who are too selfish to get something that is free, safe, and convenient to get?


Please tell be a legitimate reason why people don't want to get specifically the covid vaccine and not the list of other vaccines you were mandated to get for the public good as a child?


Come on, man. COVID is a rapidly changing respiratory virus which is not approved for small children, and the effect of vaccinating children for such diseases is highly debatable. Flu shots are not mandatory for kids either.

The vaccine effectiveness against COVID infection already dropped from 94% to ~30%. There are some very good reasons why flu shots are typically reserved for the vulnerable and some HC-workers, COVID shots will just be added to the list, and they can likely even be give the same time. Our immune systems take care of the rest, and we can live with getting knocked out once every 5-10 years.


The covid vaccine can be given to all school-age children though (5 years old, and older), who come in contact with dozens, if not hundreds, of individuals every day, which is far more important than babies/toddlers who have a much more limited number of interactions.

Also, I've never heard of flu shots being reserved for only the vulnerable; that's certainly not true in the United States, where you can walk into just about any pharmacy and get a free flu shot without any sort of check-up or health diagnostic, because we basically have infinitely many doses.

Finally, what do you mean by "effectiveness" when you say "The vaccine effectiveness against COVID infection already dropped from 94% to ~30%." What are these percentages in reference to? Preventing infection? Transmission? Death? Hospitalizations?


You're STILL using the argument that we have to vaccinate children because they come into contact with other people? Have you missed the news that the vaccines are not very good at preventing you from contracting and spreading COVID?

2 doses of pfizer provide 10% protection against infection after 20 weeks.

3 doses of pfizer provides 45% protection against infection after only 10 weeks.

Source

So if you're concerned about children spreading COVID with those they come into contact you should be really concerned that the vaccines only offer decent protection for a couple months before they quickly wane to almost no protection. Israel says even a 4th shot is likely not enough against Omicron.

So allow me to update your argument in light of this new information: What we need is MORE BOOSTERS FOR KIDS. Obviously we need to be updating their protection every 3~ months to protect the hundreds of people they come into contact with. The logistics can be solved quite easily - just cross-train teachers to give out booster shots every 3 months. Every time the students get a report card they can get a shot in the arm to go along with it. How is that any different from an MMR vaccine?


It's really weird to read "You're STILL using the argument that we have to vaccinate children because they come into contact with other people?" and then right after that, read that you fully concede that there are infection-related benefits to getting vaccinated, but okay

I was going to completely ignore your last paragraph, as it came off as ridiculous trolling and/or slippery sloping into absurdity, but giving you the benefit of the doubt that you actually believe that this is what I think, I'll respond to it: Although things may change, it seems to be the case that newer variants end up being less deadly. If newer strains continue to be less harmful as covid-19 becomes endemic, then it'll be less impactful to become infected with covid-19. Obviously, it'll be helpful to learn about the effects of long-covid, but as more effective treatments (both proactively and reactively) are researched and developed, we'll likely be able to deal with the virus a lot better, perhaps eventually relegating it to "the scientific and medical communities still recommend that you get your annual flu shot and your annual covid-19 shot, because you'd probably get a little sick if you get infected, and you could spread those viruses to others, but the daily updates of death tolls are long gone". In other words, I'm pretty optimistic that our experts will continue to help us get through this and that covid-19 will become less threatening, not more threatening. I don't see us needing to get vaccinated every 3 months in the future, but also that's irrelevant to the fact that children should already be vaccinated in the present.


What other way is there to interpret your argument? If a 2-dose series only offers 10% efficacy after 20 weeks then vaccinating school aged children in the summer before school starts means that by winter they have almost no protection from contracting and spreading COVID. If that were my argument I would certainly be advocating for frequent boosters. If I wanted to stop/slow transmission in the Fall then I would want to stop/slow transmission in the Winter as well, no?

I surmise from your 2nd paragraph that your viewpoint is that you generally trust the recommendations of "our experts" to see us through this pandemic and they are currently recommending for children to be vaccinated and you agree. So I'm curious if you and I were born in Sweden where their experts are not recommending for children to be vaccinated would you still trust "our experts." Is your view on childhood COVID vaccination predicated on where you happened to be birthed?


It seems weird to me that you have an issue with having additional protection, when the alternative is no protection. Even if it's only 10% protection, that's literally 10% more than not being vaccinated. That's two or three extra students in every single one of my classes, each of which could bring their infection home and infect their older family members.

By the way, I read your source, and you conveniently quote mined a lot of information. Here are some other numbers, from your own source, that you left out: "A booster dose, on the other hand, is up to 75% effective at preventing symptomatic infection and 88% effective at preventing hospitalization, according to the data." "The U.K. Health Security Agency also found that boosters are only 40% to 50% effective against infection 10 weeks after receiving the shot. [you lowballed at 40%]" "Israel found that fourth doses increase protective antibodies fivefold." Even if the 75% effectiveness or 5x protective antibodies dwindles over a few months, that's still additional protection!

These aren't nominal precautions, whether we're talking about lowering infection rate, or hospitalization rate, or death rate. We know that countless lives have been saved as a result. I haven't been following Sweden's handling of coronavirus, and I don't know much about Sweden, so I can't comment on what they're doing or why they're doing it.


I didn't lowball 40%. I said 45% which is right in the middle of 40-50%.

We'll have to agree to disagree. For me 10% is "slightly better than nothing" which is not a good reason to advocate for across the board mass vaccination of children.
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44329 Posts
Last Edited: 2022-02-02 05:19:49
February 02 2022 04:58 GMT
#11603
On February 02 2022 13:33 BlackJack wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 02 2022 09:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 07:22 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 05:47 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 05:07 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 02:43 Slydie wrote:
On February 01 2022 07:09 Sermokala wrote:
On February 01 2022 05:14 Slydie wrote:
It is a proven fact that the vaccines do a surprisingly bad job at preventing transmission of Omnicron. So does natural immunity, as the Delta variant is not closely related to Omnicron, double infection is VERY normal, and can even happen if vaccinated on top of that! For serious illness and death, the story is very different.

There are 2 reasons for requiring vaccines:
#1: Require them in high risk situations as the vaccines should reduce the spread of the virus.
#2: Indirectly forcing people to get the vaccine by making not having them as unpractical as possible.

For Omnicron, policies are made for reason #2, but they are often masked as reason #1. If you do not want the vaccine, that obviously pisses people off. There were already vaccine requirements for all travelers to South-Africa when Omnicron broke out, but needless to say, they did a horrible job at containing that strain. I have still not seen any research confirming that vaccine passports etc. have any direct impact on this pandemic.

If you are conciously trying to make life difficult for unvaccinated to force them to get the shots, you have to be honest about it, and not wrap it in bullshit arguments.

There is a third reason for requiring vaccines: They cause less people to die and less people to take up hospital space for everyone else.

Do you think people aren't dieing because so much hospital space is being taken up by people who are too selfish to get something that is free, safe, and convenient to get?


Please tell be a legitimate reason why people don't want to get specifically the covid vaccine and not the list of other vaccines you were mandated to get for the public good as a child?


Come on, man. COVID is a rapidly changing respiratory virus which is not approved for small children, and the effect of vaccinating children for such diseases is highly debatable. Flu shots are not mandatory for kids either.

The vaccine effectiveness against COVID infection already dropped from 94% to ~30%. There are some very good reasons why flu shots are typically reserved for the vulnerable and some HC-workers, COVID shots will just be added to the list, and they can likely even be give the same time. Our immune systems take care of the rest, and we can live with getting knocked out once every 5-10 years.


The covid vaccine can be given to all school-age children though (5 years old, and older), who come in contact with dozens, if not hundreds, of individuals every day, which is far more important than babies/toddlers who have a much more limited number of interactions.

Also, I've never heard of flu shots being reserved for only the vulnerable; that's certainly not true in the United States, where you can walk into just about any pharmacy and get a free flu shot without any sort of check-up or health diagnostic, because we basically have infinitely many doses.

Finally, what do you mean by "effectiveness" when you say "The vaccine effectiveness against COVID infection already dropped from 94% to ~30%." What are these percentages in reference to? Preventing infection? Transmission? Death? Hospitalizations?


You're STILL using the argument that we have to vaccinate children because they come into contact with other people? Have you missed the news that the vaccines are not very good at preventing you from contracting and spreading COVID?

2 doses of pfizer provide 10% protection against infection after 20 weeks.

3 doses of pfizer provides 45% protection against infection after only 10 weeks.

Source

So if you're concerned about children spreading COVID with those they come into contact you should be really concerned that the vaccines only offer decent protection for a couple months before they quickly wane to almost no protection. Israel says even a 4th shot is likely not enough against Omicron.

So allow me to update your argument in light of this new information: What we need is MORE BOOSTERS FOR KIDS. Obviously we need to be updating their protection every 3~ months to protect the hundreds of people they come into contact with. The logistics can be solved quite easily - just cross-train teachers to give out booster shots every 3 months. Every time the students get a report card they can get a shot in the arm to go along with it. How is that any different from an MMR vaccine?


It's really weird to read "You're STILL using the argument that we have to vaccinate children because they come into contact with other people?" and then right after that, read that you fully concede that there are infection-related benefits to getting vaccinated, but okay

I was going to completely ignore your last paragraph, as it came off as ridiculous trolling and/or slippery sloping into absurdity, but giving you the benefit of the doubt that you actually believe that this is what I think, I'll respond to it: Although things may change, it seems to be the case that newer variants end up being less deadly. If newer strains continue to be less harmful as covid-19 becomes endemic, then it'll be less impactful to become infected with covid-19. Obviously, it'll be helpful to learn about the effects of long-covid, but as more effective treatments (both proactively and reactively) are researched and developed, we'll likely be able to deal with the virus a lot better, perhaps eventually relegating it to "the scientific and medical communities still recommend that you get your annual flu shot and your annual covid-19 shot, because you'd probably get a little sick if you get infected, and you could spread those viruses to others, but the daily updates of death tolls are long gone". In other words, I'm pretty optimistic that our experts will continue to help us get through this and that covid-19 will become less threatening, not more threatening. I don't see us needing to get vaccinated every 3 months in the future, but also that's irrelevant to the fact that children should already be vaccinated in the present.


What other way is there to interpret your argument? If a 2-dose series only offers 10% efficacy after 20 weeks then vaccinating school aged children in the summer before school starts means that by winter they have almost no protection from contracting and spreading COVID. If that were my argument I would certainly be advocating for frequent boosters. If I wanted to stop/slow transmission in the Fall then I would want to stop/slow transmission in the Winter as well, no?

I surmise from your 2nd paragraph that your viewpoint is that you generally trust the recommendations of "our experts" to see us through this pandemic and they are currently recommending for children to be vaccinated and you agree. So I'm curious if you and I were born in Sweden where their experts are not recommending for children to be vaccinated would you still trust "our experts." Is your view on childhood COVID vaccination predicated on where you happened to be birthed?


It seems weird to me that you have an issue with having additional protection, when the alternative is no protection. Even if it's only 10% protection, that's literally 10% more than not being vaccinated. That's two or three extra students in every single one of my classes, each of which could bring their infection home and infect their older family members.

By the way, I read your source, and you conveniently quote mined a lot of information. Here are some other numbers, from your own source, that you left out: "A booster dose, on the other hand, is up to 75% effective at preventing symptomatic infection and 88% effective at preventing hospitalization, according to the data." "The U.K. Health Security Agency also found that boosters are only 40% to 50% effective against infection 10 weeks after receiving the shot. [you lowballed at 40%]" "Israel found that fourth doses increase protective antibodies fivefold." Even if the 75% effectiveness or 5x protective antibodies dwindles over a few months, that's still additional protection!

These aren't nominal precautions, whether we're talking about lowering infection rate, or hospitalization rate, or death rate. We know that countless lives have been saved as a result. I haven't been following Sweden's handling of coronavirus, and I don't know much about Sweden, so I can't comment on what they're doing or why they're doing it.


I didn't lowball 40%. I said 45% which is right in the middle of 40-50%.

We'll have to agree to disagree. For me 10% is "slightly better than nothing" which is not a good reason to advocate for across the board mass vaccination of children.


Except it's 75%, not 10%. It eventually decreases over several months, but you don't start with only 10% infection protection.

And this doesn't even take into account the other benefits, such as the 88% decrease in hospitalization. Even if you ignored the significantly reduced infection rates for several months and didn't think the vaccine helped prevent infection at all, you'd still need to dismiss the massive protection against hospitalization and death. There are just so many benefits to being vaccinated and so few downsides, and your source provides great arguments for vaccines, not against them.
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
Mohdoo
Profile Joined August 2007
United States15689 Posts
February 02 2022 06:13 GMT
#11604
I'm amazed you guys have the will to continue this conversation, the same conversation, every time

A: Vaccines aren't worth the cost
B: What cost? They are statistically a good idea in every scenario
A: Vaccines don't entirely prevent infection
B: Vaccines are still a benefit in every situation
A: Vaccines aren't worth the cost


Its the exact same conversation every time.
WombaT
Profile Blog Joined May 2010
Northern Ireland25330 Posts
February 02 2022 06:20 GMT
#11605
On February 02 2022 15:13 Mohdoo wrote:
I'm amazed you guys have the will to continue this conversation, the same conversation, every time

A: Vaccines aren't worth the cost
B: What cost? They are statistically a good idea in every scenario
A: Vaccines don't entirely prevent infection
B: Vaccines are still a benefit in every situation
A: Vaccines aren't worth the cost


Its the exact same conversation every time.

Is Mohdoo IslandTM prepped yet?
'You'll always be the cuddly marsupial of my heart, despite the inherent flaws of your ancestry' - Squat
emperorchampion
Profile Blog Joined December 2008
Canada9496 Posts
February 02 2022 06:55 GMT
#11606
On February 02 2022 15:13 Mohdoo wrote:
I'm amazed you guys have the will to continue this conversation, the same conversation, every time

A: Vaccines aren't worth the cost
B: What cost? They are statistically a good idea in every scenario
A: Vaccines don't entirely prevent infection
B: Vaccines are still a benefit in every situation
A: Vaccines aren't worth the cost


Its the exact same conversation every time.

Yup
TRUEESPORTS || your days as a respected member of team liquid are over
BlackJack
Profile Blog Joined June 2003
United States10501 Posts
February 02 2022 07:26 GMT
#11607
On February 02 2022 13:58 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 02 2022 13:33 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 09:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 07:22 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 05:47 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 05:07 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 02:43 Slydie wrote:
On February 01 2022 07:09 Sermokala wrote:
On February 01 2022 05:14 Slydie wrote:
It is a proven fact that the vaccines do a surprisingly bad job at preventing transmission of Omnicron. So does natural immunity, as the Delta variant is not closely related to Omnicron, double infection is VERY normal, and can even happen if vaccinated on top of that! For serious illness and death, the story is very different.

There are 2 reasons for requiring vaccines:
#1: Require them in high risk situations as the vaccines should reduce the spread of the virus.
#2: Indirectly forcing people to get the vaccine by making not having them as unpractical as possible.

For Omnicron, policies are made for reason #2, but they are often masked as reason #1. If you do not want the vaccine, that obviously pisses people off. There were already vaccine requirements for all travelers to South-Africa when Omnicron broke out, but needless to say, they did a horrible job at containing that strain. I have still not seen any research confirming that vaccine passports etc. have any direct impact on this pandemic.

If you are conciously trying to make life difficult for unvaccinated to force them to get the shots, you have to be honest about it, and not wrap it in bullshit arguments.

There is a third reason for requiring vaccines: They cause less people to die and less people to take up hospital space for everyone else.

Do you think people aren't dieing because so much hospital space is being taken up by people who are too selfish to get something that is free, safe, and convenient to get?


Please tell be a legitimate reason why people don't want to get specifically the covid vaccine and not the list of other vaccines you were mandated to get for the public good as a child?


Come on, man. COVID is a rapidly changing respiratory virus which is not approved for small children, and the effect of vaccinating children for such diseases is highly debatable. Flu shots are not mandatory for kids either.

The vaccine effectiveness against COVID infection already dropped from 94% to ~30%. There are some very good reasons why flu shots are typically reserved for the vulnerable and some HC-workers, COVID shots will just be added to the list, and they can likely even be give the same time. Our immune systems take care of the rest, and we can live with getting knocked out once every 5-10 years.


The covid vaccine can be given to all school-age children though (5 years old, and older), who come in contact with dozens, if not hundreds, of individuals every day, which is far more important than babies/toddlers who have a much more limited number of interactions.

Also, I've never heard of flu shots being reserved for only the vulnerable; that's certainly not true in the United States, where you can walk into just about any pharmacy and get a free flu shot without any sort of check-up or health diagnostic, because we basically have infinitely many doses.

Finally, what do you mean by "effectiveness" when you say "The vaccine effectiveness against COVID infection already dropped from 94% to ~30%." What are these percentages in reference to? Preventing infection? Transmission? Death? Hospitalizations?


You're STILL using the argument that we have to vaccinate children because they come into contact with other people? Have you missed the news that the vaccines are not very good at preventing you from contracting and spreading COVID?

2 doses of pfizer provide 10% protection against infection after 20 weeks.

3 doses of pfizer provides 45% protection against infection after only 10 weeks.

Source

So if you're concerned about children spreading COVID with those they come into contact you should be really concerned that the vaccines only offer decent protection for a couple months before they quickly wane to almost no protection. Israel says even a 4th shot is likely not enough against Omicron.

So allow me to update your argument in light of this new information: What we need is MORE BOOSTERS FOR KIDS. Obviously we need to be updating their protection every 3~ months to protect the hundreds of people they come into contact with. The logistics can be solved quite easily - just cross-train teachers to give out booster shots every 3 months. Every time the students get a report card they can get a shot in the arm to go along with it. How is that any different from an MMR vaccine?


It's really weird to read "You're STILL using the argument that we have to vaccinate children because they come into contact with other people?" and then right after that, read that you fully concede that there are infection-related benefits to getting vaccinated, but okay

I was going to completely ignore your last paragraph, as it came off as ridiculous trolling and/or slippery sloping into absurdity, but giving you the benefit of the doubt that you actually believe that this is what I think, I'll respond to it: Although things may change, it seems to be the case that newer variants end up being less deadly. If newer strains continue to be less harmful as covid-19 becomes endemic, then it'll be less impactful to become infected with covid-19. Obviously, it'll be helpful to learn about the effects of long-covid, but as more effective treatments (both proactively and reactively) are researched and developed, we'll likely be able to deal with the virus a lot better, perhaps eventually relegating it to "the scientific and medical communities still recommend that you get your annual flu shot and your annual covid-19 shot, because you'd probably get a little sick if you get infected, and you could spread those viruses to others, but the daily updates of death tolls are long gone". In other words, I'm pretty optimistic that our experts will continue to help us get through this and that covid-19 will become less threatening, not more threatening. I don't see us needing to get vaccinated every 3 months in the future, but also that's irrelevant to the fact that children should already be vaccinated in the present.


What other way is there to interpret your argument? If a 2-dose series only offers 10% efficacy after 20 weeks then vaccinating school aged children in the summer before school starts means that by winter they have almost no protection from contracting and spreading COVID. If that were my argument I would certainly be advocating for frequent boosters. If I wanted to stop/slow transmission in the Fall then I would want to stop/slow transmission in the Winter as well, no?

I surmise from your 2nd paragraph that your viewpoint is that you generally trust the recommendations of "our experts" to see us through this pandemic and they are currently recommending for children to be vaccinated and you agree. So I'm curious if you and I were born in Sweden where their experts are not recommending for children to be vaccinated would you still trust "our experts." Is your view on childhood COVID vaccination predicated on where you happened to be birthed?


It seems weird to me that you have an issue with having additional protection, when the alternative is no protection. Even if it's only 10% protection, that's literally 10% more than not being vaccinated. That's two or three extra students in every single one of my classes, each of which could bring their infection home and infect their older family members.

By the way, I read your source, and you conveniently quote mined a lot of information. Here are some other numbers, from your own source, that you left out: "A booster dose, on the other hand, is up to 75% effective at preventing symptomatic infection and 88% effective at preventing hospitalization, according to the data." "The U.K. Health Security Agency also found that boosters are only 40% to 50% effective against infection 10 weeks after receiving the shot. [you lowballed at 40%]" "Israel found that fourth doses increase protective antibodies fivefold." Even if the 75% effectiveness or 5x protective antibodies dwindles over a few months, that's still additional protection!

These aren't nominal precautions, whether we're talking about lowering infection rate, or hospitalization rate, or death rate. We know that countless lives have been saved as a result. I haven't been following Sweden's handling of coronavirus, and I don't know much about Sweden, so I can't comment on what they're doing or why they're doing it.


I didn't lowball 40%. I said 45% which is right in the middle of 40-50%.

We'll have to agree to disagree. For me 10% is "slightly better than nothing" which is not a good reason to advocate for across the board mass vaccination of children.


Except it's 75%, not 10%. It eventually decreases over several months, but you don't start with only 10% infection protection.

And this doesn't even take into account the other benefits, such as the 88% decrease in hospitalization. Even if you ignored the significantly reduced infection rates for several months and didn't think the vaccine helped prevent infection at all, you'd still need to dismiss the massive protection against hospitalization and death. There are just so many benefits to being vaccinated and so few downsides, and your source provides great arguments for vaccines, not against them.


Good protection from infection for a couple months is great if COVID was only going to be around for a couple months and not forever. Also that 75% is for a booster dose. The 10% was for double vax. So it's an apples to oranges comparison. Do you want all kids to be triple vaxxed now?

It's odd you would accuse me of cherry picking when you are the one that wants to primarily look at the 2 months after vaccination to boast about their efficacy and then ignore the eternity of months after that when the efficacy nosedives.

Anyway, here is the FDA models for the risks/benefits of vaccinating 5-11 year olds per 1 million children

[image loading]

https://www.fda.gov/media/153447/download Page 34

So per 1 million vaccinated children they expect to prevent 192 COVID hospitalizations and 62 COVID ICU hospitalizations and they expect to cause 58 excess myocarditis hospitalizations and 34 excess myocarditis ICU hospitalizations. With 1 death prevented.

For males the numbers are even more narrow, for example they expect to prevent 67 COVID ICU admissions but cause 57 myocarditis ICU admissions.

These models are from Oct 2021 before Omicron existed and they assumed a vaccine efficacy of 70% which would be a very generous estimation in the framework of 10-75% we were just discussing.
Magic Powers
Profile Joined April 2012
Austria4098 Posts
February 02 2022 08:46 GMT
#11608
Information on the reinfection risk by Omicron (i.e. protection against Omicron after pre-Omicron infection):

"Omicron was associated with a 5.41 (95% CI: 4.87-6.00) fold higher risk of reinfection compared with Delta. This suggests relatively low remaining levels of immunity from prior infection."

"Prior to Omicron, the SIREN cohort study of UK healthcare workers estimated that SARS-CoV-2 infection gave 85% protection against reinfection over 6 months (16), or a relative risk of infection of 0.15 compared with those with no prior infection. Our hazard ratio estimate would suggest the relative risk of reinfection has risen to 0.81 [95%CI: 0.73-1.00] (i.e. remaining protection of 19% [95%CI: 0-27%]) against Omicron."

https://www.imperial.ac.uk/mrc-global-infectious-disease-analysis/covid-19/report-49-Omicron/
If you want to do the right thing, 80% of your job is done if you don't do the wrong thing.
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44329 Posts
Last Edited: 2022-02-02 09:58:38
February 02 2022 09:54 GMT
#11609
On February 02 2022 16:26 BlackJack wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 02 2022 13:58 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 13:33 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 09:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 07:22 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 05:47 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 05:07 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 02:43 Slydie wrote:
On February 01 2022 07:09 Sermokala wrote:
[quote]
There is a third reason for requiring vaccines: They cause less people to die and less people to take up hospital space for everyone else.

Do you think people aren't dieing because so much hospital space is being taken up by people who are too selfish to get something that is free, safe, and convenient to get?


Please tell be a legitimate reason why people don't want to get specifically the covid vaccine and not the list of other vaccines you were mandated to get for the public good as a child?


Come on, man. COVID is a rapidly changing respiratory virus which is not approved for small children, and the effect of vaccinating children for such diseases is highly debatable. Flu shots are not mandatory for kids either.

The vaccine effectiveness against COVID infection already dropped from 94% to ~30%. There are some very good reasons why flu shots are typically reserved for the vulnerable and some HC-workers, COVID shots will just be added to the list, and they can likely even be give the same time. Our immune systems take care of the rest, and we can live with getting knocked out once every 5-10 years.


The covid vaccine can be given to all school-age children though (5 years old, and older), who come in contact with dozens, if not hundreds, of individuals every day, which is far more important than babies/toddlers who have a much more limited number of interactions.

Also, I've never heard of flu shots being reserved for only the vulnerable; that's certainly not true in the United States, where you can walk into just about any pharmacy and get a free flu shot without any sort of check-up or health diagnostic, because we basically have infinitely many doses.

Finally, what do you mean by "effectiveness" when you say "The vaccine effectiveness against COVID infection already dropped from 94% to ~30%." What are these percentages in reference to? Preventing infection? Transmission? Death? Hospitalizations?


You're STILL using the argument that we have to vaccinate children because they come into contact with other people? Have you missed the news that the vaccines are not very good at preventing you from contracting and spreading COVID?

2 doses of pfizer provide 10% protection against infection after 20 weeks.

3 doses of pfizer provides 45% protection against infection after only 10 weeks.

Source

So if you're concerned about children spreading COVID with those they come into contact you should be really concerned that the vaccines only offer decent protection for a couple months before they quickly wane to almost no protection. Israel says even a 4th shot is likely not enough against Omicron.

So allow me to update your argument in light of this new information: What we need is MORE BOOSTERS FOR KIDS. Obviously we need to be updating their protection every 3~ months to protect the hundreds of people they come into contact with. The logistics can be solved quite easily - just cross-train teachers to give out booster shots every 3 months. Every time the students get a report card they can get a shot in the arm to go along with it. How is that any different from an MMR vaccine?


It's really weird to read "You're STILL using the argument that we have to vaccinate children because they come into contact with other people?" and then right after that, read that you fully concede that there are infection-related benefits to getting vaccinated, but okay

I was going to completely ignore your last paragraph, as it came off as ridiculous trolling and/or slippery sloping into absurdity, but giving you the benefit of the doubt that you actually believe that this is what I think, I'll respond to it: Although things may change, it seems to be the case that newer variants end up being less deadly. If newer strains continue to be less harmful as covid-19 becomes endemic, then it'll be less impactful to become infected with covid-19. Obviously, it'll be helpful to learn about the effects of long-covid, but as more effective treatments (both proactively and reactively) are researched and developed, we'll likely be able to deal with the virus a lot better, perhaps eventually relegating it to "the scientific and medical communities still recommend that you get your annual flu shot and your annual covid-19 shot, because you'd probably get a little sick if you get infected, and you could spread those viruses to others, but the daily updates of death tolls are long gone". In other words, I'm pretty optimistic that our experts will continue to help us get through this and that covid-19 will become less threatening, not more threatening. I don't see us needing to get vaccinated every 3 months in the future, but also that's irrelevant to the fact that children should already be vaccinated in the present.


What other way is there to interpret your argument? If a 2-dose series only offers 10% efficacy after 20 weeks then vaccinating school aged children in the summer before school starts means that by winter they have almost no protection from contracting and spreading COVID. If that were my argument I would certainly be advocating for frequent boosters. If I wanted to stop/slow transmission in the Fall then I would want to stop/slow transmission in the Winter as well, no?

I surmise from your 2nd paragraph that your viewpoint is that you generally trust the recommendations of "our experts" to see us through this pandemic and they are currently recommending for children to be vaccinated and you agree. So I'm curious if you and I were born in Sweden where their experts are not recommending for children to be vaccinated would you still trust "our experts." Is your view on childhood COVID vaccination predicated on where you happened to be birthed?


It seems weird to me that you have an issue with having additional protection, when the alternative is no protection. Even if it's only 10% protection, that's literally 10% more than not being vaccinated. That's two or three extra students in every single one of my classes, each of which could bring their infection home and infect their older family members.

By the way, I read your source, and you conveniently quote mined a lot of information. Here are some other numbers, from your own source, that you left out: "A booster dose, on the other hand, is up to 75% effective at preventing symptomatic infection and 88% effective at preventing hospitalization, according to the data." "The U.K. Health Security Agency also found that boosters are only 40% to 50% effective against infection 10 weeks after receiving the shot. [you lowballed at 40%]" "Israel found that fourth doses increase protective antibodies fivefold." Even if the 75% effectiveness or 5x protective antibodies dwindles over a few months, that's still additional protection!

These aren't nominal precautions, whether we're talking about lowering infection rate, or hospitalization rate, or death rate. We know that countless lives have been saved as a result. I haven't been following Sweden's handling of coronavirus, and I don't know much about Sweden, so I can't comment on what they're doing or why they're doing it.


I didn't lowball 40%. I said 45% which is right in the middle of 40-50%.

We'll have to agree to disagree. For me 10% is "slightly better than nothing" which is not a good reason to advocate for across the board mass vaccination of children.


Except it's 75%, not 10%. It eventually decreases over several months, but you don't start with only 10% infection protection.

And this doesn't even take into account the other benefits, such as the 88% decrease in hospitalization. Even if you ignored the significantly reduced infection rates for several months and didn't think the vaccine helped prevent infection at all, you'd still need to dismiss the massive protection against hospitalization and death. There are just so many benefits to being vaccinated and so few downsides, and your source provides great arguments for vaccines, not against them.


Good protection from infection for a couple months is great if COVID was only going to be around for a couple months and not forever. Also that 75% is for a booster dose. The 10% was for double vax. So it's an apples to oranges comparison. Do you want all kids to be triple vaxxed now?

It's odd you would accuse me of cherry picking when you are the one that wants to primarily look at the 2 months after vaccination to boast about their efficacy and then ignore the eternity of months after that when the efficacy nosedives.

Anyway, here is the FDA models for the risks/benefits of vaccinating 5-11 year olds per 1 million children

[image loading]

https://www.fda.gov/media/153447/download Page 34

So per 1 million vaccinated children they expect to prevent 192 COVID hospitalizations and 62 COVID ICU hospitalizations and they expect to cause 58 excess myocarditis hospitalizations and 34 excess myocarditis ICU hospitalizations. With 1 death prevented.

For males the numbers are even more narrow, for example they expect to prevent 67 COVID ICU admissions but cause 57 myocarditis ICU admissions.

These models are from Oct 2021 before Omicron existed and they assumed a vaccine efficacy of 70% which would be a very generous estimation in the framework of 10-75% we were just discussing.


Those models clearly predict (and were correct about) a decrease in infection, hospitalizations, and deaths... Just like your last source... So yeah, that's even more pro-vax information.

You keep saying that the vaccines aren't worth it, but then you post sources that refute your own perspective. I don't think I need to really be here lol; you're arguing with yourself.

And yes, of course I'd want everyone to have the most up-to-date protection that's recommended by the scientific and medical communities; why would you think my opinion would be "get the initial two-part vaccination, but then *never* get the booster, just so the protection eventually dwindles to numbers that BlackJack prefers"?

On February 02 2022 15:13 Mohdoo wrote:
I'm amazed you guys have the will to continue this conversation, the same conversation, every time

A: Vaccines aren't worth the cost
B: What cost? They are statistically a good idea in every scenario
A: Vaccines don't entirely prevent infection
B: Vaccines are still a benefit in every situation
A: Vaccines aren't worth the cost


Its the exact same conversation every time.


I'm certainly up for new conversations, too
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
Geisterkarle
Profile Blog Joined September 2008
Germany3257 Posts
February 02 2022 11:06 GMT
#11610
On February 02 2022 18:54 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
I'm certainly up for new conversations, too

Ok!
How about, what people think, that quite a few countries are thinking about dropping Covid restrictions? Or have already dropped, like Denmark:
> https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-60215200
From Tuesday[so, yesterday], masks are no longer required in shops, restaurants, and on public transport. Limits on the number of people allowed at indoor gatherings and social distancing measures also come to an end.
There can only be one Geisterkarle
BlackJack
Profile Blog Joined June 2003
United States10501 Posts
February 02 2022 11:08 GMT
#11611
Like I said, we'll have to agree to disagree. Everyone has their own interpretation of what is an acceptable risk. I'm okay with a little pink in my burgers, some people like them well done. I think seat belts are fine as is, maybe you think everyone should wear a 5-point harness with a flame retardant suit and a crash helmet. I see 1 death per million and I know that 1 death is most likely from an immunocompromised child or a child with severe disabilities that is chronically ill and I think we should vaccinate specifically those children that are at risk. You see 1 death per million and you think that's fantastic, 1 > 0 so let's vaccinate every child across the board. I'm sure there's a lower threshhold for you somewhere, or maybe you're one of those people like Mohdoo that thinks if you could save a single life it would be good enough reason for compulsory vaccination of every child.

Btw, I don't really have a problem with people recommending the COVID vaccine for children, I have an issue when people in my state try to mandate it for school children, particularly when it offers shit protection against infection.
BlackJack
Profile Blog Joined June 2003
United States10501 Posts
February 02 2022 11:12 GMT
#11612
On February 02 2022 15:13 Mohdoo wrote:
I'm amazed you guys have the will to continue this conversation, the same conversation, every time

A: Vaccines aren't worth the cost
B: What cost? They are statistically a good idea in every scenario
A: Vaccines don't entirely prevent infection
B: Vaccines are still a benefit in every situation
A: Vaccines aren't worth the cost


Its the exact same conversation every time.


You could liven the place up with some more anecdotes about your family. How's your dumbass cousin doing these days?

User was warned for this post
Liquid`Drone
Profile Joined September 2002
Norway28667 Posts
February 02 2022 11:21 GMT
#11613
Just got my booster literally 30 seconds ago. Moderna again, wonder how this one will go!
Moderator
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44329 Posts
February 02 2022 11:57 GMT
#11614
On February 02 2022 20:21 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Just got my booster literally 30 seconds ago. Moderna again, wonder how this one will go!


Best of luck! Hopefully things run reasonably smoothly!
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44329 Posts
February 02 2022 12:06 GMT
#11615
On February 02 2022 20:08 BlackJack wrote:
Like I said, we'll have to agree to disagree. Everyone has their own interpretation of what is an acceptable risk. I'm okay with a little pink in my burgers, some people like them well done. I think seat belts are fine as is, maybe you think everyone should wear a 5-point harness with a flame retardant suit and a crash helmet. I see 1 death per million and I know that 1 death is most likely from an immunocompromised child or a child with severe disabilities that is chronically ill and I think we should vaccinate specifically those children that are at risk. You see 1 death per million and you think that's fantastic, 1 > 0 so let's vaccinate every child across the board. I'm sure there's a lower threshhold for you somewhere, or maybe you're one of those people like Mohdoo that thinks if you could save a single life it would be good enough reason for compulsory vaccination of every child.

Btw, I don't really have a problem with people recommending the COVID vaccine for children, I have an issue when people in my state try to mandate it for school children, particularly when it offers shit protection against infection.


I think you and I can both agree that medium rare tastes far better than well done, even if you just outed yourself as anti-airbags and anti- crumple zones and anti- new car safety features, simply because a seatbelt already exists and apparently that's more than enough protection for you o.O Taking an hour each to get a few shots, and likely feeling crummy for a day or two each time, isn't nearly as big of a deal as your comparison to wearing a flame retardant suit and crash helmet when driving a car. Come on. That analogy is only accurate when comparing the fact that getting infected with coronavirus can absolutely feel like getting hit by a truck
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
Slydie
Profile Joined August 2013
1919 Posts
February 02 2022 16:51 GMT
#11616
A big metastudy about the impact of various covid measures. School closures, "stay at home" orders and closing no-essential businesses are proved ineffective, and should never be repeated.

Covid passports and vaccine mandates are still to recent to be included.
https://sites.krieger.jhu.edu/iae/files/2022/01/A-Literature-Review-and-Meta-Analysis-of-the-Effects-of-Lockdowns-on-COVID-19-Mortality.pdf
Buff the siegetank
Lmui
Profile Joined November 2010
Canada6213 Posts
February 02 2022 16:51 GMT
#11617
On February 02 2022 20:21 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Just got my booster literally 30 seconds ago. Moderna again, wonder how this one will go!


Based on my family, sample size of 4. None of us had significant side effects to speak of, but when omicron ran through our family:

Worst: Pfizer x3 (Lingering cough, sore throat, half day fever)
OK: Moderna x3 (Cough for a few days, minor sore throat)
Best: Moderna x2, Pfizer Booster (Minor cough for ~2 day)

Basically, in pre-pandemic times, the latter two would've probably been ignored as seasonal colds. All of us had the booster in the same month, and none of us dodged it though, so protection against infection is pretty poor inside a household.
Slydie
Profile Joined August 2013
1919 Posts
Last Edited: 2022-02-02 22:25:01
February 02 2022 22:24 GMT
#11618
On February 02 2022 16:26 BlackJack wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 02 2022 13:58 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 13:33 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 09:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 07:22 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 05:47 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 05:07 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 02:43 Slydie wrote:
On February 01 2022 07:09 Sermokala wrote:
[quote]
There is a third reason for requiring vaccines: They cause less people to die and less people to take up hospital space for everyone else.

Do you think people aren't dieing because so much hospital space is being taken up by people who are too selfish to get something that is free, safe, and convenient to get?


Please tell be a legitimate reason why people don't want to get specifically the covid vaccine and not the list of other vaccines you were mandated to get for the public good as a child?


Come on, man. COVID is a rapidly changing respiratory virus which is not approved for small children, and the effect of vaccinating children for such diseases is highly debatable. Flu shots are not mandatory for kids either.

The vaccine effectiveness against COVID infection already dropped from 94% to ~30%. There are some very good reasons why flu shots are typically reserved for the vulnerable and some HC-workers, COVID shots will just be added to the list, and they can likely even be give the same time. Our immune systems take care of the rest, and we can live with getting knocked out once every 5-10 years.


The covid vaccine can be given to all school-age children though (5 years old, and older), who come in contact with dozens, if not hundreds, of individuals every day, which is far more important than babies/toddlers who have a much more limited number of interactions.

Also, I've never heard of flu shots being reserved for only the vulnerable; that's certainly not true in the United States, where you can walk into just about any pharmacy and get a free flu shot without any sort of check-up or health diagnostic, because we basically have infinitely many doses.

Finally, what do you mean by "effectiveness" when you say "The vaccine effectiveness against COVID infection already dropped from 94% to ~30%." What are these percentages in reference to? Preventing infection? Transmission? Death? Hospitalizations?


You're STILL using the argument that we have to vaccinate children because they come into contact with other people? Have you missed the news that the vaccines are not very good at preventing you from contracting and spreading COVID?

2 doses of pfizer provide 10% protection against infection after 20 weeks.

3 doses of pfizer provides 45% protection against infection after only 10 weeks.

So if you're concerned about children spreading COVID with those they come into contact you should be really concerned that the vaccines only offer decent protection for a couple months before they quickly wane to almost no protection. Israel says even a 4th shot is likely not enough against Omicron.

So allow me to update your argument in light of this new information: What we need is MORE BOOSTERS FOR KIDS. Obviously we need to be updating their protection every 3~ months to protect the hundreds of people they come into contact with. The logistics can be solved quite easily - just cross-train teachers to give out booster shots every 3 months. Every time the students get a report card they can get a shot in the arm to go along with it. How is that any different from an MMR vaccine?


It's really weird to read "You're STILL using the argument that we have to vaccinate children because they come into contact with other people?" and then right after that, read that you fully concede that there are infection-related benefits to getting vaccinated, but okay

I was going to completely ignore your last paragraph, as it came off as ridiculous trolling and/or slippery sloping into absurdity, but giving you the benefit of the doubt that you actually believe that this is what I think, I'll respond to it: Although things may change, it seems to be the case that newer variants end up being less deadly. If newer strains continue to be less harmful as covid-19 becomes endemic, then it'll be less impactful to become infected with covid-19. Obviously, it'll be helpful to learn about the effects of long-covid, but as more effective treatments (both proactively and reactively) are researched and developed, we'll likely be able to deal with the virus a lot better, perhaps eventually relegating it to "the scientific and medical communities still recommend that you get your annual flu shot and your annual covid-19 shot, because you'd probably get a little sick if you get infected, and you could spread those viruses to others, but the daily updates of death tolls are long gone". In other words, I'm pretty optimistic that our experts will continue to help us get through this and that covid-19 will become less threatening, not more threatening. I don't see us needing to get vaccinated every 3 months in the future, but also that's irrelevant to the fact that children should already be vaccinated in the present.


What other way is there to interpret your argument? If a 2-dose series only offers 10% efficacy after 20 weeks then vaccinating school aged children in the summer before school starts means that by winter they have almost no protection from contracting and spreading COVID. If that were my argument I would certainly be advocating for frequent boosters. If I wanted to stop/slow transmission in the Fall then I would want to stop/slow transmission in the Winter as well, no?

I surmise from your 2nd paragraph that your viewpoint is that you generally trust the recommendations of "our experts" to see us through this pandemic and they are currently recommending for children to be vaccinated and you agree. So I'm curious if you and I were born in Sweden where their experts are not recommending for children to be vaccinated would you still trust "our experts." Is your view on childhood COVID vaccination predicated on where you happened to be birthed?


It seems weird to me that you have an issue with having additional protection, when the alternative is no protection. Even if it's only 10% protection, that's literally 10% more than not being vaccinated. That's two or three extra students in every single one of my classes, each of which could bring their infection home and infect their older family members.

By the way, I read your source, and you conveniently quote mined a lot of information. Here are some other numbers, from your own source, that you left out: "A booster dose, on the other hand, is up to 75% effective at preventing symptomatic infection and 88% effective at preventing hospitalization, according to the data." "The U.K. Health Security Agency also found that boosters are only 40% to 50% effective against infection 10 weeks after receiving the shot. [you lowballed at 40%]" "Israel found that fourth doses increase protective antibodies fivefold." Even if the 75% effectiveness or 5x protective antibodies dwindles over a few months, that's still additional protection!

These aren't nominal precautions, whether we're talking about lowering infection rate, or hospitalization rate, or death rate. We know that countless lives have been saved as a result. I haven't been following Sweden's handling of coronavirus, and I don't know much about Sweden, so I can't comment on what they're doing or why they're doing it.


I didn't lowball 40%. I said 45% which is right in the middle of 40-50%.

We'll have to agree to disagree. For me 10% is "slightly better than nothing" which is not a good reason to advocate for across the board mass vaccination of children.


Except it's 75%, not 10%. It eventually decreases over several months, but you don't start with only 10% infection protection.

And this doesn't even take into account the other benefits, such as the 88% decrease in hospitalization. Even if you ignored the significantly reduced infection rates for several months and didn't think the vaccine helped prevent infection at all, you'd still need to dismiss the massive protection against hospitalization and death. There are just so many benefits to being vaccinated and so few downsides, and your source provides great arguments for vaccines, not against them.


Good protection from infection for a couple months is great if COVID was only going to be around for a couple months and not forever. Also that 75% is for a booster dose. The 10% was for double vax. So it's an apples to oranges comparison. Do you want all kids to be triple vaxxed now?

It's odd you would accuse me of cherry picking when you are the one that wants to primarily look at the 2 months after vaccination to boast about their efficacy and then ignore the eternity of months after that when the efficacy nosedives.

Anyway, here is the FDA models for the risks/benefits of vaccinating 5-11 year olds per 1 million children

[image loading]

https://www.fda.gov/media/153447/download Page 34

So per 1 million vaccinated children they expect to prevent 192 COVID hospitalizations and 62 COVID ICU hospitalizations and they expect to cause 58 excess myocarditis hospitalizations and 34 excess myocarditis ICU hospitalizations. With 1 death prevented.

For males the numbers are even more narrow, for example they expect to prevent 67 COVID ICU admissions but cause 57 myocarditis ICU admissions.

These models are from Oct 2021 before Omicron existed and they assumed a vaccine efficacy of 70% which would be a very generous estimation in the framework of 10-75% we were just discussing.


Why do you pring up models? They are completely useless, as so much of the data they put in is so uncertain they really should not be used to make any decisions.

They can be wrong in the positive direction too, I don't think many expected that Omnicron would spread so easily among vaccinated and perviously infected people.
Buff the siegetank
BlackJack
Profile Blog Joined June 2003
United States10501 Posts
February 02 2022 22:55 GMT
#11619
On February 03 2022 07:24 Slydie wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 02 2022 16:26 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 13:58 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 13:33 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 09:16 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 07:22 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 05:47 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 05:07 BlackJack wrote:
On February 02 2022 03:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
On February 02 2022 02:43 Slydie wrote:
[quote]

Come on, man. COVID is a rapidly changing respiratory virus which is not approved for small children, and the effect of vaccinating children for such diseases is highly debatable. Flu shots are not mandatory for kids either.

The vaccine effectiveness against COVID infection already dropped from 94% to ~30%. There are some very good reasons why flu shots are typically reserved for the vulnerable and some HC-workers, COVID shots will just be added to the list, and they can likely even be give the same time. Our immune systems take care of the rest, and we can live with getting knocked out once every 5-10 years.


The covid vaccine can be given to all school-age children though (5 years old, and older), who come in contact with dozens, if not hundreds, of individuals every day, which is far more important than babies/toddlers who have a much more limited number of interactions.

Also, I've never heard of flu shots being reserved for only the vulnerable; that's certainly not true in the United States, where you can walk into just about any pharmacy and get a free flu shot without any sort of check-up or health diagnostic, because we basically have infinitely many doses.

Finally, what do you mean by "effectiveness" when you say "The vaccine effectiveness against COVID infection already dropped from 94% to ~30%." What are these percentages in reference to? Preventing infection? Transmission? Death? Hospitalizations?


You're STILL using the argument that we have to vaccinate children because they come into contact with other people? Have you missed the news that the vaccines are not very good at preventing you from contracting and spreading COVID?

2 doses of pfizer provide 10% protection against infection after 20 weeks.

3 doses of pfizer provides 45% protection against infection after only 10 weeks.

So if you're concerned about children spreading COVID with those they come into contact you should be really concerned that the vaccines only offer decent protection for a couple months before they quickly wane to almost no protection. Israel says even a 4th shot is likely not enough against Omicron.

So allow me to update your argument in light of this new information: What we need is MORE BOOSTERS FOR KIDS. Obviously we need to be updating their protection every 3~ months to protect the hundreds of people they come into contact with. The logistics can be solved quite easily - just cross-train teachers to give out booster shots every 3 months. Every time the students get a report card they can get a shot in the arm to go along with it. How is that any different from an MMR vaccine?


It's really weird to read "You're STILL using the argument that we have to vaccinate children because they come into contact with other people?" and then right after that, read that you fully concede that there are infection-related benefits to getting vaccinated, but okay

I was going to completely ignore your last paragraph, as it came off as ridiculous trolling and/or slippery sloping into absurdity, but giving you the benefit of the doubt that you actually believe that this is what I think, I'll respond to it: Although things may change, it seems to be the case that newer variants end up being less deadly. If newer strains continue to be less harmful as covid-19 becomes endemic, then it'll be less impactful to become infected with covid-19. Obviously, it'll be helpful to learn about the effects of long-covid, but as more effective treatments (both proactively and reactively) are researched and developed, we'll likely be able to deal with the virus a lot better, perhaps eventually relegating it to "the scientific and medical communities still recommend that you get your annual flu shot and your annual covid-19 shot, because you'd probably get a little sick if you get infected, and you could spread those viruses to others, but the daily updates of death tolls are long gone". In other words, I'm pretty optimistic that our experts will continue to help us get through this and that covid-19 will become less threatening, not more threatening. I don't see us needing to get vaccinated every 3 months in the future, but also that's irrelevant to the fact that children should already be vaccinated in the present.


What other way is there to interpret your argument? If a 2-dose series only offers 10% efficacy after 20 weeks then vaccinating school aged children in the summer before school starts means that by winter they have almost no protection from contracting and spreading COVID. If that were my argument I would certainly be advocating for frequent boosters. If I wanted to stop/slow transmission in the Fall then I would want to stop/slow transmission in the Winter as well, no?

I surmise from your 2nd paragraph that your viewpoint is that you generally trust the recommendations of "our experts" to see us through this pandemic and they are currently recommending for children to be vaccinated and you agree. So I'm curious if you and I were born in Sweden where their experts are not recommending for children to be vaccinated would you still trust "our experts." Is your view on childhood COVID vaccination predicated on where you happened to be birthed?


It seems weird to me that you have an issue with having additional protection, when the alternative is no protection. Even if it's only 10% protection, that's literally 10% more than not being vaccinated. That's two or three extra students in every single one of my classes, each of which could bring their infection home and infect their older family members.

By the way, I read your source, and you conveniently quote mined a lot of information. Here are some other numbers, from your own source, that you left out: "A booster dose, on the other hand, is up to 75% effective at preventing symptomatic infection and 88% effective at preventing hospitalization, according to the data." "The U.K. Health Security Agency also found that boosters are only 40% to 50% effective against infection 10 weeks after receiving the shot. [you lowballed at 40%]" "Israel found that fourth doses increase protective antibodies fivefold." Even if the 75% effectiveness or 5x protective antibodies dwindles over a few months, that's still additional protection!

These aren't nominal precautions, whether we're talking about lowering infection rate, or hospitalization rate, or death rate. We know that countless lives have been saved as a result. I haven't been following Sweden's handling of coronavirus, and I don't know much about Sweden, so I can't comment on what they're doing or why they're doing it.


I didn't lowball 40%. I said 45% which is right in the middle of 40-50%.

We'll have to agree to disagree. For me 10% is "slightly better than nothing" which is not a good reason to advocate for across the board mass vaccination of children.


Except it's 75%, not 10%. It eventually decreases over several months, but you don't start with only 10% infection protection.

And this doesn't even take into account the other benefits, such as the 88% decrease in hospitalization. Even if you ignored the significantly reduced infection rates for several months and didn't think the vaccine helped prevent infection at all, you'd still need to dismiss the massive protection against hospitalization and death. There are just so many benefits to being vaccinated and so few downsides, and your source provides great arguments for vaccines, not against them.


Good protection from infection for a couple months is great if COVID was only going to be around for a couple months and not forever. Also that 75% is for a booster dose. The 10% was for double vax. So it's an apples to oranges comparison. Do you want all kids to be triple vaxxed now?

It's odd you would accuse me of cherry picking when you are the one that wants to primarily look at the 2 months after vaccination to boast about their efficacy and then ignore the eternity of months after that when the efficacy nosedives.

Anyway, here is the FDA models for the risks/benefits of vaccinating 5-11 year olds per 1 million children

[image loading]

https://www.fda.gov/media/153447/download Page 34

So per 1 million vaccinated children they expect to prevent 192 COVID hospitalizations and 62 COVID ICU hospitalizations and they expect to cause 58 excess myocarditis hospitalizations and 34 excess myocarditis ICU hospitalizations. With 1 death prevented.

For males the numbers are even more narrow, for example they expect to prevent 67 COVID ICU admissions but cause 57 myocarditis ICU admissions.

These models are from Oct 2021 before Omicron existed and they assumed a vaccine efficacy of 70% which would be a very generous estimation in the framework of 10-75% we were just discussing.


Why do you pring up models? They are completely useless, as so much of the data they put in is so uncertain they really should not be used to make any decisions.

They can be wrong in the positive direction too, I don't think many expected that Omnicron would spread so easily among vaccinated and perviously infected people.


Do you have a better alternative than modeling for determining future risk-benefit of decisions? I suspect they use modeling because they don't yet have access to crystal balls or time machines.
JimmiC
Profile Blog Joined May 2011
Canada22817 Posts
February 03 2022 14:19 GMT
#11620
--- Nuked ---
Prev 1 579 580 581 582 583 699 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 10h 16m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
NeuroSwarm 279
StarCraft: Brood War
ggaemo 322
firebathero 66
Aegong 65
Sexy 46
Dota 2
syndereN614
monkeys_forever371
League of Legends
JimRising 523
febbydoto3
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox702
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor190
Other Games
tarik_tv22384
summit1g12297
gofns11153
Grubby3971
shahzam426
ViBE53
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick1054
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Berry_CruncH190
• davetesta47
• RyuSc2 47
• tFFMrPink 17
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
• sooper7s
StarCraft: Brood War
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota21737
Other Games
• imaqtpie1263
Upcoming Events
Sparkling Tuna Cup
10h 16m
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
14h 16m
Bonyth vs TBD
WardiTV European League
16h 16m
ByuN vs ShoWTimE
HeRoMaRinE vs MaxPax
Wardi Open
1d 11h
OSC
2 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
3 days
The PondCast
4 days
Replay Cast
5 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
5 days
RSL Revival
6 days
[ Show More ]
RSL Revival
6 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

BSL 20 Non-Korean Championship
FEL Cracow 2025
Underdog Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL 20 Team Wars
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 3
BSL 21 Qualifiers
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
HCC Europe
CC Div. A S7
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025

Upcoming

ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
WardiTV Summer 2025
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
Thunderpick World Champ.
MESA Nomadic Masters Fall
CAC 2025
Roobet Cup 2025
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.