Vaccine effectiveness and Herd Immunity

[HappyMan]

Let me guess, the correct conclusion is only what you want it be based on your opinion. If someone doesn't want the vaccine, what skin is off your back? Vaccinated people are still getting COVID which means it will still mutate. Possibly even more so to evade the vaccine. If you are so confident that the vaccine will save your life, why worry about the "idiots" that don't want it. The are only hurting themselves. What happened to my body, my choice? Who knows about the swine vaccine debacle in 1976? Do you know how many people have died in the US after taking the COVID vaccine in 2021? According to the VAERS it is approximately 5,000. The swine flu vaccine was pulled after 53 deaths.

Hawk, when you quoted this you cut the part where the medical experts were mentioned... common habit of vaccine skeptics.

 

[Hawk256]

Hawk, when you quoted this you cut the part where the medical experts were mentioned... common habit of vaccine skeptics.

What makes me a vaccine skeptic? Just because I point out that there are risks and the vaccine is not perfect? I have been vaccinated but it was my choice and I understood the risks for the vaccine I took.

 

[dafluff]

Moderation note:

We have restored some posts belonging to banned user @Mangotree for completeness of this thread and transparency. Several more conspiracy-oriented posts will remain deleted because we do not wish this forum to be a platform, however small, for misinformation. As always, the moderators reserve the right to remove posts at their discretion.

Also, the moderators are puzzled that, despite clearly displaying references to nazism in his profile, despite including a picture of Hitler as his avatar, despite clearly hinting he was a revisionist and posting utter bullshit easily debunked by basic research, @Mangotree managed to gather "likes" from a member of this forum.

End Moderation note

 

[dafluff]

Do you know how many people have died in the US after taking the COVID vaccine in 2021? According to the VAERS it is approximately 5,000.

For the umpteenth time, VAERS does not determine cause of death. It is a public database that LITERALLY ANYONE can fill out. It is a tool to gather information and was made so accessible in the interest of the highest safety, and it is borderline a crime that anti-vaxxers use this as a tool to spread misinformation.

VAERS accepts and analyzes reports of possible health problems—also called “adverse events”—after vaccination. As an early warning system, VAERS cannot prove that a vaccine caused a problem. Specifically, a report to VAERS does not mean that a vaccine caused an adverse event.

Limitations

• VAERS is a passive reporting system, meaning that reports about adverse events are not automatically collected. Instead someone who had or is aware of an adverse event following vaccination must file a report.
• VAERS reports are submitted by anyone and sometimes lack details or contain errors.
• VAERS data alone cannot determine if the vaccine caused the reported adverse event.
  
  This specific limitation has caused confusion about the publicly available data, specifically regarding the number of reported deaths. In the past there have been instances where people misinterpreted reports of death following vaccination as death caused by the vaccines; that is a mistake.
  
  VAERS accepts all reports of adverse events following vaccination without judging whether the vaccine caused the adverse health event. Some reports to VAERS might represent true vaccine reactions, and others might be coincidental adverse health events not related to vaccination at all.
  
  Generally, a causal relationship cannot be established using information from VAERS reports alone.
• The number of reports submitted to VAERS may increase in response to media attention and increased public awareness.
• It is not possible to use VAERS data to calculate how often an adverse event occurs in a population.

VAERS | Vaccine Safety | CDC

VAERS is the national vaccine safety monitoring system that accepts reports of adverse events after vaccination. The system can quickly detect potential safety issues with vaccines.

www.cdc.gov

 

[Hawk256]

For the umpteenth time, VAERS does not determine cause of death. It is a public database that LITERALLY ANYONE can fill out. It is a tool to gather information and was made so accessible in the interest of the highest safety, and it is borderline a crime that anti-vaxxers use this as a tool to spread misinformation.

So we are supposed to discount it completely? Providing false information to VAERS is a federal crime, not that it means much but it is. How many people do you believe have died from the COVID vaccines?

 

[dafluff]

So we are supposed to discount it completely? Providing false information to VAERS is a federal crime, not that it means much but it is. How many people do you believe have died from the COVID vaccines?

It's not a matter of discounting it completely, it is simply not the correct data to be using.

It's not even about falsifying data intentionally (although I'm sure some nutters are doing just that), but some people just die of natural causes around the time of their vaccination.

How many people do you believe, out of a subset of 187 million (current vaccinated population of the US), would die of natural causes in a short time period after getting the vaccination? Taking into account that the vaccinated population skews older as they received priority.

 

[Hawk256]

It's not a matter of discounting it completely, it is simply not the correct data to be using.

So what data should we be using? I don't like to speculate, I would prefer to have data and right now the VAERS is what we have. At least in the US.

 

[HappyMan]

Moderation note:

We have restored some posts belonging to banned user @Mangotree for completeness of this thread and transparency. Several more conspiracy-oriented posts will remain deleted because we do not wish this forum to be a platform, however small, for misinformation. As always, the moderators reserve the right to remove posts at their discretion.

Also, the moderators are puzzled that, despite clearly displaying references to nazism in his profile, despite including a picture of Hitler as his avatar, despite clearly hinting he was a revisionist and posting utter bullshit easily debunked by basic research, @Mangotree managed to gather "likes" from a member of this forum.

End Moderation note

To be fair, he didn't start with Hitler on the profile pic. I didn't notice it until after he stopped posting. Doubt anyone read the profile until he started calling people pomegranates.

So bizarre to have someone be a member for two years and then start popping off with ALL the crazy, all at once. No half measures or anything, the full monty.

 

[Ruserious]

Ive just been reading reddit and there is a thread about the CDC recommending masks again. The overwhelming response was that they did not believe people would comply but also that why should they have to comply when they are fully vaccinated and (to paraphrase) the anti vax people have caused the surges. A lot of comments suggesting they just let the anti vaxers get sick and face the consequences.

A lot of genuine hate for anti vaxers online there and i believe this will increase more and more as cases go up again in the US. I suspect more businesses will start blocking people not vaccinated. Even seen republicans start to shift there view points and finally encourage vaccination.

 

[dafluff]

So what data should we be using? I don't like to speculate, I would prefer to have data and right now the VAERS is what we have. At least in the US.

You don't like to speculate, but you use data that the CDC specifically said, in bold letters and multiple times, cannot determine if the vaccine caused the reported adverse event, to speculate on the safety of the vaccine.

The first paragraph on the VAERS HHS Guide to interpreting VAERS data:

When evaluating data from VAERS, it is important to note that for any reported event, no cause-and-effect relationship has been established. Reports of all possible associations between vaccines and adverse events (possible side effects) are filed in VAERS. Therefore, VAERS collects data on any adverse event following vaccination, be it coincidental or truly caused by a vaccine. The report of an adverse event to VAERS is not documentation that a vaccine caused the event.

VAERS - Guide to Interpreting VAERS Data

 

[HappyMan]

If someone doesn't want the vaccine, what skin is off your back? Vaccinated people are still getting COVID which means it will still mutate. Possibly even more so to evade the vaccine. If you are so confident that the vaccine will save your life, why worry about the "idiots" that don't want it. The are only hurting themselves.

Hawk, you must know that the vaccines all reduce infection rates, which reduces the rate at which the virus both spreads and mutates.

So, the "skin off my back" is: greater chance they will become infected and then infect myself and others (even if we are vaccinated), the greater chance that the people they infect will then infect others, the greater chance that the virus will mutate due to aforementioned greater rate of infection...

You want to take completely unverified data at face value (against the advice of the agency that compiles it) but disregard the well documented benefits of the vaccines and their knock on benefits? Why?

 

[Balifrog]

Lol. I'm not that clever, Bali, but even I can understand that the vaccines are saving lives. Even I can understand that they are the best solution that we currently have. Even I can understand that you don't need to pointlessly muddy the waters during an international health crisis.
Some knuckle heads don't get this. They treat the internet like their local pub, posting any random crap they find personally amusing, pretending that just being an ass provides some sort of democratic virtue to society. .

At this point, it is clear that the vaccines are the best way we have to overcome the pandemic. The actual professionals agree on this. It's a proven fact. So, anyone who doesn't agree that vaccines are the solution either: 1, actually does need it explained to them, since they don't seem to be able to reach the correct conclusion by themselves or with the help of readily available information resources or 2, understands that vaccines are the solution, but has some personal (selfish) reason for pretending to disagree. I prefer to think that most anti-vaxers are in group 1, since group 2 is populated almost entirely by assholes.

Again, you went on a long rant stating YOUR view is the only valid one, instead of commenting on the newspaper article.
That's the problem with zealots. They have no interest in discussing / debating anything, and only rehash day after day their "divine" view.
Worse, they cant even accept the notion of "different views" and "let's agree to disagree"
Don't waste bandwith with long posts which are just sermons, keep them for church on Sunday

 

[Hawk256]

You want to take completely unverified data at face value (against the advice of the agency that compiles it) but disregard the well documented benefits of the vaccines and their knock on benefits? Why?

I am taking the data we have. Where else could I look at this point? I have never said vaccines don't have a benefit. What I have said that has everyone so bent out of shape is that A) Vaccines have side effects (some major and deadly) B) Vaccines are not perfect and C) We don't know the long term effects. You would think that those points would be hard to argue against but yet here we are.

 

[HappyMan]

Again, you went on a long rant stating YOUR view is the only valid one, instead of commenting on the newspaper article.
That's the problem with zealots. They have no interest in discussing / debating anything, and only rehash day after day their "divine" view.
Worse, they cant even accept the notion of "different views" and "let's agree to disagree"
Don't waste bandwith with long posts which are just sermons, keep them for church on Sunday

Bali, if you want to see the actual research, google that shit. It's easily available. Ruserious already pointed out the central portion of the article you posted, as regards vaccine effectiveness.

The reason people take this tone (like they are talking to idiots or those who are wilfully ignorant) with people who spread doubts about the vaccine is because there is actual scientific proof out there. It's not about your or my personal opinion. Just start with the premise that you will believe the most reliable source of information and go from there. Do that, and you'll probably end up with the same scientifically determined "opinions" that most people have.

Repeatedly stating a proven fact does not make you a zealot. It makes you an idiot for talking to people who have no intention of listening.

 

[gemima]

I am taking the data we have. Where else could I look at this point? I have never said vaccines don't have a benefit. What I have said that has everyone so bent out of shape is that A) Vaccines have side effects (some major and deadly) B) Vaccines are not perfect and C) We don't know the long term effects. You would think that those points would be hard to argue against but yet here we are.

A: Vaccines have side effects - but so does COVID. And if you do the math the risk of having a vaccine is still a lot safer than potential covid disease side-effects across the population scale.
B: nothing is ever perfect. Vaccines or natural immunity or your immune system
C: The Chinese vaccines use long-established technology so if you are using the "long-term side effects" argument would they be more acceptable to you? In reality, mRNA vaccines have had a lot of research over the past 10 years, this just happens to be the first widespread use of them.
The fact is that a few weeks after having a vaccine there is nothing left of the shot and from a scientific point of view I don't understand people using this argument. It's like food we eat - it gets processed in the body.
Our bodies are pretty amazing at dealing with everyday insults to our immune system. It's challenged every breath you take, every meal/ drink/ every paper cut etc. Being concerned about the effects of a tiny little vaccine boggles my mind. The air I breathe daily in Jakarta is doing me a lot more harm than any vaccine ever will.

 

[HappyMan]

I am taking the data we have. Where else could I look at this point? I have never said vaccines don't have a benefit. What I have said that has everyone so bent out of shape is that A) Vaccines have side effects (some major and deadly) B) Vaccines are not perfect and C) We don't know the long term effects. You would think that those points would be hard to argue against but yet here we are.

I don't believe anyone has argued with the bolded bits... Prove me wrong.

What is bending me out of shape is that your message has a weight of 95% on points ABC and 5% on points DE (which I'll just add for you: D) vaccines are the best method of preventing the spread/mutation of the disease, E) vaccines are the best method of reducing harm from the infection to an individual). What does point B even mean? It's just negative sounding rubbish.

You are mucking about, muddying the waters, to nobody's benefit. Your response to the CDC's statement that VAERS data should not be used to determine... anything (by itself) was to just ignore that statement. You are ignoring your own sources. How does that make sense to you?

 

[Hawk256]

You are mucking about, muddying the waters, to nobody's benefit. Your response to the CDC's statement that VAERS data should not be used to determine... anything (by itself) was to just ignore that statement. You are ignoring your own sources. How does that make sense to you?

I am not mucking about or muddying the water in any way. Like I said before and will say again about VAERS, this is the only data we have. What other data can I use? How can you not understand point B? It's clear that a vaccine is not the perfect solution. Break though cases happen and some have still died. What is it you want from me? Why are my statements so trigging to you?

 

[Hawk256]

C: The Chinese vaccines use long-established technology so if you are using the "long-term side effects" argument would they be more acceptable to you?

As a matter of fact they are and that it is the route I chose to go for myself.

 

[HappyMan]

I am not mucking about or muddying the water in any way. Like I said before and will say again about VAERS, this is the only data we have. What other data can I use? How can you not understand point B? It's clear that a vaccine is not the perfect solution. Break though cases happen and some have still died. What is it you want from me? Why are my statements so trigging to you?

B) Your statement is not perfect.

 

[Balifrog]

Now, at least some positive news about the side effects .....

Women reporting ‘Pfizer boob job’, unexpected jab side-effect

Women who have had the Pfizer vaccine are reporting an unexpected side effect – claiming their breasts have grown bigger after having the jab.

www.news.com.au

And please don't accuse me of being conspirationist ! This is an Aussie news outlet reporting on something that happened in the great USA !
I mean, how more reliable and trustworthy could it be ?

Beat BBC and Straits Times by a mile ...