dermdoc said:Goodbull_19 said:
Does this really belong on the religion and philosophy forum? Unless we are getting into the philosophy of our duty (or lack thereof) to compel others' actions for the common good of society... Or the philosophy of whether one has a societal duty to protect his neighbors... I struggle to understand why this video was posted on this forum.
This has become the safe haven of liberals.
Sad.
Yep. I just got my booster.Zobel said:
Vaccination is the best arrow in the quiver, including for omicron.
Weird, but thanks. Hope the new link is better.Howdy Dammit said:
You tiktok link shows your name. Not sure if that bothers you or not, just FYI
The data is not good enough to form conclusions, and what data there are is accessible in fits and starts.Zobel said:
Fortunately the pivotal phase 3 clinical trials are not the only data we have. We also have structured studies (test negative designs) that don't have the same flaws as casually using Our World In Data. The article is correct, but the broad conclusions are not.
Zobel said:
This seems to be too broad to be correct.
What's the problem with this paper, for example?
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-021-01548-7
The premise is kind of tails we win heads you lose. If it takes ~14 days for the vaccine to be effective, how else can you measure vaccine efficacy except after 14 days? And it's not arbitrary - in the 14 day window the vaccine and control group case growth match, and diverge after. The critique of the weakness is correct. The conclusion that we can't know anything isn't.
Here's Pfizer's release on their booster study. The window for vaccine effect was 7 days, not 14.
https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-detail/pfizer-and-biontech-announce-phase-3-trial-data-showing
ramblin_ag02 said:
Vaccines still seem to be helpful against Omicron, but we're honestly getting into influenza and flu shot territory with this strain, both with the effectiveness of vaccines and the severity of the virus. Really the only thing making Omicron worse than the flu on a broad scale is just how contagious it is, and the vaccine really doesn't seem to affect that very much. An omicron specific vaccine would likely prevent infection and transmission very well, but it looks like it won't be ready until March at the earliest. That will probably be too late to make any major difference.
ramblin_ag02 said:
I guess it depends on how long Omicron wants to hang around. It's rampant around our area, and I think the US will pretty much be done with Omicron by March, but it might really help in places that haven't been hit by it yet. If there are still any left by then
"90% in ICU are unvaccinated"
— Neil Ferguson's Calculator™ 🇨🇳 (@ProfessorFergy8) January 12, 2022
"There was no party at Downing Street"
"We have no intention to bring in vaccine passports"
"There are no plans to vaccinate children"
"They're 100% effective"
"15 million jabs to freedom"
"3 Weeks to flatten the curve"
...
Sigh...yes. First, it wasn't random. Second, there have been a lot of lies in the public health messaging around the vaccines, the virus, and the NPI's that have been both supported and shunned.ramblin_ag02 said:
I promise I'm not trying to single you out, but do you really feel that posting random twitter screencaps without comment is in any way helpful to the conversation we're having? Is there some point you want to make with this?
If true, this is bats**t crazy.
— Virál Myālgía MD, PhD (@contrarian4data) January 12, 2022
I see so many families who rely on RM houses to stay close to the hospital for frequent treatment and care.
This parent is already struggling with balancing disease risks against mRNA vaccination hematologic risks:https://t.co/1VgCh8F3C7 https://t.co/X5u6OU7t5E
Not touching the Downing Street stuff. I just expect hypocrisy and lies from politicians at this point. Everything else in your screencap was the legitimate, honest best advice at the time it was made. Our knowledge grew and the virus changed, so the response had to chance. That's not lying, that's being smart.Quote:
Sigh...yes. First, it wasn't random. Second, there have been a lot of lies in the public health messaging around the vaccines, the virus, and the NPI's that have been both supported and shunned.
Hope that helps!
Mostly due to the vaccines being a poor match for omicron. They aren't super good at preventing infection or spread of disease. Hard to tell if they prevent severe disease as omicron doesn't nearly as much severe disease as the prior strains.Duncan Idaho said:
Is your stance on mandates for omicron based on the efficacy of the current vaccines? Or the virulence of the strain?
Basically When the omicron specific vaccine cones out will your stance on a vaccine mandate shift back?
You've argued in a circle now. The premise of your bayesian post was that we can't measure efficacy outside of clinical trials. He says "this is WHY randomized controlled trials are used. you need to get all the bias out and equalized BEFORE you start. there is a reason that study design and enrollment randomization and balance are a whole separate subfield. once the data starts getting confounded in complex ways, you cannot untangle it. you're lost." That's before an accusation of more or less study design fraud, of course. But the point stands - and is correct. Outside of a study, you can't untangle the complexities of confounders in the data.Quote:
The initial studies looked solid, the observed impact does not match.
Several test-negative studies have shown vaccinations to have efficacy both against infection and severe disease. I linked one for you two posts ago, and I linked a recent one earlier for Omicron showing ~70% efficacy. Therefore we can conclude from the evidence that vaccinations reduce both the chance of infection and the likelihood of severe disease. There has been no study done that shows otherwise. If you have one, please share it.Quote:
In any case "taking the vax" has no benefit to anyone other than the user.
