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

The Plague of the Poor

tabletmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 181 posts

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#81

Post by lossolo »

Apes wrote: post #68
cupofcoffee wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Odds of death from AstraZenaca are 1 in 1 million. Let's take odds of the event of having serious complications to be 1/100,000 just to be more skeptical. The odds that 5 people in a row have such serious side effect is 1/10^25. That is equivalent to tossing 83 coins in a row and getting all heads. Which is more likelier. 1/10^25 or that you have false information regarding this. : )

I'm pro vaccine, and am convinced that the benefits of the vaccine absolutely eclipse the risks, but your math is so horrendously wrong here. Delete this. Edit, here's some corrections: This isn't 5 people in a row who had issues, it's 5 people within 4 nodes of distance in their social network. 4 nodes of distance is a lot of people, probably around 200,000 - 2,000,000. The odds of having severe complications from t…

> probably around 200,000 - 2,000,000

There are around 200 strokes per 100 000 people per year [1].

And number of "heart issues" is even more, only deaths because of heart issues are around ~170 per 100k people per year.

Correlation is not causation.

[1] https://www.world-stroke.org/assets/downloads/WSO_Global_Str...

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#82

Post by tzs »

> In New York City for example, only 28% of the city’s Black residents aged 18 to 44 were vaccinated as of August 2021, when the city began paying residents $100 each to receive the vaccine. When that didn’t work, the city embraced a vaccine passport system that would exclude the majority of young Black New Yorkers from most indoor and civic activities, amounting to a de facto form of segregation.

In New York City it is now 40% of Black adults fully vaccinated, 49% at least 1 dose. Numbers for whites are 57% and 61%. (Latinos are 63% and 76%, Asians 89% and 91%).

For the people most at risk, those 65 and older, it is currently 57% fully vaccinated 60% at least one dose for Blacks. The numbers are 60% and 63% for whites, 64% and 67% for Latinos, and 82% and 87% for Asians.

Data: https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data-vaccines.p...

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#83

Post by cupofcoffee »

Apes wrote: post #68
cupofcoffee wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Odds of death from AstraZenaca are 1 in 1 million. Let's take odds of the event of having serious complications to be 1/100,000 just to be more skeptical. The odds that 5 people in a row have such serious side effect is 1/10^25. That is equivalent to tossing 83 coins in a row and getting all heads. Which is more likelier. 1/10^25 or that you have false information regarding this. : )

I'm pro vaccine, and am convinced that the benefits of the vaccine absolutely eclipse the risks, but your math is so horrendously wrong here. Delete this. Edit, here's some corrections: This isn't 5 people in a row who had issues, it's 5 people within 4 nodes of distance in their social network. 4 nodes of distance is a lot of people, probably around 200,000 - 2,000,000. The odds of having severe complications from t…

You are wrong about what is meant by a "social circle". They are people that he socializes with.

Definition of social circle is "A social circle is a group of socially interconnected people". I doubt anyone would complain about having a small social circle if it contained 2M people. :)

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#84

Post by protomyth »

ineptech wrote: post #76
protomyth wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is advocating for people to get infected, but many front line workers have already had COVID while they were doing their hero work. Since studies are now showing they have better immunity than those who have received a vaccination, it is foolish to have them vaccinate. If you've had Measles, you aren't required to get a vaccination, so there is a well established precedent. The politicalization of the vaccine…

> The politicalization of the vaccine is foolish and unscientific. I think you're confusing cause and effect here. The politicization of the vaccine is the reason the government is now pushing vaccine mandates and such, not a reaction to it. If Fox News had spent the last year telling its viewers that seat belts make you sterile, the government would be raising fines and ramping up enforcement and generally adopting…

Both sides are to blame. I stand by my statement. Any politics directed at vaccines is foolish and unscientific. People should acknowledge that mistakes were made by the government and officials with their foolish statements. CNN and Fox are equal partners in the hysteria.

People need to remember the goal is to eliminate the threat, not get everyone vaccinated. These are two different things. Ignoring post-COVID immunity studies just makes officials look unscientific and doesn't contribute to the final goal. Being unscientific puts you at the same level as hucksters. Getting rid of health care workers that risked it all and put a huge strain on their families is just plain dumb and ungrateful. The idea they don't know the whole story is baffling.

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#85

Post by protomyth »

faster wrote: post #63
p49k wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Antibody tests exist. I’m not in any way antivax, but it makes no sense why people who already had COVID should be required to receive a vaccine instead of just proving they have antibodies. This kind of illogical policy gives fuel to antivaxers.

What's the difference in cost to the organization giving the shots or the antibody tests? My expectation is that they're about the same. If that's true, it's easier and more certain to just require vaccination. Also, this article provides some arguments based more on biology. https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/10/prior-infection-vs-v...

So if it costs a company the same, then workers can take medicine they don't need that has a risk to save someone a buck? How about we stick with science instead of profits?

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#86

Post by nradov »

Aeolun wrote: post #11

I’m willing to read these articles, and even sort of willing to consider other viewpoints, but this is mostly garbage. What stands out is the authors’ favor of natural immunity being better than vaccination. It may well be, but it has this small caveat that you need to have had the virus to become naturally immune. E.g. you need to take that 1-2% of not surviving entirely, and if too many people take that chance at t…

The CDC estimated the overall US infection fatality rate at 0.6%, not 1-2%. But I would still encourage everyone to get vaccinated if they can.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burd...

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#87

Post by nradov »

generj wrote: post #34
robomartin wrote: post #20

Last night I had a few interesting conversations with a range of people at a birthday party. The group I was speaking with were mostly in the sciences and technology with a couple of high school teachers and a college professor in the mix. The perspectives were interesting. I won't get into all the details here. I'll just say that the well-reasoned opinions spanned a range. The teachers had legitimate concerns about…

And sometimes education comes from the rest of society saying “you are welcome to your beliefs, but not welcome to pollute my air at our workplace until you aren’t a danger to me.” We set the precedent for forced vaccination nearly a century ago. There is no slippery slope here, or at least if there is we already slid down the hill and are resting comfortably on flat ground.

I encourage everyone to get vaccinated if they can, but your comment makes no sense and presents a false choice. Vaccinated people can also pollute the air at your workspace and present a danger to you. There is only a limited and temporary reduction in risk of transmission.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02689-y

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#88

Post by cupofcoffee »

throwawayay02 wrote: post #66
cupofcoffee wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Odds of death from AstraZenaca are 1 in 1 million. Let's take odds of the event of having serious complications to be 1/100,000 just to be more skeptical. The odds that 5 people in a row have such serious side effect is 1/10^25. That is equivalent to tossing 83 coins in a row and getting all heads. Which is more likelier. 1/10^25 or that you have false information regarding this. : )

Your math is wrong, see the birthday paradox. But still, unlikely.

It's a back of the envelope calculation. I've a strong intuition that the precise answer isn't too far off.

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#89

Post by Apes »

cupofcoffee wrote: post #83
Apes wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pro vaccine, and am convinced that the benefits of the vaccine absolutely eclipse the risks, but your math is so horrendously wrong here. Delete this. Edit, here's some corrections: This isn't 5 people in a row who had issues, it's 5 people within 4 nodes of distance in their social network. 4 nodes of distance is a lot of people, probably around 200,000 - 2,000,000. The odds of having severe complications from t…

You are wrong about what is meant by a "social circle". They are people that he socializes with. Definition of social circle is "A social circle is a group of socially interconnected people". I doubt anyone would complain about having a small social circle if it contained 2M people. :)

No.

> My daughter's bf's friends mom

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#90

Post by [deleted] »

cupofcoffee wrote: post #83
Apes wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pro vaccine, and am convinced that the benefits of the vaccine absolutely eclipse the risks, but your math is so horrendously wrong here. Delete this. Edit, here's some corrections: This isn't 5 people in a row who had issues, it's 5 people within 4 nodes of distance in their social network. 4 nodes of distance is a lot of people, probably around 200,000 - 2,000,000. The odds of having severe complications from t…

You are wrong about what is meant by a "social circle". They are people that he socializes with. Definition of social circle is "A social circle is a group of socially interconnected people". I doubt anyone would complain about having a small social circle if it contained 2M people. :)

[deleted]
Post reply on HN