Live data from Hacker News

Poll: Will you take the Covid vaccine?

news.ycombinator.com

871–880 of 911 posts

Re: Poll: Will you take the Covid vaccine?

#871
post #869
post #863

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We can't exactly know the risks from letting COVID-19 doing its thing unimpeded, either. Really? We've got a lot more data on COVID than we do on the vaccines.

> Really? We've got a lot more data on COVID than we do on the vaccines. Sure, but we don't know much about long-term morbidity tied to COVID infection, or exactly how many people it will get in the end. Even if I've got it all wrong--- the vaccine is riskier than our current data implies in the age 24-30 group, and fewer people from age 24-30 will get it because things burnt themselves out earlier-- what about the r…

> Sure, but we don't know much about long-term morbidity tied to COVID infection

I would say the same about the vaccines though. It seems like a lose/lose but one of which has a much greater sample.

Re: Poll: Will you take the Covid vaccine?

#872
post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, dunno if I should explain my reasoning but here goes... For the same reason I never got a rabies vaccine until having to work in close proximity with rabid animals. Up until that point, my chances of dying from rabies were pretty slim to none. Likewise, my chances of severe complications, death, or even experiencing any symptoms at all are slim to none. The at risk people around me will be likely vaccinated, so…

> There are potential side effects, these side effects are potentially long term and severely debilitating and despite being a low risk, it's still a higher risk for me than experiencing anything terrible from covid. Your risk perception is way off. Like orders of magnitude off. You're also assuming the risks of catching COVID are known and minor, but the risks of a vaccine are unknown and possibly off. In reality it…

>I'm willing to bet a good chunk of them felt just as safe as you.

Except, I don't care if I test postive or not. If I get sick enough i'll go to the hospital i'll deal with it the same as I would any other disease that puts me in the hosptial. Until then, i'll keep doing what i've doing wearing a mask when I need to and respectfully maintaining distance from people.

Re: Poll: Will you take the Covid vaccine?

#873

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean, "try"? You said > A more promising vaccine was developed in January 2020 and requires only -4C Which vaccine is this? The link you just posted talks about Moderna, which started trials in August.

OK, try this: https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/12/moderna-covid-19-vac... Designed by Jan 13, manufactured and first trial by mid-Feb. Also quote .. > as early as July the MIT Technology Review reported that a group of 70 scientists in the orbit of Harvard and MIT, including “celebrity geneticist” George Church, were taking a totally DIY nasal-spray vaccine,

Thank you for clarifying. It's unfortunate it took so long for their trials to start.

Re: Poll: Will you take the Covid vaccine?

#874

I'm surprised to see such a high percentage of "NO" responses. I'm genuinely curious to understand why

maybe they're environmentalists? seems like a deadly virus is good for global warming and habitat extinction. any other reasons?

I was always pro-vaccination, but this is the first time I see a vaccine developed so quickly, and like many others, it makes me uneasy.

If I'm not mistaken, some countries like France still remember such vaccines that went wrong. Russians have zero trust in their government and its Sputnik vaccine.

I will get the vaccine eventually, but I don't mind not being in front of the queue.

Re: Poll: Will you take the Covid vaccine?

#875

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are multiple strains. And in various parts of the world it's a differents strain that is common. I'm not telling anyone else to get it, I'm just stating I am going to wait and see if the problem is actually solved before acting like it.

But you did say it would be "useless" if there were different strains and now you are saying "there are multiple strains". I haven't seen anything about the current vaccines not being effective to what is already out there. If that is true then what you are saying is wrong, because the fact that the vaccines can treat what is now filling up hospitals and killing thousands per day means they are the opposite of useles…

> But you did say it would be "useless" if there were different strains and now you are saying "there are multiple strains".

Yea... That's what the experts are saying, you know the scientists. Are we not to believe them now? And the experts have said if it mutates alot that a vaccine could only ve good againist a certain amount for a certain amount of time. You see a vaccine could work againist strain 1-8 but then stop working on strain 9+.

> I haven't seen anything about the current vaccines not being effective to what is already out there. If that is true then what you are saying is wrong, because the fact that the vaccines can treat what is now filling up hospitals and killing thousands per day means they are the opposite of useless and in fact one of the most valuable things in existence right now.

Overall, this paragraph is moot because you failed to understand my original point, which I'll explain further down when responding to another line. But the fact you haven't heard anything about how a brand new vaccine just being rolled out this week. And I believe there were thoughts it wouldn't work againist the mink strain that Denmark had to cull it's entire mink population to stop.

> Even the regular flu shot was recommended as being more important this year so that there would be less spread and less to deal with.

Who said that? Last I read, they were expecting the flu to be pretty much non exsistant this year due to all the measures to stop corona stopping the flu. They seen this in the south and expect it to be true for the north.

> No, that isn't what you said. That might be what you are trying to claim now that you said something ridiculous.

Ok... I said something ridiculous? I repeated something the experts said. The flu vaccine is needed to be done every year, why? Because the virus mutates so much that it's only good for one year and then useless.

My original comment was merely there was another option. It didn't advocate for anything, didn't state any opinion, etc. You seemed to misunderstand a rather simple thing and on a massive scale.

You seem uninformed on this matter. The experts have been saying for a while, even if we get a vaccine (which we have) it may not to stop it as it may only work for a short period of time. And the fact they won't be able to vaccinate everyone in a timely fashion due to production limits, means corona could be around for decades.

And if you're going to carry on saying I said something come back with the quotes or please keep your thoughts to yourself.

Re: Poll: Will you take the Covid vaccine?

#876
post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

needs an edit for the assumption. also, half of the planet is already in Spring

Half the geography, maybe. Maybe 12% of the population (at most).

indeed, and if by geography you mean land mass, it's actually closer to 12% than half

Re: Poll: Will you take the Covid vaccine?

#879
post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, dunno if I should explain my reasoning but here goes... For the same reason I never got a rabies vaccine until having to work in close proximity with rabid animals. Up until that point, my chances of dying from rabies were pretty slim to none. Likewise, my chances of severe complications, death, or even experiencing any symptoms at all are slim to none. The at risk people around me will be likely vaccinated, so…

> There are potential side effects, these side effects are potentially long term and severely debilitating and despite being a low risk, it's still a higher risk for me than experiencing anything terrible from covid. Your risk perception is way off. Like orders of magnitude off. You're also assuming the risks of catching COVID are known and minor, but the risks of a vaccine are unknown and possibly off. In reality it…

The 1/2000 could be valid for your age group (we will need to check the real number of people who caught it be sure of the IFR) but is not necessary accurate for you (could be more or less).

In France, in Marseilles, they studied all people who died from covid in the hopsital during the first episode. They calculated the Charlson score for each patient. What they found is that very large majority of people who died have a low life expectancy and all expect 2 patients have one or more co-morbidities (cancer, diabetes, etc).

So if you are healthy then you real risk is below the average of the same age group.

Re: Poll: Will you take the Covid vaccine?

#880
post #635

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You needn't have bothered. You shared a highly speculative piece which seemed to not mention the Pfizer vaccine at all, which largely said the opposite of what you are saying (i.e. the Oxford vaccine reduced both symptomatic and asymptomatic infections) and had one quote talking about a "worst case scenario" in which that might not be true. And you shared it 8 times, which is 8 times too many.

I see 3, but even if it were 8 at some point, it'd just be 7 times too many at best. Saying 8 times is just shutting-up a perfectly valid comment.

My point was that it wasn't a perfectly valid comment.
Post reply on HN