Coronavirus
Out of context: Reply #5489
- Started
- Last post
- 6,399 Responses
- nb0
The second confirmation follows from the first and explains why, even given the power of vaccines, there are still some number of severe breakthrough cases and deaths. That 11-fold reduction of risk found in the national CDC study, for instance? Enormous, of course, but it is an average across the observed population as a whole and represents only the equivalent of the ­difference between an unvaccinated 86-year-old man and a 61-year-old one, all else being equal. According to an analysis of British data by the Financial Times, a vaccinated 80-year-old has about the same mortality risk as an unvaccinated 50-year-old, and an unvaccinated 30-year-old has a lower risk than a vaccinated 45-year-old. Even a 42-fold reduction, as was found in King County, would only be the rough equivalent of the difference between an unvaccinated 85-year-old woman and an unvaccinated 50-year-old — the sort of person who was very worried last year before the arrival of vaccines and who may this year be worrying many of those around them by not getting one.
To be clear: They should get one since doing so reduces disease transmission significantly, thereby limiting the future course of the disease, and because it would reduce their own risk of death from COVID by such a dramatic degree that it doesn’t even make sense to call it a degree. But it’s a sign of just how large the age skew is to begin with that getting vaccinated doesn’t deliver you into an entirely new category of pandemic safety — safer and more protected than anyone who hasn’t gotten vaccinated — but simply pushes you down the slope of mortality risk by the equivalent of a few decades.
On the other end of the age spectrum, the same skew is more comforting. Recent data from the U.K. illustrate the phenomenon neatly: unvaccinated children are safer from COVID-19 death than vaccinated adults of any age
FULL ARTICLE:
- Also don’t forget that it’s not just about deaths. We all would prefer to not get a serious casenb
- blasting the horn about relative risk based on age is finally getting through to some people...pr2
- "Vaccinated 95-year-old is still over a thousand times more at risk of death than an unvaccinated 15-year-old."...pr2
- "Which means we probably shouldn’t be giving those two groups the same advice about masks or social distancing or boosters."pr2
- Amen to that.pr2
- ^ no one is arguing that older people aren't more vulnerable. though have fun living in your imaginary victimhood of being surrounded by "dummies".inteliboy
- vaxxed 95yo vs un-unxxed 15 is still 1000x more vulnerable. your statement is a GROSS oversimplification.pr2
- "cloth masks of the kind typically worn by children offer very little protection, and the strongest effects of surgical masks were observed among the elderly."pr2
- lol @ pr2 marveling at the age differences. This is not new, we've known all along that it is far more dangerous for old people, and when I see people in theiryuekit
- 50s or older talk about the situation they have a different perspective on it.yuekit
- But if you're so focused on age then you can't ignore this part: the vaccine "pushes you down the slope of mortality risk by the equivalent of a few decades."yuekit
- So vaccine is very effective based on your own metric and seems like the best way out of the current shitshow.yuekit
- Using 95+ year-olds as your argument is ridiculous.nb
- I just keep wondering what is the takeaway from all this? There are almost a billion people over 60 in the world, 75 million in the USA alone...yuekit
- Unless you have a plan to "sandbox" them somewhere (maybe we can put them on an island?) what would you suggest doing differently?yuekit
- your 70yo mom has 1 in 20 chance of dying; you at 40yo 1 in 3000; your 5yo kid 1 in 100,000 and yet you use the same sled hammer approach to all.pr2
- repeating the same mantra "wear mask and get vaxxed" as if this solution was appropriate or working for all.pr2
- so the ball is really in your court. start concentrating on solutions that work for this landscape rather then repeating trite non-scientific slogans.pr2
- when you stop using sledgehammer, you might even get guys like me on your side.pr2
- lol...seriously though, what's the downside of this approach? Explain something that would end the pandemic faster than everyone getting vaccinated (if thatyuekit
- was possible). Reduce deaths, reduce transmission. reduce hospitalizations (which is not only old people). How is this bad?yuekit
- most covid hospitalizations in Israel are vaxxed older people. your vax-all approach gives a false sense of security.pr2
- you are reducing death and transmission only withing the first 6 months.pr2
- its not worth arguing with pr2. I would really like to discuss the merits of various approaches, however it doesn't seem he is interested in having a sane convorobotinc
- Insults aside, he cherry picks his science, and ignores all points that don't fit his point of view. For instance, he wont talk about the non lethal affectsrobotinc
- I said reduce, not eliminate. And USA is already giving booster shots, I'm sure other countries will follow.yuekit
- go ahead robo, argue with the article.pr2
- Let's say you only vaccinated old people and no one else. You will have hospitals filling up with middle aged and young people, the health system getsyuekit
- overwhelmed, even more people die, and then government will be forced to do lockdown again. I'm not really seeing a better alternative here...yuekit
- He doesn’t understand. Too stupid.monospaced
- Thanks for all the research!palimpsest
- 0-17 = 1% ends up in hospital;
18-49 = 3%; 50-64 = 9%;
65+ = 28%pr2 - it's the old people clogging up the system not everyone else.pr2
- Take a look here...
https://covid.cdc.go…yuekit - The age disparity has actually changed a lot at different points in the pandemic. Currently it's more like a three times difference between 65+ and 18-49.yuekit
- But what you're failing to take into account is that the vast majority of the population aren't senior citizens. So even if the hospitalization rate is lower..yuekit
- You're talking about a lower percentage of hundreds of millions of people as opposed to tens of millions. You're still going to have a huge number of patientsyuekit
- ...especially once they start taking your advice not to get vaccinated or take any precautions.yuekit
- specifically because "the vast majority of the population aren't senior citizens" we shouldn't use blanker approach. If you are old you might...pr2
- ...you might end up in hospital (clogging the system) or die, but if you are not - the chances of either happening are slim.pr2
- The data is in the link you've posted.pr2
- Haha OK I'm starting to think you're just trolling now, you just repeat the same thing again and again.yuekit
- que? you are the one posting links that prove everything i say.pr2
- maybe start interpreting the data ?pr2