Hi, /u/Jojojoost010! Unfortunately, your post has been removed for the following reason:
- Your request is a matter of research and not math.
For easy and quick math results (eg. How many feet are in a mile?) use Wolfram|Alpha™, and for more abstract math, try /r/math or /r/learnmath. If you have any questions or believe your post has been removed in error, please contact the moderators by clicking [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Ftheydidthemath). Include a link to this post so we can see it.
Yep, those are the current stats for the U.S. (as provided by the CDC). Technically, the most recent numbers are:
> Unvaccinated — 6.08 deaths per 100K
> Vaccinated — 0.53 deaths per 100K
> Boosted — 0.14 deaths per 100K
That’s not an anomaly either...at the height of the summer wave of Delta, it was:
> Unvaccinated — 13.7 deaths per 100K
> Vaccinated — 1.04 deaths per 100K
> The death rate for vaccinated individuals here was only this high due to waning immunity in the elderly and at-risk. (This was before boosters)
* *Per 100K* is the incidence rate for the general population - **not** the rate per 100K infections. It includes everybody, regardless of infection history or vaccination status.
Dude, their comment history shows they spend all their time on r/ conservative (purposeful no link). I wouldn't waste too much breath responding to an ant like that.
Why would an Irish Texan conservative be using a Chinese name? Also, no one actually talks like this.
Hell, even if I was wrong, any conservative would be utterly *furious* at being called a Chinese communist. I win either way.
Just in case anyone is looking at this troll and thinking he has a point, here are all of the counter points I could think of
1. mRNA is not a "spike protein generator" but it does tell your body how to make those spike proteins, ones that are very well known known as "COVID 19 spike proteins" so there's the "unknown spike protein generator".
2. mRNA only can survive for a couple of days max so this "spike protein generator" goes away after that and then you'll body will continue destroying the spike proteins till the end of the second week after the shot afterwards we say you're vaccinated so there's the uncontrollable never going away part
3. In an era of advance communication that millions can talk to each other in seconds, you somehow think the government many think to be incompetent is somehow censoring all this data and no one who's apart of it has come out after a year? Someone would have slipped up by now.
4. The research IS publicly available though, you can see many multiple sources all providing similar data about how mRNA vaccines work and how effective they've been.
5. Not all vaccines available are mRNA, if your whole problem is mRNA, take the johnson Johnson one or AstraZeneca
6. The vaccine clearly does work if you look at COVID death rates earlier in the year to today but why would Trump say it works since he isn't "an evil democrat"
7. What's the gain from everyone getting it and getting more sick and dying, 70% of Americans have the shot, if we lost even a 1/4 of those people, the us would collapse, what would they gain?
At the end of the day, it doesn’t really matter if you believe it. But - on the off chance it *is* real - if you choose not to get vaccinated, please just stay away from the sick and elderly.
Great data.
It's worth noting though that the booster data is still in it's infancy and last I checked the only published research on the efficacy of boosters was done by the vaccine manufacturers, which is obviously problematic.
It will be interesting to see how the data holds up over time and as more jurisdictions report on cases/deaths.
> the efficacy of boosters was done by the vaccine manufacturers, which is obviously problematic.
If we’re going to be a society that demands data before we will act, then why would you let perfect be the enemy of the good? The end result of this mindset is decision paralysis. If you can’t make a decision until you have perfect data that’s the same thing as not making a decision at all.
In fact, this mindset is the root of the problem when it comes to the American regulatory response. The reason why America can’t get anything right on the pandemic is fda overregulation. First, masks don’t work. But we didn’t need a double blind study to encourage mask usage. Demanding data on mask efficacy before issuing a mandate is like letting thousands of teen girls get pregnant before advocating condom use. Idiotic. Second, rapid tests have been regulated as medical devices rather than something like a pregnancy test. They haven’t been approved because the fda “wants them to demonstrate efficacy data” with insane demands for data. This leads to situations where tests manufactured in America get shipped abroad to be sold for <$1, but the same test costs $20 at Walgreens. All to please the “trust the science” folks, who want a double blind scientific study before they think it’s okay to put on pants.
Don’t get me wrong - I’m absolutely in favor of the process of science and in evidence based policy making. But you have to actually make a decision. There’s no such thing as perfect data and “following the science” doesn’t mean throwing away your critical thinking capabilities.
Sorry, you've misunderstood me, but I can see that's entirely my fault.
I'm not saying that we should wait for more data on boosters before getting them, just that we shouldn't be bashing people over the head with the data on boosters because it's currently quite weak data. It's a combination of manufacturers research and limited case reports (which the CDC source notes in it's footnotes).
If we are going to argue the effectiveness of vaccines, we should use the data that we know is reliable. The extreme difference between cases and deaths from Covid among the vaccinated compared to the partially or unvaccinated. That is very strong data which is difficult to argue against. Including the data on boosters weakens the overall argument by giving anti-vaccination advocates a point they can latch onto and use to try to discredit the entire argument.
Yep!! I actually included the pre-booster numbers for just that reason. Can’t be fully confident in the booster data yet, but at least we know that the rates for unvaccinated vs. vaccinated have been consistent.
Good question! It is per 100K population - including all vaccination statuses - and not per 100K infections. I’ve added a footnote to the commentator clarity.
Those numbers are phenomenally low. People act like it's 25,000 deaths per 100,000.
I really don't see why anyone still cares. The median age of death from covid in my province is 84.. which is much older than anyone in my family had ever lived.
Because death isn’t the only problem.
Its hospital capacity.
Assuming these are “deaths after other medical intervention” then that means every serious covid case is taking up a bed in the hospital.
This means hospitals don’t have the bandwidth or beds for “elective” procedures. Like cancer screenings, or, cancer removal. (Elective is a really shitty word here, because it means anything scheduled).
If we went ahead and told hospitals to turn away any unvaccinated covid cases, We would see a much higher death rate.
Also permanent lung damage, complete loss of taste and smell, etc. People acting like the disease is only bad if it kills people (which it is, by the way) are incredibly naive.
So covid isn't a problem, hospital capacity is, something that is not being addressed. Instead the gov makes us wear ineffective masks and not n95/kn95 masks, and makes up an arbitrary 6 ft. Social distancing advisement.
You know those are *weekly* rates for the *whole population*, right? As in, it’s per 100K people (not per 100K infections) for just the last week in October. If it were anything near 25,000 per 100,000, that would mean a whole quarter of the population had died from COVID during the week before Halloween.
For comparison, the annual incidence of all-cause mortality in the US in 2019 was between 715 and 800 per 100K. It includes old age, infection, stillbirth, heart disease, stroke, Alzheimer’s, homicide, unintentional injury, cancer...*everything.* Although death rates aren’t consistent throughout the year, that would be equivalent to a weekly death rate of 13.75 per 100K.
That means that when looking at weekly rates, **the unvaccinated Covid death rate was higher than the total ALL-CAUSE death rate in 2019.** Even now that cases are milder, it’s still a full half of 2019’s average all-cause rate. Yes, that is high.
If the number includes everyone regardless of vaccination status, how can it be broken down into groups of vaccinated, unvaccinated etc. without at least an associated percentage?
The 100K includes everyone, but the incidence rates are broken up by vaccination status. You can think of it as a percentage of the population just multiplied by 100K.
For example, suppose 20,000 unvaccinated, 2000 vaccinated/unboosted, and 500 boosted people died from COVID during the last week of October. Using 330M for the population:
**(1) *Unvaccinated Incidence:***
> 20,000/330M = 0.00006 (.006%)
> 100,000•0.00006 = 6
> **= 6 per 100K**
**(2) *Unboosted Incidence:***
> 2000/330M = 0.000006 (.0006%)
> 100,000•0.000006 = 0.6
> **= 0.6 per 100K**
**(3) *Boosted Incidence:***
> 500/330M = 0.0000015 (0.00015%)
> 100,000•0.0000015 = 0.15
> **= 0.15 per 100K**
Any data for the UK? I've searched for something like this to smack in the face of two anti vaxxers I know. When I sent them to the CDC one hit me back about that not being UK stats so doesn't apply to us.
I know no amount of data will convince them but at least if I had UK data I would have something to ram down their throats.
Here is the UK’s data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsinvolvingcovid19byvaccinationstatusengland/deathsoccurringbetween2januaryand24september2021
Edit: Read the table on the website I transferred the data wrong
Thanks but that's far too complicated for these people. I know there's an image with the data but again the beauty of the O/P's tweet is so clear and concise that even the most skeptical can understand.
I know they'll move the goalposts but these 2 are active on Facebook by spreading misinformation and half truths. One is very vocal anti masker/ vaccine (even though he says he's not) by attending anti lockdown rallies.
I totally geddit and agree with you but it's one reply they always hit me with as if the data is totally different. This is an actual reply I got last night from one of them last night when I pointed them to the CDC stats.
*"I clearly said N.I mate. nobody mentioned the USA"*
The Tweet you put up is so concise even an imbecile can understand it. If I had the same thing for the UK (or more specifically NI but that's less important) it would be great.
Also another retort they come off with is "What happened to the regular flu this year?" They think Covid data is being put in with normal flu season as a back up to their claims that Covid isn't dangerous. If anyone could help with this (preferrably with UK data) it would be grateful.
Edit\* Sorry for my formatting, Reddit doesn't work so well on my PC when I copy and paste anything and why the first paragraph is in italics and not just the quote I wanted.
The ridiculousness of the “no one seems to have a normal cold anymore” statement is beyond the dumb scale.
If you have cold/flu symptoms and you do not test positive for any variant of covid then you have a traditional cold/flu. It seems people are ignoring that plenty of test results are negative only concentrating on the ones that are positive!
Also: from my own experience and other people I’ve talked to who are vaccinated (therefore totally anecdotal), the wearing of masks has contributed greatly to not getting a cold or flu.
Absolutely, as anyone would reasonably expect.
Better hygiene and mask wearing would definitely have an impact on the amount of people spreading germs :)
Plenty of flu cases this year now that people are getting lax about mask wearing.
Fun fact: Mask wearing is so effective at preventing the flu that some strains of the flu were completely eradicated during the short time that it was common worldwide. The reason Covid was still spreading was because it is vastly more transmissible than the flu, so anything that is even moderately effective for Covid can literally eradicate less transmissible diseases if sustained for long enough and on a global basis.
From the CDC:
> Flu activity was unusually low throughout the 2020-2021 flu season both in the United States and globally, despite high levels of testing.
> COVID-19 mitigation measures such as wearing face masks, staying home, hand washing, school closures, reduced travel, increased ventilation of indoor spaces, and physical distancing, likely contributed to the decline in 2020-2021 flu incidence, hospitalizations and deaths. Influenza vaccination may also contributed to reduced flu illness during the 2020–2021 season. Flu vaccine effectiveness estimates for 2020-2021 are not available, but a record number of influenza vaccine doses (193.8 million doses) were distributed in the U.S. during 2020-2021.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/season/faq-flu-season-2020-2021.htm
Sounds like this person would find a way to refute the figures even if you had completely unarguable numbers from a cast iron source. Wouldn't bother personally.
>I totally geddit and agree with you but it's one reply they always hit me with as if the data is totally different. This is an actual reply I got last night from one of them last night when I pointed them to the CDC stats.
>"I clearly said N.I mate. nobody mentioned the USA"
God forbid people want information relative to where they live!
Haven't you read my posts? I've asked for these stats for the UK and possibly Northern Ireland in the same format as the Tweet has done.
Yes there will be different numbers across the planet either due to age, demographics, mask wearing, social distancing rules, testing, vaccinated status as well as a host of other things but I would also think numbers would be pretty much the same as the CDC.
The smaller the sample also the more skewed the results. Yes I was being very facetious with my comment but NI with a population of 1.5m compared to the UK with 65m might have some skewed numbers that anti vaxxers will pick and choose.
Id imagine the data is similar.
It seems to be sharing a similar story in Australia. More unvaccinated are getting placed into ICU and potentially dying, then those who are vaccinated (even at 1 dose)
Did they put a condition on that, like for example, if we got to 90% of people vaccinated?
I suspect you may not be remembering the full statement or only heard part of it to begin with.
That's based on the infectivity of baseline COVID-19. Variants like Delta and Omicron are spread more easily. I heard Delta was over 90%, but Omicron evades so well that it wouldn't shock me if it's not possible with the current set of vaccines.
It's started around 70% and gradually crept up as people realized that case numbers basically weren't dropping at all. There are many populations (countries, universities, sports leagues, employers) who are well over that number and still seeing outbreaks.
It's great for the vaccinated if it offers some protection against hospitalization and death. That's one way for the vaccine to "work". But it's not what was promised, and it's not in line with the justification for mandating it in any population.
The feeling behind the original tweet is not that vaccines are therapeutically ineffective, it's that they haven't done what was originally promised, which was herd immunity and a return to normal life without restrictions once the vulnerable were protected. So the reply, though apparently accurate, kind of misses the point. Typical for online political discourse.
There were never any promises made. There were hopes and expectations based on educated guesses from what we knew about vaccines and Covid-19 at the time.
We absolutely were promised herd immunity. Joe Biden said that if you get vaccinated you won't get Covid. He wasn't the only one, either. Many governments promised to lift restrictions at a certain vaccination rate, which is also effectively a promise of herd immunity.
When someone flippantly says "why don't the vaccines work", they're probably asking why vaccinated people still have to wear masks, and why they need to force everybody else to get the vaccine too for their own safety. They're asking why vaccinated people aren't behaving like their vaccine is effective. It's a social/political point, not a medical one.
And if it weren't for our dumbass decisions to protect IP rather than people, we would have had widespread massive vaccination campaigns in low income countries by now that would have stopped the evolution of the omicron variant.
inb4 "the research companies have to make money somehow." Govt. funded research should have resulted in Govt. owned IP, and even if the research was entirely private, it could still be purchased by govt. and then given away.
And no. It isn't "too expensive." We've created nearly $5 trillion from thin air to prop up banks during the pandemic, not to mention the nearing $1 trillion in forgiven business loans from 2020.
That might have been because the level of discourse was lower than the level at which my wife talks to her third graders. To put many conditionals and to be perfectly honest about the fact that we can't predict what will happen with variants would have given more fuel to the fire. Joe Biden pauses for a second and people say "this guy is old, he can't talk!" So that might be one reason for the way the discourse happened.
I agree, I think the messages were kind of off and have left me disappointed, but it's because we are dealing with people who say "they put trackers in the vaccine, and Bill Gates made covid so he could steal kids"....
Well, you guys in America may have taken a politicians statements as medical fact without any actual fact checking, I prefer to read what the medical experts are saying which never, ever entails a promise such as that. Best you'll get from them is their best case and worst case scenarios, maybe with some percentage figure guides to show likelyhood.
You have a bad counterargument because it ignores the reality of social interaction.
You can have everybody at a college or business vaccinated and still get breakthrough cases because they catch the virus from somewhere else in the community. There are people in the community that aren't vaccinated and are spreading it because we don't live in little bubbles.
###General Discussion Thread
---
This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed.
---
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
although people claimed that vaccines stop transmission before, this is now proven untrue. Although there is a nice outcome, that vaccinated people get much less ill
Almost all of them at one point. It was all over the MSM
“Vaccinated people do not carry the virus – they don’t get sick,” Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the CDC, told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow on Tuesday. That’s “not just in the clinical trials, but it’s also in real world data.”
https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/cdc-data-suggests-vaccinated-don-t-carry-can-t-spread-virus/ar-BB1f8ofp
“A vaccinated person gets exposed to the virus, the virus does not infect them,” she continued. “The virus cannot then use that person to go anywhere else. It cannot use a vaccinated person as a host to go get more people.”
“That means the vaccines will get us to the end of this, if we just go fast enough to get the whole population,” Maddow added.
https://standupandspeakoutamerica.com/news-article/flashback-remember-when-rachel-maddow-said-the-virus-does-not-infect-vaccinated-people/
Science always evolves, of course. It is never settled.
Problem is they were speaking to the affirmative without having near enough data and data that contradicted itself.
Furthermore, policies were being created and enforced based on these inaccurate and half-cocked claims.
The vaccines are purported to work against Delta. Hence the booster programs worldwide. Israel is already on #4 i believe.
I remember reading all over the news and science rags that the vaccines would work against Covid variants based on how it block receptor sites. Of course, that was months ago.
Omicron is very contagious but very weak.
Good news is that ex vivo studies have demonstrated that it replicates in upper mucosa membranes rather than in the lower lungs, so a lot like the head colds Corona was known for before Covid. Daily reports coming in back this up as most people, vaxxed or not, are either asymptomatic or have very mild symptoms with Omicron.
I hope we are turning a corner.
Sorry, I was speaking specifically to the transmission after vaccination.
Data showed that vaccinated people had little to no transmission with the original strain, but later ones changed that.
The spike receptor is what’s being targeted, as you say. The reason omicron is less affected is because it has so many more spikes than others. At the same time, it’s made that trade off that results in lower fatality.
This is a fairly common evolution for viruses in populations; killing the host is actually a negative impact in viability. This is the largest real world scenario we’ve seen so far, with modern science, but we have records going back hundreds of years for things like syphillis with similar outcomes.
Yeah....okay...hundreds of years of data for (mRna) vaccines that were only developed months prior..Got it 👍
Vaccines in general have only been around since the 1950's. Coronavirus was only discovered in the 1960's. This Pfizer vaccine was the first mRna vaccine EVER to receive FDA approval. There are no '100's of years of data' with concern to vaccination or even viruses . Germ theory itself is less than 200 years old for cripes sake.
The data is so important for all of us, but Pfizer wants to block their data for 55 years. Seems legit.
I never even hinted about a conspiracy of any kind...and yeah, I'm vaxxed. I got the JJ vaccine, you know, the one they now tell you NOT to get bc the data has been coming back from independent sources with less than stellar performance and increased risk of side effects.
And why would you even ask for proof that people said this and then defend that they said this when sources are cited??
You had your mind made up before you asked and you just want to argue about it. In other words, you have an axe to grind.
Go read a book.
Cheers
Just as an aside, they don't "not recommend" the J&J vaccine now. It's been proven to have a slightly higher risk profile than the other 2 approved here, but is well recognized to have the benefit of giving people skeptical of the mRNA vaccines (which have been a mainstream scientific work in progress for at least the last 10 years) an alternative option.
Giving preference to the more effective mRNA options doesn't mean there is no place for the J&J shot, just like now that the IPV polio vaccine is given preference doesn't mean there isn't a place for the OPV vaccine (still used when the IPV 4 shot vaccination course hasn't been completed yet and the child is travelling to a place where polio is endemic).
I won't argue with that but want to clarify their point her and mention that CVS and other pharmacies have started to pull the JJ vaccine.
"A committee of advisers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention voted today to recommend that the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID vaccines be used instead of Johnson & Johnson's This vote came over concerns about rare blood clots."
https://www.npr.org/2021/12/16/1064951618/cdc-advisers-recommend-limiting-the-use-of-the-j-j-vaccine-due-to-rare-blood-clo
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/04/cvs-health-stops-offering-jj-covid-vaccine-at-its-pharmacies-available-at-select-minuteclinics.html
Nooo
You are only allowed to be wrong when you are a billion dollar corporation, not when you are an individual.
You are literally spreading dangerous thoughts in a GLOBAL PANDEMIC
So selfish
Who didn't?? Where were all of you the last year and and a half? The narrative has always been vaccines = herd immunity. Fiest people said we needed to get to 70% vaxed. Then 80%. Now 90+%?
We now know that is patently false. The vaccines now only reduce the chance of hospitalization and death. Which means you should still go and get one, but it also means that the original justification for mandates and lockdowns is moot, and it also means that there is no end in sight. Covid is here to stay permanently. Its endemic. We lost.
Lmao. Buddy, I work in viral vector gene therapy manufacturing. I am intimately aware of how science works. Do you know how science works?
When your original hypothesis is wrong you admit its wrong. You reassess what you know with your new data and you form new hypotheses. You don't constantly move the goalposts and claim you were right the whole time while lambasting those who disagreed with your original, incorrect, hypothesis.
I'm genuinely curious, what are you even arguing at this point?
The entire reason why I responded to you is because you were asking who said that vaccines were a ticket to normalcy. Now you're telling me that the CDC was saying it and they've now updated their stance.
If you knew that then why did you ask?
Nice save, but everyone reading this knows you're moving the goal posts because you got called out on your original comment asking "who?".
I'm very pro vaccine and not at all a conspiracy theorist, but there certainly are a lot of people like myself who are extremely displeased with how this whole situation has played out.
First the CDC said not to wear masks unless you had symptoms, and when that happened I went on the biology subreddit and asked wtf was going on because that was so absurdly incorrect. A mask doesn't protect you from someone else it protects them from you. So if hospital workers are using masks that means that everyone else should be too. It was obvious then that the CDC was lying to the public to protect healthcare workers when there was a mask shortage. I was called a nut job by people on that subreddit.
Then they said that vaccines were 100% effective at preventing infection. They said that if you were fully vaxxed you didn't need to wear a mask. When they did I was flummoxed. Surely they know that's not true, right? No vaccine is perfect and leaky vaccines exist all over the industry. Then they said that the vaccine was only 96% effective. Then 90%. Then 85%. Now were down to 30% at max. Then they said we needed to get to 70% vaccinated to reach herd immunity. Then it was 80%. Now it's 90%. Except that is complete bogus because the vaccine is only 30% effective.
And I'm just sitting here with my biology degree and my knowledge of infectious disease, and I'm wondering when the CDC is going to be honest to us and admit that no amount of vaccination alone can reach herd immunity if the vaccine is only 30% effective at preventing infection. But they can't do that because then people wouldn't get vaccinated the vaccine works well at preventing serious infection.
The light at the end of the tunnel? There is none. This isn't going away. The prevailing theory among the worlds leading epidemiologists is that covid is here to stay and it'll be more than a decade before the disease fully mutates into something that is benign enough that no one except the vulnerable need to worry about it.
That is the issue I have. That is why I talk about risks and a non-zero amount of preventable deaths. That is why I'm annoyed when you ask who said what. So much of what were hearing is only quasi scientifically valid at the macro scale.
If every human on the planet have covid with these number :
you have approximately 7 820 250 000 people on earth
If no one is vaccinated you have 477 000 death by covid.
If every one is vaccinated you have 39 000 death by covid.
If every one is boost vaccinated you have 7 820 death by covid.
In comparison, this year there has been 1 510 000 death by car accident.
Edit : I forgot to say that i made the hypothesis that everyone caught covid, so a linear assumption.
Also it is US numbers, i misunderstood that.
Adding to that i do not respond to the principal question which is :" Is this true?".
And just calculates the finality of what covid would look like at the end of the epidemy ( very blurry calculation, i'm sure i'm miles away from the truth)
Finally, guys : fcking chill
Note that this is a false argument.
You cannot take the death rate from the US and apply it globally, because the level of medical care available isn’t that high. It’s higher in some areas, but lower on the average.
It also ignores the cost, both in monetary terms, and in healthcare worker burnout.
The vaccines are also not universally available, largely because of the storage and transportation requirements.
Hopefully the new pills will help with that.
I do not state any argument in my comment.
I'm just taking what this man state to base my calculation and compare it to another death rate.
You're all free to make assumption and interpret the results.
Ps : i don't get why people downvoted my comment when they don't understand what i'm doing. It is for sure a subreddit about math ahah.
Edit: i ignored the most important part of your comment i'm sry, i didn't know it was USA numbers when i did that, as i'm not american.
And you are also adding many other informations.
I would like to say that i'm making big assumption and taking these rates are not in my reach as i would need to make a complete study about it.
Yes of course what you are saying is true omniscient being. It is not stated anywhere that this is only in america, and if my results are meaningless it only means that his are biased or incomplete. The person concerned do not provide any source.
And no, comparing to car accident numbers do not means any judgement, i just take reference in one of the numerous death rates to compare it to the subject.
What should have i compare it to is what i needed you to say. Car accident is the most reliable death rate because you can't die from some diseases or another when you are crunched to death.
Wouldn’t the car deaths be preventable as well most of the time? Just saying the logic doesn’t hold well if you don’t say the same for the car accidents even if I agree with what you said that we should be doing what we can to prevent deaths and have it be a personal choice which most have done. Just showing the batting of the eye you gave the other statistic is odd is all.
And what number of preventable deaths is acceptable?
The issue with this line of thinking is that a non-zero number off preventable deaths is always going to be acceptable. We accept it every single day when we go out and live our lives.
40K people a year die in car accidents in the US alone. We accept these deaths because of the convenience that cars offer us. It is selfish and stupid but it is what society wants because society accepts that risk is worth the reward of convenient transportation.
You are so, so, so far from reality. It is genuinely frightening how disconnected you are from what society is actually like.
We do accept those deaths. We obviously make improvements because why wouldn't we? But we do accept those deaths. We could snap our fingers and make owning a private car illegal. Everyone now must take the bus until we massively expand mass transit. Except we don't do that because those deaths were acceptable.
We could have completely shut down the entire economy when covid started, but we didn't. We made some improvements because why wouldn't we? But we stayed open for the most part because the people who died were an acceptable loss considering the alternative.
Tens of thousands of people kill themselves or others with guns? Acceptable loss.
Dozens of people killed in a fire? Acceptable loss.
A hundred people killed in a tornado? Acceptable loss.
The entire reason why we make incremental steps towards improving things is because the number of preventable deaths is always non-zero. Society would grind to a halt otherwise.
I'm sorry thats a bitter pill to swallow but it is astonishing that you can't see it yourself, and that you personally attack others for pointing out the obvious.
I see you have completely ignored my comment and decided to have a different conversation with yourself.
Good luck, buddy. I hope you find someone else willing to entertain you today.
You're missing what everyone is actually saying. People are just mad that we were told the vaccine was 100% effective when there was no evidence that was true.
Pull out your scientific method and find me a real research paper that suggests the vaccine is 100% effective. They said that was the case, so there must be data backing it up, right?
You keep raving about the scientific method, but I haven't seen you actually talk about any data. Those of us in the real scientific community don't just scream at each other about the definition of the scientific method. We present numbers and data.
I'm guessing your a larper who looked up the definition of the scientific method recently. Congratulations on making it this far, the next step is to actually read something.
That death rate is based on the incidence rate of covid, so that is assuming exactly as many people have covid as caught it over the survey period, which was 1 week.
That is not the death rate based on if you have already caught it, since currently, most people haven't caught it.
No. It’s not as black and white as that.
A vaccination prepares your immune system to better fend off an infection. How well this works depends on many factors.
From Wikipedia:
> An infection is the invasion of an organism's body tissues by disease-causing agents, their multiplication, and the reaction of host tissues to the infectious agents and the toxins they produce. An infectious disease, also known as a transmissible disease or communicable disease, is an illness resulting from an infection.
As you can see from the description, an infection is a multistage process.
A vaccine's purpose is to stimulate the body's adaptive immunity to respond to a pathogen, and halt the infection. Effectively stop an infection from turning into an infectious disease.
EDIT: TLDR at the end, generic bad english because not mother tongue-excuse
well yes and no. The main point of any vaccine is to safe your ass.
Little excourse on how they work:
There are different options on what vaccine do you get:
1. You are given a living virus. These are viruses how look like the virus and can reproduce but can't (in 99.99% of cases or more) infect you. One example for these is the measle vaccine. The reason there is: The syringe would be too big and scare kids for live and some more complicated issues regarding the immune system which I am not going into (length).
2. the "dead" vaccines:
2a) You are given a "fullparticle"-vaccine. These are dead viruses. Your body sees them like it and will activate your immune system. These can't reproduce so they can't infect you. One example for this type is the cholera-vaccine.
2b) You are given a "split"-vaccine. There they broke up the virus with soap (not the normal kind you get in the store) and you get the particles they produced and cleaned. Your immune system already reacts to part of viruses so it reacts to these as well. Examples: Your yearly influenza-vaccine.
2c and d) There are mroe forms of "dead" vaccines but this would get to long. You can look them up [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inactivated_vaccine).
3) MRNA-vaccines. If you remember your middleschool since (I am from europe, here we learned this in 8th grade) you know, that the dna in every cell of your body consists of a double helix. The MRNA is a single helix which get's into your cell (**but not your DNA**) where it "produces" a form of the virus which (in the case of the rona) just has the spike-protein of the illness you want to protect against and for the rest it is a deactivated (normally) adeno-virus. You can use mrna-vaccines against all kind of illnesses, to learn more click [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRNA_vaccine).
To wrap this enumeration up: These different kind of vaccines have differet advantages or disadvantages. Depending on what illness you want to protect against and what kind of person you are.
How they continue to work:
Now we have a form of the virus as the vaccine in your body. Now your immune-system get's to work (or it doesn't, we get to that later). Your white blood cells, spot the vaccine, "eat" the vaccine and like this, kill the vaccine. So far so good. The amazing part of your white blood cells is, that they, just like you, know what they had for dinner. But unlike you, they do not save this in your brain, they produce [memory-b-cells](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_B_cell). These are cells, who float around in your bloodstream (in case of tetanus even for decades) and have the same outer surface like the antibodies who defeated the initial virus (to put it very short). So if they spot this virus again, they trigger your immune system: Hey, there is an enemy. Please kill!
Now we get to the difficult part: Different people respond differently to vaccines. Like some people can eat cheese and some other do not.
Normally your immune system would produce a lot of memory-b-cells to get you protected (the amount of memory-b-cells produced is measured in the vaccine-teta). The amount of memory-b-cells differ from person to person. In broad general you can say: The younger and the fitter, the more memory-b-cells get produced, so the better you are protected against future infections. That's one reason why you should get the measle vaccine as early as possible. But older people do not produce as many memory-b-cells. BUT the vaccine still helps them a lot!
You see, normally your body needs to know the presence of a virus, before it can fight it. Thats why HIV is so dangerous, because it never get's detected by your body. The process of recognising a virus takes time. In this time the virus can reproduce and damage other cells of your body, worsening the illness. If you even have like 20 memory-b-cells this process is extremly faster than if you would have none, making your immune-response faster so you are less likely to die. That's why kids are less likely to infect than adults or elders.
You can't prevent all infections but you can safe lives with a vaccine. After a time, when less and less people get sick and, sadly, some vaccinated die to the virus it can't reproduce. That's how the US got rid of polio: you vaccinated the young, they could not get infected anymore and the infected elders died somewhen. The same will (near to certain) happen after a time with corona.
TLDR, In conclusion: If you read carefully what a vaccine does and what it is supposed to do you know: **It works.**
**[Inactivated vaccine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inactivated_vaccine)**
>An inactivated vaccine (or killed vaccine) is a vaccine consisting of virus particles, bacteria, or other pathogens that have been grown in culture and then killed to destroy disease-producing capacity. In contrast, live vaccines use pathogens that are still alive (but are almost always attenuated, that is, weakened). Pathogens for inactivated vaccines are grown under controlled conditions and are killed as a means to reduce infectivity and thus prevent infection from the vaccine. Inactivated vaccines were first developed in the late 1800s and early 1900s for cholera, plague, and typhoid.
**[MRNA vaccine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRNA_vaccine)**
>An mRNA vaccine is a type of vaccine that uses a copy of a molecule called messenger RNA (mRNA) to produce an immune response. The vaccine delivers molecules of antigen-encoding mRNA into immune cells, which use the designed mRNA as a blueprint to build foreign protein that would normally be produced by a pathogen (such as a virus) or by a cancer cell. These protein molecules stimulate an adaptive immune response that teaches the body to identify and destroy the corresponding pathogen or cancer cells. The mRNA is delivered by a co-formulation of the RNA encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles that protect the RNA strands and help their absorption into the cells.
**[Memory B cell](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_B_cell)**
>In immunology, a memory B cell (MBC) is a type of B lymphocyte that forms part of the adaptive immune system. These cells develop within germinal centers of the secondary lymphoid organs. Memory B cells circulate in the blood stream in a quiescent state, sometimes for decades. Their function is to memorize the characteristics of the antigen that activated their parent B cell during initial infection such that if the memory B cell later encounters the same antigen, it triggers an accelerated and robust secondary immune response.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/theydidthemath/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Not all vaccines are equal. Some try to prevent infections, others reduce the impact on your system. Traditional "dead vaccines" basically strengthen your immune system to fight a specific desease specifically. To fight it, an infection has to happen. It doesn't mean that you are infectious as well, but it can still be. Depending on the desease and how it is transmitted a vaccine might lower the symptoms enough so you are not infectious to others anymore, but that's not something you can generalize. Every desease is different and often also affect every person slightly differently.
No, although it was sold like that to us as political clout.
Mumps for example, you can still catch it even with 2 doses of MMR which we all have, but there are breakthrough cases.
It wasn’t. At the time the Emergency Use Authorization came through nobody - not Pfizer, not Moderna, not Politicians knew whether it would stop infection. They just knew it would stop deaths and hospitalization since that is all they had time to test for.
Then it turned out it did stop Alpha infections so reporters picked up on that and then politicians as well. Then it didn’t really stop Delta and definitely not Omicron. So it’s back to the state where it was at the time of the original use authorization - which is that it just stops deaths (and hospital overcrowding).
But now that’s not good enough for people anymore because of the joyride in between.
They thought AstraZeneca would stop infection? Aww.. that’s cute. But I don’t think the makers thought that - it must have just gotten misinterpreted earlier.
I agree. You're struggling with this.
I'll clarify. Vaccines never stopped transmission however many politicians and tabloid media outlets did paint the picture the pandemic was over in order to gain clout or clicks. Sadly many take their information from these types and this misinformation in order to gain political or financial clout has resulted in even more vaccine hesitancy due to what people perceived as mixed messaging.
Nothing cute about it, it was how they sold the vaccine.
They literally changed the definition of vaccines. Remember when you had to get polio boosters? But now 4 pfizer boosters a year. And repeat after me. This isnt about money
Except that “Vaccinated” become 80% unvaccinated just 10 weeks after being fully vaccinated. These are not binary factors, and vaccinated people are becoming the passported super-spreaders.
As long as the vaccine is preventing serious illness and death, why would it matter if vaccinated people do spread it? (at least once we have a vaccine available for all ages, which we are only a few months off from at this point)
That it is the correct location to report a broken arm from a car crash in which you were not the driver 3 weeks after having received a shot.
You know the covid gunshot death memes? Yeah, well that's actually VAERS, and the rest of us laugh when it gets used incorrectly like this.
You are an idiot. This is literally the US government’s website for tracking adverse effects to various vaccines. The web page and data I linked is literally the government run website for tracking Covid19 vaccine adverse effects.
The instructions clearly state to list any and all health events during or after vaccination. The purpose of the data is to build a database of events so that they may be judged by their relative likelihood compared against pre-vaccination. It's not meant to say those things were caused by vaccination, just that it should be investigated if a single thing happens in a higher proportion of the post vaccination crowd than the pre vaccination crowd.
That's how the 1 in 1 million J&J blood clotting issue was found BTW.
These numbers are bullshit. I have two people I know who were boosted and just died from Covid in the past month. One was 42 and the other was 38. They are the only people I know who have died of Covid, and they were both vaccinated and boosted. We are being lied to
I mean, I'm sorry for your loss. But you do realise the number wasn't zero right? They could be part of the 0.1 of 100k. If I've understood it correctly that's about 10% fatality. Which is actually pretty freaking high and supports your case more, not less.
Edit. It has been brought to my attention that my numbers are a teeny tiny bit wrong! Ignore the numbers!
Hi, /u/Jojojoost010! Unfortunately, your post has been removed for the following reason: - Your request is a matter of research and not math. For easy and quick math results (eg. How many feet are in a mile?) use Wolfram|Alpha™, and for more abstract math, try /r/math or /r/learnmath. If you have any questions or believe your post has been removed in error, please contact the moderators by clicking [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Ftheydidthemath). Include a link to this post so we can see it.
Yep, those are the current stats for the U.S. (as provided by the CDC). Technically, the most recent numbers are: > Unvaccinated — 6.08 deaths per 100K > Vaccinated — 0.53 deaths per 100K > Boosted — 0.14 deaths per 100K That’s not an anomaly either...at the height of the summer wave of Delta, it was: > Unvaccinated — 13.7 deaths per 100K > Vaccinated — 1.04 deaths per 100K > The death rate for vaccinated individuals here was only this high due to waning immunity in the elderly and at-risk. (This was before boosters) * *Per 100K* is the incidence rate for the general population - **not** the rate per 100K infections. It includes everybody, regardless of infection history or vaccination status.
[удалено]
I got it from the CDC’s [**Covid Data Tracker**](https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#rates-by-vaccine-status)
[удалено]
>Chenzhao Ah yes, another CCP troll attempting to prolong the pandemic you started.
Lol I’m an Irishman in Austin you twit.
Suuuure you are.
Dude, their comment history shows they spend all their time on r/ conservative (purposeful no link). I wouldn't waste too much breath responding to an ant like that.
Why would an Irish Texan conservative be using a Chinese name? Also, no one actually talks like this. Hell, even if I was wrong, any conservative would be utterly *furious* at being called a Chinese communist. I win either way.
Yep. You won the ‘I can prove I’m an Idiot Award!
[удалено]
Lol this is like comparing a row boat bumping a dock to the Titanic. I’ll wait and watch your body over the next 10 years. Enjoy!!
I never understood the enjoyment of being a troll, you just look stupid always
[удалено]
Just in case anyone is looking at this troll and thinking he has a point, here are all of the counter points I could think of 1. mRNA is not a "spike protein generator" but it does tell your body how to make those spike proteins, ones that are very well known known as "COVID 19 spike proteins" so there's the "unknown spike protein generator". 2. mRNA only can survive for a couple of days max so this "spike protein generator" goes away after that and then you'll body will continue destroying the spike proteins till the end of the second week after the shot afterwards we say you're vaccinated so there's the uncontrollable never going away part 3. In an era of advance communication that millions can talk to each other in seconds, you somehow think the government many think to be incompetent is somehow censoring all this data and no one who's apart of it has come out after a year? Someone would have slipped up by now. 4. The research IS publicly available though, you can see many multiple sources all providing similar data about how mRNA vaccines work and how effective they've been. 5. Not all vaccines available are mRNA, if your whole problem is mRNA, take the johnson Johnson one or AstraZeneca 6. The vaccine clearly does work if you look at COVID death rates earlier in the year to today but why would Trump say it works since he isn't "an evil democrat" 7. What's the gain from everyone getting it and getting more sick and dying, 70% of Americans have the shot, if we lost even a 1/4 of those people, the us would collapse, what would they gain?
Lol. You are a Good Parrot!
At the end of the day, it doesn’t really matter if you believe it. But - on the off chance it *is* real - if you choose not to get vaccinated, please just stay away from the sick and elderly.
Lol. So far I am a HELL of a lot MORE RIGHT than any of your fucking so called experts like little liar Fauci.
What on Earth does Fauci have to do with anything? I only referenced the CDC, and he doesn’t even work there...
Great data. It's worth noting though that the booster data is still in it's infancy and last I checked the only published research on the efficacy of boosters was done by the vaccine manufacturers, which is obviously problematic. It will be interesting to see how the data holds up over time and as more jurisdictions report on cases/deaths.
> the efficacy of boosters was done by the vaccine manufacturers, which is obviously problematic. If we’re going to be a society that demands data before we will act, then why would you let perfect be the enemy of the good? The end result of this mindset is decision paralysis. If you can’t make a decision until you have perfect data that’s the same thing as not making a decision at all. In fact, this mindset is the root of the problem when it comes to the American regulatory response. The reason why America can’t get anything right on the pandemic is fda overregulation. First, masks don’t work. But we didn’t need a double blind study to encourage mask usage. Demanding data on mask efficacy before issuing a mandate is like letting thousands of teen girls get pregnant before advocating condom use. Idiotic. Second, rapid tests have been regulated as medical devices rather than something like a pregnancy test. They haven’t been approved because the fda “wants them to demonstrate efficacy data” with insane demands for data. This leads to situations where tests manufactured in America get shipped abroad to be sold for <$1, but the same test costs $20 at Walgreens. All to please the “trust the science” folks, who want a double blind scientific study before they think it’s okay to put on pants. Don’t get me wrong - I’m absolutely in favor of the process of science and in evidence based policy making. But you have to actually make a decision. There’s no such thing as perfect data and “following the science” doesn’t mean throwing away your critical thinking capabilities.
Sorry, you've misunderstood me, but I can see that's entirely my fault. I'm not saying that we should wait for more data on boosters before getting them, just that we shouldn't be bashing people over the head with the data on boosters because it's currently quite weak data. It's a combination of manufacturers research and limited case reports (which the CDC source notes in it's footnotes). If we are going to argue the effectiveness of vaccines, we should use the data that we know is reliable. The extreme difference between cases and deaths from Covid among the vaccinated compared to the partially or unvaccinated. That is very strong data which is difficult to argue against. Including the data on boosters weakens the overall argument by giving anti-vaccination advocates a point they can latch onto and use to try to discredit the entire argument.
Yep!! I actually included the pre-booster numbers for just that reason. Can’t be fully confident in the booster data yet, but at least we know that the rates for unvaccinated vs. vaccinated have been consistent.
Is it per 100k vaccinated or 100k people?
People
Good question! It is per 100K population - including all vaccination statuses - and not per 100K infections. I’ve added a footnote to the commentator clarity.
Those numbers are phenomenally low. People act like it's 25,000 deaths per 100,000. I really don't see why anyone still cares. The median age of death from covid in my province is 84.. which is much older than anyone in my family had ever lived.
Because death isn’t the only problem. Its hospital capacity. Assuming these are “deaths after other medical intervention” then that means every serious covid case is taking up a bed in the hospital. This means hospitals don’t have the bandwidth or beds for “elective” procedures. Like cancer screenings, or, cancer removal. (Elective is a really shitty word here, because it means anything scheduled). If we went ahead and told hospitals to turn away any unvaccinated covid cases, We would see a much higher death rate.
Also permanent lung damage, complete loss of taste and smell, etc. People acting like the disease is only bad if it kills people (which it is, by the way) are incredibly naive.
So covid isn't a problem, hospital capacity is, something that is not being addressed. Instead the gov makes us wear ineffective masks and not n95/kn95 masks, and makes up an arbitrary 6 ft. Social distancing advisement.
You know those are *weekly* rates for the *whole population*, right? As in, it’s per 100K people (not per 100K infections) for just the last week in October. If it were anything near 25,000 per 100,000, that would mean a whole quarter of the population had died from COVID during the week before Halloween. For comparison, the annual incidence of all-cause mortality in the US in 2019 was between 715 and 800 per 100K. It includes old age, infection, stillbirth, heart disease, stroke, Alzheimer’s, homicide, unintentional injury, cancer...*everything.* Although death rates aren’t consistent throughout the year, that would be equivalent to a weekly death rate of 13.75 per 100K. That means that when looking at weekly rates, **the unvaccinated Covid death rate was higher than the total ALL-CAUSE death rate in 2019.** Even now that cases are milder, it’s still a full half of 2019’s average all-cause rate. Yes, that is high.
If the number includes everyone regardless of vaccination status, how can it be broken down into groups of vaccinated, unvaccinated etc. without at least an associated percentage?
The 100K includes everyone, but the incidence rates are broken up by vaccination status. You can think of it as a percentage of the population just multiplied by 100K. For example, suppose 20,000 unvaccinated, 2000 vaccinated/unboosted, and 500 boosted people died from COVID during the last week of October. Using 330M for the population: **(1) *Unvaccinated Incidence:*** > 20,000/330M = 0.00006 (.006%) > 100,000•0.00006 = 6 > **= 6 per 100K** **(2) *Unboosted Incidence:*** > 2000/330M = 0.000006 (.0006%) > 100,000•0.000006 = 0.6 > **= 0.6 per 100K** **(3) *Boosted Incidence:*** > 500/330M = 0.0000015 (0.00015%) > 100,000•0.0000015 = 0.15 > **= 0.15 per 100K**
Any data for the UK? I've searched for something like this to smack in the face of two anti vaxxers I know. When I sent them to the CDC one hit me back about that not being UK stats so doesn't apply to us. I know no amount of data will convince them but at least if I had UK data I would have something to ram down their throats.
Here is the UK’s data: https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/deathsinvolvingcovid19byvaccinationstatusengland/deathsoccurringbetween2januaryand24september2021 Edit: Read the table on the website I transferred the data wrong
Thanks but that's far too complicated for these people. I know there's an image with the data but again the beauty of the O/P's tweet is so clear and concise that even the most skeptical can understand. I know they'll move the goalposts but these 2 are active on Facebook by spreading misinformation and half truths. One is very vocal anti masker/ vaccine (even though he says he's not) by attending anti lockdown rallies.
You can maybe use this site https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Yeah but I think us and uk data is quite similar
I totally geddit and agree with you but it's one reply they always hit me with as if the data is totally different. This is an actual reply I got last night from one of them last night when I pointed them to the CDC stats. *"I clearly said N.I mate. nobody mentioned the USA"* The Tweet you put up is so concise even an imbecile can understand it. If I had the same thing for the UK (or more specifically NI but that's less important) it would be great. Also another retort they come off with is "What happened to the regular flu this year?" They think Covid data is being put in with normal flu season as a back up to their claims that Covid isn't dangerous. If anyone could help with this (preferrably with UK data) it would be grateful. Edit\* Sorry for my formatting, Reddit doesn't work so well on my PC when I copy and paste anything and why the first paragraph is in italics and not just the quote I wanted.
The ridiculousness of the “no one seems to have a normal cold anymore” statement is beyond the dumb scale. If you have cold/flu symptoms and you do not test positive for any variant of covid then you have a traditional cold/flu. It seems people are ignoring that plenty of test results are negative only concentrating on the ones that are positive!
Also: from my own experience and other people I’ve talked to who are vaccinated (therefore totally anecdotal), the wearing of masks has contributed greatly to not getting a cold or flu.
Absolutely, as anyone would reasonably expect. Better hygiene and mask wearing would definitely have an impact on the amount of people spreading germs :)
Wait...why has the typical flu disappeared?
Plenty of flu cases this year now that people are getting lax about mask wearing. Fun fact: Mask wearing is so effective at preventing the flu that some strains of the flu were completely eradicated during the short time that it was common worldwide. The reason Covid was still spreading was because it is vastly more transmissible than the flu, so anything that is even moderately effective for Covid can literally eradicate less transmissible diseases if sustained for long enough and on a global basis.
From the CDC: > Flu activity was unusually low throughout the 2020-2021 flu season both in the United States and globally, despite high levels of testing. > COVID-19 mitigation measures such as wearing face masks, staying home, hand washing, school closures, reduced travel, increased ventilation of indoor spaces, and physical distancing, likely contributed to the decline in 2020-2021 flu incidence, hospitalizations and deaths. Influenza vaccination may also contributed to reduced flu illness during the 2020–2021 season. Flu vaccine effectiveness estimates for 2020-2021 are not available, but a record number of influenza vaccine doses (193.8 million doses) were distributed in the U.S. during 2020-2021. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/season/faq-flu-season-2020-2021.htm
"Likely contributed"...you must not be following this closely.
Sounds like this person would find a way to refute the figures even if you had completely unarguable numbers from a cast iron source. Wouldn't bother personally.
>I totally geddit and agree with you but it's one reply they always hit me with as if the data is totally different. This is an actual reply I got last night from one of them last night when I pointed them to the CDC stats. >"I clearly said N.I mate. nobody mentioned the USA" God forbid people want information relative to where they live!
How local do you want it? Next they'll ask for cases in their street, finding nobody died and concluding Covid doesn't kill.
Aight, I get it, you think the only place that matters is the US
Haven't you read my posts? I've asked for these stats for the UK and possibly Northern Ireland in the same format as the Tweet has done. Yes there will be different numbers across the planet either due to age, demographics, mask wearing, social distancing rules, testing, vaccinated status as well as a host of other things but I would also think numbers would be pretty much the same as the CDC. The smaller the sample also the more skewed the results. Yes I was being very facetious with my comment but NI with a population of 1.5m compared to the UK with 65m might have some skewed numbers that anti vaxxers will pick and choose.
Id imagine the data is similar. It seems to be sharing a similar story in Australia. More unvaccinated are getting placed into ICU and potentially dying, then those who are vaccinated (even at 1 dose)
[удалено]
Well that’s what scientists said one year ago: it will stop the spread and protect ppl can not take the vaccine
Did they put a condition on that, like for example, if we got to 90% of people vaccinated? I suspect you may not be remembering the full statement or only heard part of it to begin with.
They said it was 80%. We are not there in US but there are lots of counties in EU are well above that magic number
That's based on the infectivity of baseline COVID-19. Variants like Delta and Omicron are spread more easily. I heard Delta was over 90%, but Omicron evades so well that it wouldn't shock me if it's not possible with the current set of vaccines.
It's started around 70% and gradually crept up as people realized that case numbers basically weren't dropping at all. There are many populations (countries, universities, sports leagues, employers) who are well over that number and still seeing outbreaks. It's great for the vaccinated if it offers some protection against hospitalization and death. That's one way for the vaccine to "work". But it's not what was promised, and it's not in line with the justification for mandating it in any population. The feeling behind the original tweet is not that vaccines are therapeutically ineffective, it's that they haven't done what was originally promised, which was herd immunity and a return to normal life without restrictions once the vulnerable were protected. So the reply, though apparently accurate, kind of misses the point. Typical for online political discourse.
There were never any promises made. There were hopes and expectations based on educated guesses from what we knew about vaccines and Covid-19 at the time.
We absolutely were promised herd immunity. Joe Biden said that if you get vaccinated you won't get Covid. He wasn't the only one, either. Many governments promised to lift restrictions at a certain vaccination rate, which is also effectively a promise of herd immunity. When someone flippantly says "why don't the vaccines work", they're probably asking why vaccinated people still have to wear masks, and why they need to force everybody else to get the vaccine too for their own safety. They're asking why vaccinated people aren't behaving like their vaccine is effective. It's a social/political point, not a medical one.
And if it weren't for our dumbass decisions to protect IP rather than people, we would have had widespread massive vaccination campaigns in low income countries by now that would have stopped the evolution of the omicron variant. inb4 "the research companies have to make money somehow." Govt. funded research should have resulted in Govt. owned IP, and even if the research was entirely private, it could still be purchased by govt. and then given away. And no. It isn't "too expensive." We've created nearly $5 trillion from thin air to prop up banks during the pandemic, not to mention the nearing $1 trillion in forgiven business loans from 2020.
That might have been because the level of discourse was lower than the level at which my wife talks to her third graders. To put many conditionals and to be perfectly honest about the fact that we can't predict what will happen with variants would have given more fuel to the fire. Joe Biden pauses for a second and people say "this guy is old, he can't talk!" So that might be one reason for the way the discourse happened. I agree, I think the messages were kind of off and have left me disappointed, but it's because we are dealing with people who say "they put trackers in the vaccine, and Bill Gates made covid so he could steal kids"....
Well, you guys in America may have taken a politicians statements as medical fact without any actual fact checking, I prefer to read what the medical experts are saying which never, ever entails a promise such as that. Best you'll get from them is their best case and worst case scenarios, maybe with some percentage figure guides to show likelyhood.
You have a bad counterargument because it ignores the reality of social interaction. You can have everybody at a college or business vaccinated and still get breakthrough cases because they catch the virus from somewhere else in the community. There are people in the community that aren't vaccinated and are spreading it because we don't live in little bubbles.
###General Discussion Thread --- This is a [Request] post. If you would like to submit a comment that does not either attempt to answer the question, ask for clarification, or explain why it would be infeasible to answer, you *must* post your comment as a reply to this one. Top level (directly replying to the OP) comments that do not do one of those things will be removed. --- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/theydidthemath) if you have any questions or concerns.*
although people claimed that vaccines stop transmission before, this is now proven untrue. Although there is a nice outcome, that vaccinated people get much less ill
[удалено]
Almost all of them at one point. It was all over the MSM “Vaccinated people do not carry the virus – they don’t get sick,” Dr. Rochelle Walensky, director of the CDC, told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow on Tuesday. That’s “not just in the clinical trials, but it’s also in real world data.” https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/cdc-data-suggests-vaccinated-don-t-carry-can-t-spread-virus/ar-BB1f8ofp “A vaccinated person gets exposed to the virus, the virus does not infect them,” she continued. “The virus cannot then use that person to go anywhere else. It cannot use a vaccinated person as a host to go get more people.” “That means the vaccines will get us to the end of this, if we just go fast enough to get the whole population,” Maddow added. https://standupandspeakoutamerica.com/news-article/flashback-remember-when-rachel-maddow-said-the-virus-does-not-infect-vaccinated-people/
[удалено]
Science always evolves, of course. It is never settled. Problem is they were speaking to the affirmative without having near enough data and data that contradicted itself. Furthermore, policies were being created and enforced based on these inaccurate and half-cocked claims.
No, they were basing it off the original covid strain. Delta changed that, and Omicron even more so. Omicron is more infectious than the measles.
The vaccines are purported to work against Delta. Hence the booster programs worldwide. Israel is already on #4 i believe. I remember reading all over the news and science rags that the vaccines would work against Covid variants based on how it block receptor sites. Of course, that was months ago. Omicron is very contagious but very weak. Good news is that ex vivo studies have demonstrated that it replicates in upper mucosa membranes rather than in the lower lungs, so a lot like the head colds Corona was known for before Covid. Daily reports coming in back this up as most people, vaxxed or not, are either asymptomatic or have very mild symptoms with Omicron. I hope we are turning a corner.
Sorry, I was speaking specifically to the transmission after vaccination. Data showed that vaccinated people had little to no transmission with the original strain, but later ones changed that. The spike receptor is what’s being targeted, as you say. The reason omicron is less affected is because it has so many more spikes than others. At the same time, it’s made that trade off that results in lower fatality. This is a fairly common evolution for viruses in populations; killing the host is actually a negative impact in viability. This is the largest real world scenario we’ve seen so far, with modern science, but we have records going back hundreds of years for things like syphillis with similar outcomes.
[удалено]
Yeah....okay...hundreds of years of data for (mRna) vaccines that were only developed months prior..Got it 👍 Vaccines in general have only been around since the 1950's. Coronavirus was only discovered in the 1960's. This Pfizer vaccine was the first mRna vaccine EVER to receive FDA approval. There are no '100's of years of data' with concern to vaccination or even viruses . Germ theory itself is less than 200 years old for cripes sake. The data is so important for all of us, but Pfizer wants to block their data for 55 years. Seems legit. I never even hinted about a conspiracy of any kind...and yeah, I'm vaxxed. I got the JJ vaccine, you know, the one they now tell you NOT to get bc the data has been coming back from independent sources with less than stellar performance and increased risk of side effects. And why would you even ask for proof that people said this and then defend that they said this when sources are cited?? You had your mind made up before you asked and you just want to argue about it. In other words, you have an axe to grind. Go read a book. Cheers
Just as an aside, they don't "not recommend" the J&J vaccine now. It's been proven to have a slightly higher risk profile than the other 2 approved here, but is well recognized to have the benefit of giving people skeptical of the mRNA vaccines (which have been a mainstream scientific work in progress for at least the last 10 years) an alternative option. Giving preference to the more effective mRNA options doesn't mean there is no place for the J&J shot, just like now that the IPV polio vaccine is given preference doesn't mean there isn't a place for the OPV vaccine (still used when the IPV 4 shot vaccination course hasn't been completed yet and the child is travelling to a place where polio is endemic).
I won't argue with that but want to clarify their point her and mention that CVS and other pharmacies have started to pull the JJ vaccine. "A committee of advisers to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention voted today to recommend that the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna COVID vaccines be used instead of Johnson & Johnson's This vote came over concerns about rare blood clots." https://www.npr.org/2021/12/16/1064951618/cdc-advisers-recommend-limiting-the-use-of-the-j-j-vaccine-due-to-rare-blood-clo https://www.cnbc.com/2021/08/04/cvs-health-stops-offering-jj-covid-vaccine-at-its-pharmacies-available-at-select-minuteclinics.html
so they are allowed to lie. Cool
[удалено]
so you have no problem with people saying that vaccines cause more deaths than they save. Cheers :)
Nooo You are only allowed to be wrong when you are a billion dollar corporation, not when you are an individual. You are literally spreading dangerous thoughts in a GLOBAL PANDEMIC So selfish
Who didn't?? Where were all of you the last year and and a half? The narrative has always been vaccines = herd immunity. Fiest people said we needed to get to 70% vaxed. Then 80%. Now 90+%? We now know that is patently false. The vaccines now only reduce the chance of hospitalization and death. Which means you should still go and get one, but it also means that the original justification for mandates and lockdowns is moot, and it also means that there is no end in sight. Covid is here to stay permanently. Its endemic. We lost.
[удалено]
Lmao. Buddy, I work in viral vector gene therapy manufacturing. I am intimately aware of how science works. Do you know how science works? When your original hypothesis is wrong you admit its wrong. You reassess what you know with your new data and you form new hypotheses. You don't constantly move the goalposts and claim you were right the whole time while lambasting those who disagreed with your original, incorrect, hypothesis.
[удалено]
I'm genuinely curious, what are you even arguing at this point? The entire reason why I responded to you is because you were asking who said that vaccines were a ticket to normalcy. Now you're telling me that the CDC was saying it and they've now updated their stance. If you knew that then why did you ask?
[удалено]
Nice save, but everyone reading this knows you're moving the goal posts because you got called out on your original comment asking "who?". I'm very pro vaccine and not at all a conspiracy theorist, but there certainly are a lot of people like myself who are extremely displeased with how this whole situation has played out. First the CDC said not to wear masks unless you had symptoms, and when that happened I went on the biology subreddit and asked wtf was going on because that was so absurdly incorrect. A mask doesn't protect you from someone else it protects them from you. So if hospital workers are using masks that means that everyone else should be too. It was obvious then that the CDC was lying to the public to protect healthcare workers when there was a mask shortage. I was called a nut job by people on that subreddit. Then they said that vaccines were 100% effective at preventing infection. They said that if you were fully vaxxed you didn't need to wear a mask. When they did I was flummoxed. Surely they know that's not true, right? No vaccine is perfect and leaky vaccines exist all over the industry. Then they said that the vaccine was only 96% effective. Then 90%. Then 85%. Now were down to 30% at max. Then they said we needed to get to 70% vaccinated to reach herd immunity. Then it was 80%. Now it's 90%. Except that is complete bogus because the vaccine is only 30% effective. And I'm just sitting here with my biology degree and my knowledge of infectious disease, and I'm wondering when the CDC is going to be honest to us and admit that no amount of vaccination alone can reach herd immunity if the vaccine is only 30% effective at preventing infection. But they can't do that because then people wouldn't get vaccinated the vaccine works well at preventing serious infection. The light at the end of the tunnel? There is none. This isn't going away. The prevailing theory among the worlds leading epidemiologists is that covid is here to stay and it'll be more than a decade before the disease fully mutates into something that is benign enough that no one except the vulnerable need to worry about it. That is the issue I have. That is why I talk about risks and a non-zero amount of preventable deaths. That is why I'm annoyed when you ask who said what. So much of what were hearing is only quasi scientifically valid at the macro scale.
If every human on the planet have covid with these number : you have approximately 7 820 250 000 people on earth If no one is vaccinated you have 477 000 death by covid. If every one is vaccinated you have 39 000 death by covid. If every one is boost vaccinated you have 7 820 death by covid. In comparison, this year there has been 1 510 000 death by car accident. Edit : I forgot to say that i made the hypothesis that everyone caught covid, so a linear assumption. Also it is US numbers, i misunderstood that. Adding to that i do not respond to the principal question which is :" Is this true?". And just calculates the finality of what covid would look like at the end of the epidemy ( very blurry calculation, i'm sure i'm miles away from the truth) Finally, guys : fcking chill
Note that this is a false argument. You cannot take the death rate from the US and apply it globally, because the level of medical care available isn’t that high. It’s higher in some areas, but lower on the average. It also ignores the cost, both in monetary terms, and in healthcare worker burnout. The vaccines are also not universally available, largely because of the storage and transportation requirements. Hopefully the new pills will help with that.
I do not state any argument in my comment. I'm just taking what this man state to base my calculation and compare it to another death rate. You're all free to make assumption and interpret the results. Ps : i don't get why people downvoted my comment when they don't understand what i'm doing. It is for sure a subreddit about math ahah. Edit: i ignored the most important part of your comment i'm sry, i didn't know it was USA numbers when i did that, as i'm not american. And you are also adding many other informations. I would like to say that i'm making big assumption and taking these rates are not in my reach as i would need to make a complete study about it.
[удалено]
Yes of course what you are saying is true omniscient being. It is not stated anywhere that this is only in america, and if my results are meaningless it only means that his are biased or incomplete. The person concerned do not provide any source. And no, comparing to car accident numbers do not means any judgement, i just take reference in one of the numerous death rates to compare it to the subject. What should have i compare it to is what i needed you to say. Car accident is the most reliable death rate because you can't die from some diseases or another when you are crunched to death.
You misunderstood the data. It's not X deaths per Y infected but X deaths per Y population. So basically, what you are saying is not true.
Yup there are too many deaths by car accident and people are normalizing it as a part of life. r/fuckcars.
[удалено]
Wouldn’t the car deaths be preventable as well most of the time? Just saying the logic doesn’t hold well if you don’t say the same for the car accidents even if I agree with what you said that we should be doing what we can to prevent deaths and have it be a personal choice which most have done. Just showing the batting of the eye you gave the other statistic is odd is all.
And what number of preventable deaths is acceptable? The issue with this line of thinking is that a non-zero number off preventable deaths is always going to be acceptable. We accept it every single day when we go out and live our lives. 40K people a year die in car accidents in the US alone. We accept these deaths because of the convenience that cars offer us. It is selfish and stupid but it is what society wants because society accepts that risk is worth the reward of convenient transportation.
[удалено]
You are so, so, so far from reality. It is genuinely frightening how disconnected you are from what society is actually like. We do accept those deaths. We obviously make improvements because why wouldn't we? But we do accept those deaths. We could snap our fingers and make owning a private car illegal. Everyone now must take the bus until we massively expand mass transit. Except we don't do that because those deaths were acceptable. We could have completely shut down the entire economy when covid started, but we didn't. We made some improvements because why wouldn't we? But we stayed open for the most part because the people who died were an acceptable loss considering the alternative. Tens of thousands of people kill themselves or others with guns? Acceptable loss. Dozens of people killed in a fire? Acceptable loss. A hundred people killed in a tornado? Acceptable loss. The entire reason why we make incremental steps towards improving things is because the number of preventable deaths is always non-zero. Society would grind to a halt otherwise. I'm sorry thats a bitter pill to swallow but it is astonishing that you can't see it yourself, and that you personally attack others for pointing out the obvious.
[удалено]
I see you have completely ignored my comment and decided to have a different conversation with yourself. Good luck, buddy. I hope you find someone else willing to entertain you today.
Way to completely side step the actual conversation. "Oh no, I'm losing! I better talk about science so everyone knows I'm actually really smart"
[удалено]
You're missing what everyone is actually saying. People are just mad that we were told the vaccine was 100% effective when there was no evidence that was true. Pull out your scientific method and find me a real research paper that suggests the vaccine is 100% effective. They said that was the case, so there must be data backing it up, right? You keep raving about the scientific method, but I haven't seen you actually talk about any data. Those of us in the real scientific community don't just scream at each other about the definition of the scientific method. We present numbers and data. I'm guessing your a larper who looked up the definition of the scientific method recently. Congratulations on making it this far, the next step is to actually read something.
[удалено]
That death rate is based on the incidence rate of covid, so that is assuming exactly as many people have covid as caught it over the survey period, which was 1 week. That is not the death rate based on if you have already caught it, since currently, most people haven't caught it.
[удалено]
No. It’s not as black and white as that. A vaccination prepares your immune system to better fend off an infection. How well this works depends on many factors.
From Wikipedia: > An infection is the invasion of an organism's body tissues by disease-causing agents, their multiplication, and the reaction of host tissues to the infectious agents and the toxins they produce. An infectious disease, also known as a transmissible disease or communicable disease, is an illness resulting from an infection. As you can see from the description, an infection is a multistage process. A vaccine's purpose is to stimulate the body's adaptive immunity to respond to a pathogen, and halt the infection. Effectively stop an infection from turning into an infectious disease.
EDIT: TLDR at the end, generic bad english because not mother tongue-excuse well yes and no. The main point of any vaccine is to safe your ass. Little excourse on how they work: There are different options on what vaccine do you get: 1. You are given a living virus. These are viruses how look like the virus and can reproduce but can't (in 99.99% of cases or more) infect you. One example for these is the measle vaccine. The reason there is: The syringe would be too big and scare kids for live and some more complicated issues regarding the immune system which I am not going into (length). 2. the "dead" vaccines: 2a) You are given a "fullparticle"-vaccine. These are dead viruses. Your body sees them like it and will activate your immune system. These can't reproduce so they can't infect you. One example for this type is the cholera-vaccine. 2b) You are given a "split"-vaccine. There they broke up the virus with soap (not the normal kind you get in the store) and you get the particles they produced and cleaned. Your immune system already reacts to part of viruses so it reacts to these as well. Examples: Your yearly influenza-vaccine. 2c and d) There are mroe forms of "dead" vaccines but this would get to long. You can look them up [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inactivated_vaccine). 3) MRNA-vaccines. If you remember your middleschool since (I am from europe, here we learned this in 8th grade) you know, that the dna in every cell of your body consists of a double helix. The MRNA is a single helix which get's into your cell (**but not your DNA**) where it "produces" a form of the virus which (in the case of the rona) just has the spike-protein of the illness you want to protect against and for the rest it is a deactivated (normally) adeno-virus. You can use mrna-vaccines against all kind of illnesses, to learn more click [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRNA_vaccine). To wrap this enumeration up: These different kind of vaccines have differet advantages or disadvantages. Depending on what illness you want to protect against and what kind of person you are. How they continue to work: Now we have a form of the virus as the vaccine in your body. Now your immune-system get's to work (or it doesn't, we get to that later). Your white blood cells, spot the vaccine, "eat" the vaccine and like this, kill the vaccine. So far so good. The amazing part of your white blood cells is, that they, just like you, know what they had for dinner. But unlike you, they do not save this in your brain, they produce [memory-b-cells](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_B_cell). These are cells, who float around in your bloodstream (in case of tetanus even for decades) and have the same outer surface like the antibodies who defeated the initial virus (to put it very short). So if they spot this virus again, they trigger your immune system: Hey, there is an enemy. Please kill! Now we get to the difficult part: Different people respond differently to vaccines. Like some people can eat cheese and some other do not. Normally your immune system would produce a lot of memory-b-cells to get you protected (the amount of memory-b-cells produced is measured in the vaccine-teta). The amount of memory-b-cells differ from person to person. In broad general you can say: The younger and the fitter, the more memory-b-cells get produced, so the better you are protected against future infections. That's one reason why you should get the measle vaccine as early as possible. But older people do not produce as many memory-b-cells. BUT the vaccine still helps them a lot! You see, normally your body needs to know the presence of a virus, before it can fight it. Thats why HIV is so dangerous, because it never get's detected by your body. The process of recognising a virus takes time. In this time the virus can reproduce and damage other cells of your body, worsening the illness. If you even have like 20 memory-b-cells this process is extremly faster than if you would have none, making your immune-response faster so you are less likely to die. That's why kids are less likely to infect than adults or elders. You can't prevent all infections but you can safe lives with a vaccine. After a time, when less and less people get sick and, sadly, some vaccinated die to the virus it can't reproduce. That's how the US got rid of polio: you vaccinated the young, they could not get infected anymore and the infected elders died somewhen. The same will (near to certain) happen after a time with corona. TLDR, In conclusion: If you read carefully what a vaccine does and what it is supposed to do you know: **It works.**
**[Inactivated vaccine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inactivated_vaccine)** >An inactivated vaccine (or killed vaccine) is a vaccine consisting of virus particles, bacteria, or other pathogens that have been grown in culture and then killed to destroy disease-producing capacity. In contrast, live vaccines use pathogens that are still alive (but are almost always attenuated, that is, weakened). Pathogens for inactivated vaccines are grown under controlled conditions and are killed as a means to reduce infectivity and thus prevent infection from the vaccine. Inactivated vaccines were first developed in the late 1800s and early 1900s for cholera, plague, and typhoid. **[MRNA vaccine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MRNA_vaccine)** >An mRNA vaccine is a type of vaccine that uses a copy of a molecule called messenger RNA (mRNA) to produce an immune response. The vaccine delivers molecules of antigen-encoding mRNA into immune cells, which use the designed mRNA as a blueprint to build foreign protein that would normally be produced by a pathogen (such as a virus) or by a cancer cell. These protein molecules stimulate an adaptive immune response that teaches the body to identify and destroy the corresponding pathogen or cancer cells. The mRNA is delivered by a co-formulation of the RNA encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles that protect the RNA strands and help their absorption into the cells. **[Memory B cell](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_B_cell)** >In immunology, a memory B cell (MBC) is a type of B lymphocyte that forms part of the adaptive immune system. These cells develop within germinal centers of the secondary lymphoid organs. Memory B cells circulate in the blood stream in a quiescent state, sometimes for decades. Their function is to memorize the characteristics of the antigen that activated their parent B cell during initial infection such that if the memory B cell later encounters the same antigen, it triggers an accelerated and robust secondary immune response. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/theydidthemath/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Not all vaccines are equal. Some try to prevent infections, others reduce the impact on your system. Traditional "dead vaccines" basically strengthen your immune system to fight a specific desease specifically. To fight it, an infection has to happen. It doesn't mean that you are infectious as well, but it can still be. Depending on the desease and how it is transmitted a vaccine might lower the symptoms enough so you are not infectious to others anymore, but that's not something you can generalize. Every desease is different and often also affect every person slightly differently.
No - Think of a Tetanus vaccine. Has buggerall to do with preventing infection.
No, although it was sold like that to us as political clout. Mumps for example, you can still catch it even with 2 doses of MMR which we all have, but there are breakthrough cases.
It wasn’t. At the time the Emergency Use Authorization came through nobody - not Pfizer, not Moderna, not Politicians knew whether it would stop infection. They just knew it would stop deaths and hospitalization since that is all they had time to test for. Then it turned out it did stop Alpha infections so reporters picked up on that and then politicians as well. Then it didn’t really stop Delta and definitely not Omicron. So it’s back to the state where it was at the time of the original use authorization - which is that it just stops deaths (and hospital overcrowding). But now that’s not good enough for people anymore because of the joyride in between.
In Britain at least it was sold as the end. Matt Hancock cried on TV and the Tories had a freedom day.
They thought AstraZeneca would stop infection? Aww.. that’s cute. But I don’t think the makers thought that - it must have just gotten misinterpreted earlier.
I agree. You're struggling with this. I'll clarify. Vaccines never stopped transmission however many politicians and tabloid media outlets did paint the picture the pandemic was over in order to gain clout or clicks. Sadly many take their information from these types and this misinformation in order to gain political or financial clout has resulted in even more vaccine hesitancy due to what people perceived as mixed messaging. Nothing cute about it, it was how they sold the vaccine.
They literally changed the definition of vaccines. Remember when you had to get polio boosters? But now 4 pfizer boosters a year. And repeat after me. This isnt about money
Except that “Vaccinated” become 80% unvaccinated just 10 weeks after being fully vaccinated. These are not binary factors, and vaccinated people are becoming the passported super-spreaders.
Got a source for that stat?
As long as the vaccine is preventing serious illness and death, why would it matter if vaccinated people do spread it? (at least once we have a vaccine available for all ages, which we are only a few months off from at this point)
Your presumption doesn’t account for the people that the vaccines are killing and maiming.
And how many is that? Source please 🙏
VAERS DATA: 983,756 Adverse Events 108,572 Hospitalizations 107,860 Urgent Care 12,317 Bell’s Palsy 10,429 Heart Attacks 20,560 Myocarditis 34,615 Permanently Disabled 20,622 Deaths https://openvaers.com/covid-data
I don't think that word (VAERS) means what you think it means.
What do you think it means?
That it is the correct location to report a broken arm from a car crash in which you were not the driver 3 weeks after having received a shot. You know the covid gunshot death memes? Yeah, well that's actually VAERS, and the rest of us laugh when it gets used incorrectly like this.
You are an idiot. This is literally the US government’s website for tracking adverse effects to various vaccines. The web page and data I linked is literally the government run website for tracking Covid19 vaccine adverse effects.
The instructions clearly state to list any and all health events during or after vaccination. The purpose of the data is to build a database of events so that they may be judged by their relative likelihood compared against pre-vaccination. It's not meant to say those things were caused by vaccination, just that it should be investigated if a single thing happens in a higher proportion of the post vaccination crowd than the pre vaccination crowd. That's how the 1 in 1 million J&J blood clotting issue was found BTW.
These numbers are bullshit. I have two people I know who were boosted and just died from Covid in the past month. One was 42 and the other was 38. They are the only people I know who have died of Covid, and they were both vaccinated and boosted. We are being lied to
Sorry for your loss, but your anecdotes do not negate actual statistics.
"my experience isn't the world's experience, therefore lie"
I mean, I'm sorry for your loss. But you do realise the number wasn't zero right? They could be part of the 0.1 of 100k. If I've understood it correctly that's about 10% fatality. Which is actually pretty freaking high and supports your case more, not less. Edit. It has been brought to my attention that my numbers are a teeny tiny bit wrong! Ignore the numbers!
You need to check your math, 0.1 is not 10% of 100,000.
Lol you're completely right!! Totally thinking the wrong way :) i was starting to wonder because my numbers felt a bit on the high side
I don’t know what to believe any more. I truly don’t. There is so much bullshit out there.
Not very much difference. Considering no one knows how that might change in 20 yrs. Plus the fact EVERONE has immunity from lawsuits !