Delta Variant Infected Dozens at a Party – Except the Six Vaccinated People | Hacker News Reader

Delta Variant Infected Dozens at a Party – Except the Six Vaccinated People

iflscience.com

15 pointsaliasEli18 comments

Wouldn't a follow-up to the infected people at the party be in order? Sure, the attendees were infected but how crippling was the disease?

Stories like this have me worried the vaccines aren't as effective as I once believed. Why would I be reading cherry picked stories instead of studies if the vaccine was easily shown to be effective?

Now, that isn't to say they aren't effective, but this type of headline is more likely to make me a skeptic than anything. I cringe every time I see this kind of junk being fed to the public. Is this what we want the next generation to consider evidence?

It’s because it’s the kind of story Facebook groups want to share. Just like the ‘only the hairdresser customers that didn’t wear a mask got infected’ story of a few months ago. Never mind of course that the masks were supposed to be protecting not the wearer but the others.

Type "study delta variant vaccine" in google and you'll find dozen of them

The majority of mass media articles are bullshit, no matter the topic. Every 3 days we revolutionise nuclear reactors, lithium ion batteries, cure Alzheimer and double human life expectancy

People don't react to studies otherwise we wouldn't be fighting for them to get vaccinated, they react to stories, not facts

Journalists generally believe that readers will sooner relate to stories than to statistics. I am afraid that that is correct for large groups of readers.

> Why would I be reading cherry picked stories instead of studies if the vaccine was easily shown to be effective?

Infection rates drop rapidly in countries where a large part of the population is vaccinated. If you want to read studies you should consider other media.

You cringe, as you should.

But when you say empty-headed things like, “Stories like this have me worried the vaccines aren't as effective as I once believe”, now I cringe.

It’s a clickbait science website pandering to people who like anecdotes.

It should have zero bearing on your opinions of vaccine efficacy.

I understand. Your opinions probably didn’t change and you were shooting for a dramatic effect.

You just don’t like being manipulated with anecdotes, so you’ll respond in kind by manipulating people by playing the role of the person who is inversely influenced by anecdotes.

So which is it? Are you an empty-headed ninny who’s aware of anecdotes but is still inversely influenced by them?Or just another manipulative person playing a role?

BTW - I down voted the story.

I do not follow. The fact that the 6 vaccinated people did not get infected makes you less likely to believe the vaccines work?

Why?

Vaccines are not a religion. The effectiveness of the vaccine doesn’t change if someone believe it or not. The article doesn’t prove anything, because the sample size is negligible. This is just a fear mongering garbage article.

Indeed the overall health of the individuals is important, and the cause for concern is the known lower effectiveness of the mRNA vaccine on variants other than -19 - and that vaccinated people are getting it; based on everything I've read, it'll only be once we mass deploy Ivermectin as a preventative or at minimum distributed to take upon first symptoms until we abolish the virus; everyone taking preventatively would mean non-symptomatic carriers wouldn't be spreading blindly.

> The article doesn’t prove anything, because the sample size is negligible.

That would be true if the difference was smaller. With an effect this large it means something even with this small sample size.

Nothing conclusive, but the chances of this occuring by random chance are vanishingly small (though there could be something about the behavior of people that get vaccinated that makes them less likely to get infected, instead of the vaccines themselves).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com