Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Pfizer board member suggests end to mask, vaccine mandates

ntdca.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

831–840 of 1001 posts

Re: Pfizer board member suggests end to mask, vaccine mandates

#831

Post by jeeeb »

timr wrote: post #767
jeeeb wrote: post #730

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is the actual study: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm?s_cid=mm... Importantly it doesn’t account for the effect of boosters and looks at pre-omicron data. That noted the best protection seems to be had by a combination of vaccination and prior infection, which is perhaps unsurprising. Also other CDC studies suggest that natural immunity declines quicker than vaccine induced immunity ( https://…

> Importantly it doesn’t account for the effect of boosters and looks at pre-omicron data. Don't just read the summary. Look at figure 1: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7104e1.htm#F1_down There are unvaccinated, uninfected people...and then there is everyone else . Once you have been infected or vaccinated, the difference between is so small as to be academic. And as the authors note, the importance of natu…

> There are unvaccinated, uninfected people...and then there is everyone else.

This is shifting the goal. The disclaimers I cited come directly from the study and are highly relevant when comparing the effect of natural immunity vs vaccination.

> No. That's not what that study said. First, it followed symptomatic infection, not severe illness.

This doesn’t contradict what I said. The study gives evidence that natural immunity (to symptomatic infection) declines more quickly than vaccine induced immunity.

> Also, methodologically, the study you're citing was bad. It only gave credit for natural immunity to those people with confirmed infections, which was/is an underestimate, and made vaccines look more effective than they are.

One, the same effect would also have been present in the natural immunity group, as people may have been reinfected since their initial confirmed infection.

Two, this is largely irrelevant to the point I was making.

The statistical evidence suggests that even if you have had a previous confirmed infection, you’re still better off getting vaccinated.

Re: Pfizer board member suggests end to mask, vaccine mandates

#832

Post by vanusa »

caditinpiscinam wrote: post #810
vanusa wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having anyone's freedoms dependent on available hospital capacity is a terrible way to run a society. So is letting people die from otherwise treatable injuries and infections so someone else can enjoy their "freedom" to ... you know what I'm driving at.

I think it's less about freedoms and more about rights Is it a person's right to fly on an airplane without wearing a mask? I'd don't think so Is it a person's right to decide what medicines they take? I'd say yes, definitely You can take away freedoms in the interest of others, but not rights, in my opinion. The policies I've seen are pretty fuzzy on this distinction

Is it a person's right to decide what medicines they take? I'd say yes, definitely.

Note that the mandates in question (those in Quebec) don't force you to get the vaccine.

They just say that if you don't, you no longer have an inalienable "right" to shop at Walmart.

Re: Pfizer board member suggests end to mask, vaccine mandates

#833

Post by rkk3 »

wk_end wrote: post #296
akomtu wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same reasoning can be applied to obesity.

...only if (and if only!) obesity were a problem that could be solved by a couple of quick, free shots at the local pharmacy.

"free shots"... hah those shots cost Tens of billions of dollars if not more. It was a totally worthwhile investment to make (we probably should have invested more in it) - but lets not pretend like there is nothing we could do about obesity if threw 100 Billion at the problem.

Re: Pfizer board member suggests end to mask, vaccine mandates

#834

Post by ipaddr »

mlac wrote: post #680
ipaddr wrote: post #666

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Data has been showing 80/20 vaxed/non vaxed hospitalizations for this new variant. How does that change your worldview?

Source? That might mean we’re approaching herd immunity and critical mass for vaccinated people in the population, which would be fantastic.

https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data#casesByVaccinationStatus

Re: Pfizer board member suggests end to mask, vaccine mandates

#835

Post by evandale »

ipaddr wrote: post #704
namdnay wrote: post #676

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t it just simpler to vaccinate everyone and be done with it? Instead of tracking who already had an infection etc. Just like we do for all the other vaccines we get. I don’t understand why it’s so controversial. The upside is huge and there is literally no downside.

There is no downside to force vaccinating a population with something new that doesn't expect the first long term study to be in until 2024? How could that be controversial? A woman has a right to say my body my choice. You think removing that choice is without controversy?

>A woman has a right to say my body my choice. You think removing that choice is without controversy?

Choosing to terminate a pregnancy is not comparable to choosing to spread a highly contagious disease.

Re: Pfizer board member suggests end to mask, vaccine mandates

#836

Post by henrikschroder »

MatteoFrigo wrote: post #820
henrikschroder wrote: post #802

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, this is a prime example of bad data being worse than no data. In the UK, for months now, the rate of infection has been higher among the vaccinated cohort than among the unvaccinated cohort, for most age groups. [1] The antivaxxers are of course pointing to this data and claiming it's evidence that the vaccines make you more likely to get infected, and therefore the tinfoil hats were right all along. But what's…

Either way, there is no point in vaccinating the unvaccinated cohort that you mentioned. If you are right, most of them have natural immunity and the data proves that this is already better than the vaccine, so what's the point? They are already doing ok, and vaccination would then move them to the vaccinated column and count their immunity as a success for the vaccine, which is unscientific and dishonest.

I agree.

Many places around the world have vaccine passes that don't care about natural immunity, which is incredibly unscientific and dishonest. If the case rate is higher among the vaccinated, you're statistically less protected at a venue that checks the vaccine pass. It's counterproductive and ought to be abolished immediately.

Vaccine mandates that ignore natural immunity are equally wrong. Many hospitals in the US fired un-vaccinated healthcare personnel without regarding natural immunity, which led to staff shortages, which combined with this Omicron surge means hospitals are so desperate for staff, that many are allowing people to work with an active corona infection, as long as they are vaccinated. We're preferring actually infected people over un-infected, but un-vaccinated people. In a healthcare setting.

And the people responsible for this is claiming to "follow science".

It's absurd.

The only measurement that should matter is your immunity level, regardless of how you acquired it.

Re: Pfizer board member suggests end to mask, vaccine mandates

#837

Post by [deleted] »

tynpeddler wrote: post #272
tzs wrote: post #30

Something from the NYT mailing list yesterday: > The Covid vaccines are remarkably effective at preventing serious illness. If you’re vaccinated, your chances of getting severely sick are extremely low. Even among people 65 and older, the combination of the vaccines’ effectiveness and the Omicron variant’s relative mildness means that Covid now appears to present less danger than a normal flu. > For the unvaccinated,…

The vaxxed and unvaxxed populations both rely on the same medical infrastructure. So when the unvaxxed fill hospitals to recover or die, they are consuming scarce resources that are required by the population at large for other things like birth, cancer, surgery, etc. Sadly, we don't have an ethical way to let all the unvaxxed get covid without impacting the medical system negatively for the rest of us.

[deleted]

Re: Pfizer board member suggests end to mask, vaccine mandates

#838

Post by anonfornoreason »

mlac wrote: post #675
dahfizz wrote: post #654

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because the data shows they don't matter. Source? Because the CDC says otherwise. > In the first full week of October, vaccinated New Yorkers with a prior Covid-19 case were 19.8 times less likely to catch the virus than their unvaccinated and uninfected peers, whereas people who were unvaccinated but previously infected were 14.7 times less likely, and vaccinated but uninfected New Yorkers were just 4.5 times less…

There is a behavioral component. Is that because people who have caught it are more likely to take precautions against catching it again? Those who were vaccinated but previously uninfected may have had a “it can’t happen to me and if it does, I’m vaccinated” attitude. I’d expect unvaccinated people to be in the bucket with covid deniers and anti-maskers, which would have the highest base rate of COVID.

I doubt it. I caught it in Aug/September during the delta wave and am way less careful now than I was before. Not saying this is true or advocating a position here, but I feel like the pandemic is over for me, I don't have to worry about any current variants, etc. The people I talk to who have also developed natural immunity have the same sort of feeling.

Re: Pfizer board member suggests end to mask, vaccine mandates

#839

Post by sharken »

bonzini wrote: post #614
nu11ptr wrote: post #571

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apologies in advance for getting on my soapbox, but this has been on my mind for a while. The way in which the media has gotten everyone to say "the unvaccinated" is a 'disease' against basic science (not even getting into the divisive nature of this). I would go as far as saying if you read any paper, study, or other that refers to the "unvaccinated" as a single cohort, you are reading vaccine propaganda, not scienc…

> why are they so adamant to vaccinate those with prior infection Because the data shows they don't matter. This is the same thing as deaths due to covid vs. deaths while positive to covid. Sure some people might have been miscounted as covid deaths but actually died due to cancer/car accident/whatever. Despite this the excess deaths over the past two years is much higher than the number of covid deaths; thus showing…

Saying that some people might have been miscounted is pushing an agenda that is not pro science I'd say.

In London this number has been as high as 40%, so it's highly relevant to present accurate numbers.

But the only place science has won is in producing a good vaccine, the rest has been a shit show of crazy decisions and a hunt for those who didn't want to get vaccinated right away.

I sincerely hope sanity returns.

Re: Pfizer board member suggests end to mask, vaccine mandates

#840

Post by spookthesunset »

jstarfish wrote: post #776
hutzlibu wrote: post #613

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a hard problem, because you do not only need beds, but also humans tending to the patients. And while you can just build another hospital if you have the cash - you cannot just build another doctor, if you need one.

> you cannot just build another doctor, if you need one. So take your pool of existing NPs and give them a temporary promotion.

Or anything like that. It's an emergency, right? So what about people in medical school who have yet to be licensed? Grab them and have them do stuff. Retired doctors? Go get them. Whatever. It's an emergency. Get creative. You don't need things perfect. You need things to work. It's an emergency. Every second you aren't focused on solving overwhelmed healthcare is a second you are stealing from people through lockdowns.

I really don't understand why people are completely incapable of using their imagination to solve "hospitals over capacity". The only thing I can think of is perhaps hospitals have never actually been overwhelmed because if they were... we'd have fixed the problem already.

Post reply on HN