Jump to content

Safer for a healthy 32 year old: contracting COVID or getting the vaccine?


Recommended Posts

Just now, dimreepr said:

You follow logic like you hand out neg rep's, with no reason other than a childish need to be right...

Yeah, a childish need to be right, not at all a concern about my health, I'm just here to be argumentative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For anyone interested in debating this dispassionately (and if you're not and just want to hurl insults, please just go to some other thread), what about this:

At the 14 minute mark the guy in the video says 195 million people vaccinated annually for the flu, 20-30 deaths reported. So why have the COVID vaccines racked up 4k death reports after 160 million doses?

11 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Aren't we all? 

What makes you right?

Right about what??? What claim have I made?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Alfred001 said:

Don't try to follow logic, you're no good at it. You wrote a 7 point post and over half of them bore in no way on the discussion at hand lol

Only 7 ?

I missed one then because you are even lucky enough to still have a job, unlike all those 32 year olds whose jobs have been trashed by covid, or just never had one.

 

In the 1950s there was a saying about this attitude.

"I'm all right Jack"

There was even a film (sorry movie) about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, please. As the moderator said, if you want to argue the evidence dispassionately and in a civil manner, please engage, if you don't, please just go to some other thread. I'm not looking for personal insult matches. If that's your goal, just don't post, PLEASE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
On 5/7/2021 at 11:17 AM, Area54 said:

I'm not in a position to say if the neg rep you seemingly gave me was warranted. I'm sure the one to @MigL was not, so I've cancelled that out with a Like. Neg rep this post if it makes you feel better.

I hate to see someone else blamed for my neg rep.

Typically I find it is best to call someone out for trolling AFTER they've trolled, rather than assume they are a troll in disguise.

Not everyone has yet come to the firm conclusion that the vaccine for everyone is a no-brainer like most people on this site have. It might be best to let them finish their journey of education rather than insult them because they haven't already arrived.

I've recently found myself discussing the vaccine with people in their 20's and 30's who are hesitating because they don't know if the vaccine is worth the risk for them personally. Asking for a discussion around this aspect of the pandemic is something I might have pursued myself to fill out my overall understanding and help me in being persuasive. 

 

Edited by zapatos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alfred001 said:

At the 14 minute mark the guy in the video says 195 million people vaccinated annually for the flu, 20-30 deaths reported. So why have the COVID vaccines racked up 4k death reports after 160 million doses?

I can't edit my post for some reason, so I'll add here:

Well, turns out the doctor in the video is NOT a reliable source. Still, I'm curious about whether that particular claim checks out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
7 hours ago, Alfred001 said:

To revive this topic, here's data from VAERS on adverse events:

https://www.medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=CAT&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19

4k deaths, 3.8k life-threatening adverse events, 12k hospitalizations etc.

Now, I understand around 160 million people in the US have taken at least one dose. With that many vaccinations, these adverse events could be coincidental, but I want to hear comments. What do you guys think is the explanation? Have the deaths been investigated for possible causality? And so forth...

There is a useful article here about the care needed when interpreting raw numbers from VAERS: https://www.ibtimes.com/over-900-died-after-receiving-covid-19-vaccine-experts-say-data-misinterpreted-3153820

So the answer I think is no, they have not been investigated for possible causality, nor are there necessarily grounds for doing so. By the look of it, it may be the old post hoc ergo propter hoc trap. 

It seems quite hard to find the data you are looking for viz. the risk of fatal side effects of the vaccine in fit and healthy under 30yr olds. I have been able to find the relative risk due to the virus of death, hospitalisation by age bands in the US, but this does not filter out the fit and healthy from the others: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/investigations-discovery/hospitalization-death-by-age.html

I suspect that, for the cohort you are interested in, the main issues will be  (i) the risk to them of Long Covid from the virus, and (ii) the increased spreading of the virus in the population by this group if they are not vaccinated  - and hence the potential for further variants to arise. 

I also suspect we simply do not have data on all this, given that the disease has only been with us for 18 months and given the huge number of variables, e.g. there are more than 5 vaccines in widespread use, there are half a dozen variants of the virus, all with  their own characteristics, etc.  

The only further thing I can contribute is that, in the UK, people under 30 are recommended not to have the Astra/Zeneca vaccine but one of the others, due to the low but finite risk of blood clots. I would think the same applies to the Johnson & Johnson one, as that, I gather, uses similar technology.

So Pfizer and Moderna seem to be fine for younger people. And by being vaccinated you do your bit for society by stopping the spread and reducing the chance of further lockdowns due to new variants.  Plus you avoid the risk of long Covid, like my 25yr old nephew, and which I myself have had a brush with, as a fittish 65yr old.  

 

 

 

Edited by exchemist
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

"VAERS cannot prove that a vaccine caused a problem. Specifically, a report to VAERS does not mean that a vaccine caused an adverse event. But VAERS can give CDC and FDA important information. If it looks as though a vaccine might be causing a problem, FDA and CDC will investigate further and take action if needed."

"In some cases, multiple reports are submitted for the same adverse event."

"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."

These three quotes about the vaccine adverse events reporting system come from the CDC.  

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/ensuringsafety/monitoring/vaers/index.html

Politifact or some other fact-checking organization also had an article about this kind of erroneous interpretation, if I recall correctly.

The Economist magazine calculated an estimate of worldwide excess deaths, of 10 million people.  The CDC has a table broken down by age at this link.  https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/investigations-discovery/hospitalization-death-by-age.html

"Sample interpretation: Compared with 5—17-year-olds, the rate of death is 45 times higher in 30—39-year-olds and 8,700 times higher in 85+-year-olds."

Edited by BabcockHall
clarity and uniformity of font size
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, exchemist said:

There is a useful article here about the care needed when interpreting raw numbers from VAERS: https://www.ibtimes.com/over-900-died-after-receiving-covid-19-vaccine-experts-say-data-misinterpreted-3153820

I've been reading up on bacground rates, which is used as an argument to dismiss an association between the vaccines and specific adverse events and here's what bothers me about the argument:

The argument is, ok, let's calculate the expected rate of some adverse event (meaning how often does it happen in the general population), we calculate it and find that it's X and now let's see how many instances among the vaccinated and it's always waaaay less than the background rate and this is used to back up the idea that the vax isn't causing that adverse event.

My objection is, if the background rate is a well calculated, reliable figure, shouldn't the rate among the vaccinated be at least in the neighborhood rather than waaaaay lower?

EDIT:

I guess the answer to the question could be underreporting in the vaccinated group. People either figure the adverse event is not caused by the vax so they don't report or they simply don't bother reporting.

Edited by Alfred001
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Alfred001 said:

But I'm not right now and I work from home and frankly don't leave the house much and never without a mask, so until I'm 50 or my life circumstances change in such a way that I become a reasonably likely spreader I'm going to be concerned with healthy 32 year olds.

And that is precisely why we did not manage to stamp out the disease in the first place and why the chances of stamping it out is diminishing. I wished I could say I was surprised but I really am just disappointed.

In addition what has already been mentioned, one can get more details from state/provincial data as well from COVID-Net (USA). Looking at the cumulative values, about 20% of all recorded COVID-19 related hospitalizations in the US were folks below 40 years. 

Also, being fit is is not confer magic protection. There have been plenty of hospitalizations of folks who had no known comorbidities. The data in papers are pretty broad (as they are all over the world with different cohorts), but we can see among folks in the 40s without comorbidities about 15% develop severe symptoms, including death. 

I.e. while there is a correlation with worse outcomes in cases of certain risk factors, thinking that you are safe just because you have no (known) issues is very risk (and again, at minimum you would be likely become a spreader and incubator).

Also when it comes to background monitoring of effects, COVID-19 vaccines are administered as a much higher rate than other vaccines (influenza, for example is typically only as high as 40% among the target age group). So we do not have good apples to apples comparisons here.

However, there is clinical data from the trials and if we look at e.g. the Pfizer documents, about 0.6% of the vaccine group had at least one serious adverse event compared to 0.5% in the placebo group. 

Adverse effects in case of COVID-19 in the 30s age bracket (minimum hospitalization) is somewhere around 14-20%.

So if the question is not between two different vaccines but between vaccines and COVID-19 the answer is clear, even if one ignores the public health need of vaccinations (which at this point one really, really shouldn't). 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Alfred001 said:

I don't understand, first you say you don't know the numbers for AEs of COVID patients, then you say the math isn't hard. Was that a bluff, a joke, am I halucinating??? On a science forum, OF ALL PLACES, I can't believe I'm encountered with this kind of an attitude and I can't understand why you're so opposed to considering the evidence.

There’s nothing unreasonable in asking you to check on the numbers for something that you are questioning. Your response suggests you did not comprehend the post.

 

8 hours ago, Alfred001 said:

This was my point:

But the question here is what is the number of young, fit, healthy people who have died from COVID vs vaccine deaths (if there be any), not what is the number of total COVID deaths? I doubt many of those COVID deaths were people younger than 50 and with no comorbidities.

What is yours?

Wait, iNow says “I bet” about some prediction, and you eviscerate them for not having the actual data, but now you say “I doubt” without supporting data?

Hold yourself to at least the standard you ask of others. Hypocrisy isn’t a good look. 

 

8 hours ago, Alfred001 said:

But the question here is what is the number of young, fit, healthy people who have died from COVID vs vaccine deaths (if there be any), not what is the number of total COVID deaths? I doubt many of those COVID deaths were people younger than 50 and with no comorbidities.

US stats are available from the CDC

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/28/2021 at 5:47 PM, zapatos said:

I hate to see someone else blamed for my neg rep.

No problem at all. I'll transfer the blame to you.

 

On 5/28/2021 at 5:47 PM, zapatos said:

Typically I find it is best to call someone out for trolling AFTER they've trolled, rather than assume they are a troll in disguise.

I wasn't aware I had called anyone out as a troll. Would you elaborate?

 

On 5/28/2021 at 5:47 PM, zapatos said:

Not everyone has yet come to the firm conclusion that the vaccine for everyone is a no-brainer like most people on this site have. It might be best to let them finish their journey of education rather than insult them because they haven't already arrived.

Nor have I. I reached a provisional conclusion that the OP had a selfish attitude. I offered them two options, one hyperbole riddled instance where they proudly refused the vaccine and another where they did the socially responsible thing and took it. They (and you) appeared to miss that second option. I've reread my post several times and am comfortable that the option was clear unless one chose to be deflected by the hyperbole. Or, to put it another way, there was no insult.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
On 5/29/2021 at 1:38 AM, Alfred001 said:

Don't try to follow logic, you're no good at it. You wrote a 7 point post and over half of them bore in no way on the discussion at hand lol

The logic is that at this stage we have certain ways and methodologies to help avoid catching this virus...

[1] Hygene: Wash your hands with soap and water after using the bathroom and after being out and about.

[2] Social distancing: Keep as much as possible a 1.5 mtre  distance between you and others when out and about, particularly on public transport.

[3] Always wear a properly fitted face mask when advised to do so.

[4] Get vaccinated.

I use all four and have been totally vaccinated and follow the medical advice.

The virus has been pretty well controlled in Australia and New Zealand, although the occasional outbreak has occured, which then is controlled by various means including in the most severe circumstances, total lockdowns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For those who think getting a blood clot from the vaccine is bad, here is what you could get with blood clots from the real thing.

Quote

BBC

the virus had ravaged me from head (brain seizure) to toe (dropped foot). Coronavirus had blitzed my respiratory system. I had suffered blood clots and a massive pulmonary embolism in my lungs, plus severe Covid-19 pneumonia. Two-and-a-half stones in weight (16kg) had fallen away from me - mostly muscle - leaving me barely able to walk.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57569540

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.