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

Denmark not offering second Covid booster shot to healthy adults under 50

sst.dk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 417 posts

Re: Denmark not offering second Covid booster shot to healthy adults under 50

#401

Post by Markoff »

throwntoday wrote: post #265
noir_lord wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So 40% efficacy IF WELL MATCHED to virus That's a disingenuous reading of the thing you just quoted. It's 40% to 60% if well matched - assuming that that the range is evenly distributed then the middle point is 50% not 40% and reducing overall risk of flu by 50% is a good thing since flu is much more a killer of the old and young (usually - there have been exceptions, 1918 Flu (aka Spanish Flu) killed younger peopl…

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding but is it not 40-60% effective if well matched and 0% effective otherwise? Flu shot efficiacy is typically under 50% so if they guessed the wrong strains you happen to be exposed to that season it is totally worthless. There seems to be a common misconception that it will somehow help you even if they guessed the wrong ones but I'm not sure why that is so prevalent. If there are 5 viruses…

you are understanding it correctly, if they are well matched (if lucky) they have at best 40-60% efficacy, if they are NOT well matched (if not lucky) their efficacy is somewhere between 0-40%, simple as that, but these pro-vaxxers will ignore science if it doesn't suit their interest

Re: Denmark not offering second Covid booster shot to healthy adults under 50

#402

Post by FullStackAda »

EdwardDiego wrote: post #334
OrvalWintermute wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

You really need to define "significant". Also, for nearly all people affected, pericarditis and myocarditis adverse effects from vaccines were a) temporary and b) easily treatable. During the pandemic, ICUs were hammered as they desperately tried to save the lives of people with Covid. Do you genuinely believe that the vaccinations caused the same influx into intensive care? If you really think more young people were…

While pericarditis and myocarditis are not immediately fatal/morbid, we should not just hand wave it away. I got all my vac+booster, but I was better off knowing that there are some potential and serious side effects. Knowing about rare but fatal vaccine-induced immune thrombotic thrombocytopenia helped me to be more certain in my preference for the MRNA vaccine, even with myocarditis risks.

Re: Denmark not offering second Covid booster shot to healthy adults under 50

#403

Post by jonathanstrange »

988747 wrote: post #310
jonathanstrange wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what's bullshit about that? Did you expect French politicians to be all-knowing robots who can never be wrong? This sounds like a run-of-the-mill political debate that hopefully in the end was decided on the basis of an expert panel. (And no, of course, medical experts are also not infallible. I don't think we have investigated a disease and responded to it as fast as to this one ever before in the history of man…

>> Did you expect French politicians to be all-knowing robots who can never be wrong? I would expect government members making decisions to consult expert virologists/epidemiologists first. The fact that they can make two contradictory statements means that either they did not consult any experts, or they consulted different experts, which means there is no consensus among experts on the topic.

Incorrect logic. One of the French politicians could have consulted experts and the other one might not, for instance. That's not uncommon. In other countries that happened all the time, think about Donald Trump musing about injecting bleach to kill the virus. Personally, I'd vote for the politicians who follow expert advise in such matters.

Re: Denmark not offering second Covid booster shot to healthy adults under 50

#404

Post by Trouble_007 »

This Header ↑↑'Denmark not offering second Covid booster shot to healthy adults under 50'↑↑ is a misrepresentation.

The website page Header is "Vaccination against covid-19"

This will likely be fixed by:dang

per: >If the title contains a gratuitous number or number + adjective, we'd appreciate it if you'd crop it.

E.g. translate "10 Ways To Do X" to "How To Do X," and "14 Amazing Ys" to "Ys."

Exception: when the number is meaningful, e.g. "The 5 Platonic Solids."

>> Otherwise please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize.

HN Guidelines : https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Denmark not offering second Covid booster shot to healthy adults under 50

#405

Post by brigandish »

LadyCailin wrote: post #359
brigandish wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To protect or support one individual's rights is to protect or support everyone's individual rights. That is why, for example, prominent free speech activists will support the right of people they vehemently disagree with to voice their opinions, as it protects one's own right to voice opinions. How is that selfish? > If you would like to be selfish, you should do it in a very intelligent way. The stupid way to be se…

Individual rights do not trump collective rights in all cases. If I have the right to shoot a gun, that does not mean I have the right to shoot a gun while people are down range. This lack of nuance in your argument is absurd. The selfish part is suggesting that your individual rights trump everyone else’s rights. Specific individual rights can and do trump collective rights, but this is a conversation we have to hav…

> Individual rights do not trump collective rights in all cases.

I agree, though:

a) I didn't make that claim

b) You may as well just say "one right does not always trump another", which is just as true and more insightful

Which makes this part:

> This lack of nuance in your argument is absurd.

actually absurd. And this part:

> The selfish part is suggesting that your individual rights trump everyone else’s rights.

as I've already pointed out, is not something I claimed. This was my claim:

“To protect or support one individual's rights is to protect or support everyone's individual rights."

Perhaps you'd like to try again, and this time actually address me with some respect, not least by actually replying to what was written and not what is most convenient to you in the fantasy argument you've spilled out from your head.

Re: Denmark not offering second Covid booster shot to healthy adults under 50

#406

Post by disgruntledphd2 »

canoebuilder wrote: post #390
disgruntledphd2 wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I look forward to hearing your Nobel prize for Medicine speech in a number of years so.

Big, is bigger than small. The number of people who have died from the virus after shots were introduced, that were supposed to stop people from contracting the virus, let alone dying from it, is bigger than the smaller number of people who died from the virus before the shots were introduced. Do you find this an important data point? Do you think it is enough to win the prize? Do you want to co-author with me? Where…

Honestly I probably can't tell you my actual feelings without violating the rules here.

Suffice it to say that I don't think that chart means what you think it means.

Re: Denmark not offering second Covid booster shot to healthy adults under 50

#407

Post by upsidesinclude »

EdwardDiego wrote: post #328
upsidesinclude wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And how is that number derived? Do you have any idea how the calculations are performed to arrive at that number? I suggest you take some time to investigate. When we are talking about the US, in particular, the whole pandemic has been politicized

The hint is in the word "excess". If there's a pandemic, and concurrently the amount of deaths in a population increases, there's a strong argument for correlation. Excess deaths doesn't care what your cause of death was, it just compares deaths in period X to deaths in previous periods. > When we are talking about the US, in particular, the whole pandemic has been politicized Yeah, it was very sad to see the Republi…

You seem to want to keep your blinders on.

The population is growing and hence the number dying is also growing. The way you handle the data to determine what is considered 'excess' changes the value.

Actuarial science has been used to make that determination in more recent studies. Those studies suggest that the 'excess' number used by politicians and in news media is not accurate.

Actuarial science used by insurance companies now shows historic changes in occurrence of deaths, over this period of time, that are not caused by SarsCoV2.

Again, I suggest you investigate where the information comes from that you consider to support you base assumptions.

Re: Denmark not offering second Covid booster shot to healthy adults under 50

#408

Post by croes »

OrvalWintermute wrote: post #365
EdwardDiego wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, are the risks of Covid lower than the risks of the vaccine? And do you have evidence to back your implied assertion?

https://brownstone.org/articles/are-the-covid-mrna-vaccines-...

Are you sure they are a valid source?

They "proved" that mRNA don't prevent deaths at all https://brownstone.org/articles/have-people-been-given-the-w...

and are linked to the Great Barrington Declaration https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/9560...

Re: Denmark not offering second Covid booster shot to healthy adults under 50

#409

Post by thunky »

dragontamer wrote: post #399
thunky wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this is strictly about reducing the spread of Omicron / BA.5 and related substrains From cdc.gov: Updated COVID-19 boosters add Omicron BA.4 and BA.5 spike protein components to the current vaccine composition, helping to restore protection that has waned since previous vaccination by targeting variants that are more transmissible and immune-evading.

The original vaccine still has strong protective effects vs even BA.5 though. That's my point. The original vaccine may be "worse" than the BA.5-specific vaccine that came out last week. But its still doing its most important job (ie: keeping people out of the hospital and/or morgue). "Not getting sick" is still useful (and BA.5 specific vaccines should be great at that). But is kind of a secondary or even tertiary c…

I just don't see where the CDC or anyone else is saying that the new boosters are meant to prevent sickness but not to protect against hospitalization and death.

This is from fda.gov:

The updated COVID-19 vaccine boosters are designed to give you broad protection against COVID-19, including better protection against the Omicron variant.

COVID-19 vaccines can help protect against severe illness, hospitalization and death from COVID-19. As the virus changes and your immunity naturally decreases over time, you may lose some of that protection.

The updated (bivalent) booster vaccines are authorized to help provide better protection against COVID-19.

The reason most people are taking the booster, if I were to hazard a guess, is because they do not want to die or get severely ill. If the booster was only good for preventing minor sickness, well that changes the equation. I mean, the booster itself will likely make them feel sick anyway.

Maybe you're right that original vaccine still provides strong protection against severe illness and death, but it would be nice to hear that from the CDC and FDA as these boosters are rolled out so that those that are trying to decide whether or not to take it have a better understanding of the potential benefits or lack thereof.

Re: Denmark not offering second Covid booster shot to healthy adults under 50

#410

Post by wvenable »

WastingMyTime89 wrote: post #400
yosame wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two points: the booster wasn't barely tested, it was excessively tested. I don't think you realise how (comparitively) little testing goes into normal drug testing. Secondly, people need boosters because immunity wanes to both the vaccine and natural infections. In about a year, you will get just as sick again if you get a natural infection, so why wouldn't you get a booster that will give you mild discomfort for a d…

> Two points: the booster wasn't barely tested, it was excessively tested. I don't think you realise how (comparitively) little testing goes into normal drug testing. I’m sorry: you can’t call a vaccine tested for six months excessively tested. None of of the Covid vaccines were properly tested. It was fine. The urgency required it. This is not the case for the booster. > Secondly, people need boosters because immuni…

> I’m sorry: you can’t call a vaccine tested for six months excessively tested.

Why not? Your making an assumption based on a single variable: time. There are plenty of other variables that may be even more significant.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/how-did-we-develop...

https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/were-the-covid-19-vaccines...

Post reply on HN