101–110 of 179 posts
Chesterton's Fence strikes again
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Anticipating all the downvotes Please don't do this: "Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading" [1]. > flu vaccines are extremely ineffective They're not. They're not particularly effective for preventing flu in an individual. But at the group level, they have a clear and useful effect. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> They're not. They're not particularly effective for preventing flu in an individual. But at the group level, they have a clear and useful effect. This is my understanding. It basically would have marginally reduced the cost of the flu coming through, right? But thats not the impression that I would get from any of the discussion here. Am I wrong?
This the opposite of your understanding. The benefit to the individuals in a group from the whole group taking the vaccine is actually much larger than the benefit to an individual in the group of taking the vaccine solo.
You can read more about it here (and ask more questions!). https://claude.ai/share/8e8ffef7-ba33-44aa-a2a6-ca3b9be6d516
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it was Ebola instead of COVID-19, 1000% guaranteed that all those antivaxxers would have been banging down the doors to get a vaccine, and would have been raging if the government hadn't rushed it out. All their antivax outrage was because they didn't think they personally were going to die from COVID, and didn't want to help save anyone else's life. 2 million dead Americans later and people still complain that th…
> If it was Ebola instead of COVID-19, 1000% guaranteed that all those antivaxxers would have been banging down the doors to get a vaccine Sadly, no. There is a theory that Ebola cases are really just arsenic poisoning from the mines in the area. That’s the kind of narrative that would take hold realistically. I would also point out that prior to Bidens election it was mostly Democrats who were saying they weren’t go…
Nope, look at Figure 10 in this poll [0]. Asked about a hypothetical vaccine in the next ~2 months before the election was held, the answer "Yes, would want to get vaccinated" was 50% for Democrats and only 36% for Republicans.
Democrats may have become more confident after the election--for damn good reasons--but there was no flip or reversal.
[0] https://www.kff.org/health-information-trust/kff-health-trac...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Anticipating all the downvotes Please don't do this: "Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading" [1]. > flu vaccines are extremely ineffective They're not. They're not particularly effective for preventing flu in an individual. But at the group level, they have a clear and useful effect. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Willing to discuss it but I am definitely one who thinks it's a "scam", "mainstream" example articles on ineffectiveness: "Flu vaccines didn't work that well in the US, officials find (2026)" https://abc7chicago.com/post/flu-vaccines-didnt-work-us-offi... https://apnews.com/article/flu-season-cdc-subclade-k-vaccina... "Flu Vaccine Was Not Very Effective This Season, the C.D.C. Says (2022)" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.go…
This is especially true in the case of the flu because it has a relatively low R0 of approximately 1.3, meaning that without intervention/vaccines, each infected individual infects on average 1.3 other people. The vaccine just needs to be effective enough to drive the reproduction rate below 1 for the virus to die out.
We do not have good data on how effective flu vaccines are at neutralizing transmission. But for the sake of argument, let's take these relatively "bad" years for the flu where they prevented 40% of doctor's visits. Suppose that corresponds to merely preventing 40% of transmissions. The other 60% of transmissions still occur.
In that case is it even possible to drive R_eff (the effective reproduction rate of the virus) below 1? It turns out, yes! With an R0 of 1.3 and an effectiveness of only 40%, you stop the spread of the virus after vaccinating only 60% of people.
Details on the math: https://claude.ai/share/8e8ffef7-ba33-44aa-a2a6-ca3b9be6d516. You can also extend the conversation and ask more questions!
This administration might be the exception, but it is actually normal for the US military to be getting more vaccines than average, even when their effectiveness is suspect (some past flu vaccines) or side effects are moderate to severe (e.g. anthrax vaccines). Readiness - a matter of national security - tends to trump most concerns that, in civilian populations, might warrant greater choice and debate.
There is (was?) a mandatory list of vaccines all military had to receive upon enlisting.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality-based_community
> The aide said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.' [...] 'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. 'We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, c…
It's reality as it appears to be to a person on the outside. Not actual reality.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Anticipating all the downvotes Please don't do this: "Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading" [1]. > flu vaccines are extremely ineffective They're not. They're not particularly effective for preventing flu in an individual. But at the group level, they have a clear and useful effect. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
> They're not. They're not particularly effective for preventing flu in an individual. But at the group level, they have a clear and useful effect. This is my understanding. It basically would have marginally reduced the cost of the flu coming through, right? But thats not the impression that I would get from any of the discussion here. Am I wrong?
On your own impression? Probably not.
I’m not militant about getting the flu shot every year. I think I would be if I were in a company where my getting sick could get a friend killed.
I have a close friend who is an officer nearing twenty years. He has not had a tendency to criticize his job. However, he has been adamant that vaccines are incredibly important for the military and the policy changes have really angered him, specifically because of the damage it does to readiness.
The covid refusal also became a scam. If you refused then you couldnt be deployed. But it tool months to kick people out. So people who didnt want to deploy would refuse and then agree to get the shot at the last minute. So it kept them home for up to six months while thier buddies went overseas..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The covid refusal also became a scam. If you refused then you couldnt be deployed. But it tool months to kick people out. So people who didnt want to deploy would refuse and then agree to get the shot at the last minute. So it kept them home for up to six months while thier buddies went overseas..
The US has a volunteer army, if you don't want to do army things why be there in the first place?