Hacker News Reader

Comment by thepasswordis | Hacker News Reader

At this point what is the case for vaccine requirements?

* They aren't risk free (like we were all told initially)

* They don't prevent transmission (like we were all told initially)

Full disclosure: fully vaxxed, got it the very first day I was allowed to. Wouldn't change the decision. That said: man I really cannot get over the fact that it feels like public health officials are just straight up lying to us all at this point. That is something that I really do not like for several reasons. Not the least of which is that it will prevent people from trusting them in the future, and that will have negative consequences for everyone.

View on HN

>They don't prevent transmission (like we were all told initially)

They do prevent transmission to a certain extent.

How much is "to a certain extent"?

Has this been quantified? Because I recall Fauci saying it "100%" prevent hospitalizations and it turns out it was far, far less than 100%.

Unvaccinated 12-34 year-olds in Washington are

• 3 times more likely to get COVID-19 compared with fully vaccinated 12-34 year-olds.

• 12 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with fully vaccinated 12-34 year-olds.

Unvaccinated 35-64 year-olds are

• 4 times more likely to get COVID-19 compared with fully vaccinated 35-64 year-olds.

• 18 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with fully vaccinated 35-64 year-olds.

Unvaccinated 65+ year-olds are • 7 times more likely to get COVID-19 compared with fully vaccinated 65+ year-olds.

• 13 times more likely to be hospitalized with COVID-19 compared with fully vaccinated 65+ yearolds.

• 15 times more likely to die of COVID-19 compared with fully vaccinated 65+ year-olds.

https://www.doh.wa.gov/Portals/1/Documents/1600/coronavirus/...

When everything is multiplied by a fraction of a percent, the result is a bunch of small magnitudes overall. Like 12 times more likely to be hospitalized than fully vaccinated 12-34 year olds? What the latter's rate of hospitalization? Near 0, I assume?

This is all just weaponized statistics to generate fear. Or at least, vaccine sales.

I honestly don't have the strength for this discussion anymore, but it does make a pretty signifcant difference between seeing two thirty-somethings struggling for their lives vs. 20. I don't care about people like you anymore, I just want to protect the people that are actually important to me, which includes multiple people having to work in the ICU, and multiple people who might die if hospital capacities are full.

I've lost close friends and family to preventable circumstances, it hurt. I however did not try to justify imposing changes to people's behavior, autonomy, or freedom.

I'm against vaccine mandates and don't think the state should have the ability to impose so much on bodily autonomy, especially given that these booster shots might become a semi-regular thing for a couple of years. At the same time, I generally don't want to associate with unvaccinated people, and am happy that my employer has the same view.

I'm not obligated to treat people with respect that they don't deserve, and I think it is heartbreaking - but important - that hospital staff are doing their best to treat everyone the same despite the obvious negligence on the side of the unvaccinated. Autonomy is cool as long as you do not need to rely on others.

Looking at the linked document, the hospitalization rate for fully vaccinated 12-34 year olds is 2.5 per 100,000. For unvaccinated it's 30.4 per 100,000.

For 35-64 it's 8.2 vs 148.8 per 100,000.

For 65+ it's 29.2 vs 382.9 per 100,000.

Interesting that they grouped together 12-34 and 34-64 age groups for death statistics table, noting that "For tables showing hospitalizations by vaccination status and deaths by vaccination status, age groups are collapsed to protect privacy"

Does it mean that number of deaths throughout the year in 12-34 age group is so low that you can guess who is who?

He tells you that he distrusts a popular authority, so you cite a popular authority.

Actual studies are a very different thing from the government's TV doctor.

You are telling us that your authority is a better authority.

The point since the start was to prevent serious cases. In my country the only target value under consideration for intensifying/reducing measures is just ICU occupations in hospital, and this rapid increase of cases, even with lower risk of serious cases compared to delta, is seriously jeopardizing our hospitals (again)

> The point since the start was to prevent serious cases.

It was sold as preventing transmission:

It's official: Vaccinated people don't transmit COVID-19 https://fortune.com/2021/04/01/its-official-vaccinated-peopl...

> "Our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don't get sick, and that it's not just in the clinical trials but it's also in real-world data," CDC Director Dr. Rochelle Walensky told Rachel Maddow on Monday, March 29.

That's a fairly week post-hoc claim that was oversold in the media. The actual clinical, controlled studies weren't checking for stopping transmission.

> That's a fairly week post-hoc claim that was oversold in the media.

Besides CDC Director Walensky's claim that the vaccines would prevent transmission, another well-known and trusted figure named Tony Fauci made the same claim:

Masks off? Fauci confirms ‘extremely low’ risk of transmission, infection for vaccinated https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/dr-fauci-confirms-extreme...

> “The risk is extremely low of getting infected, of getting sick, or of transmitting it to anybody else, full stop,” says Dr. Fauci, explaining the new CDC mask guidance for fully vaccinated folks.

I admit I don't know the narrative in the US/CDC. For what I understood reading around on various international news networks the idea it would prevent transmission via reducing the viral charge to almost zero was related to the variant to which the current version of the vaccines were built for. The new variants (delta first and omicron in particular) require new updated and targeted vaccines to keep the viral charge so low to keep avoiding transmission.

But again, I am no virologist and my understanding is just a sum of what I read around.

> They don't prevent transmission (like we were all told initially)

No "real" public official I believe ever said this.

December 2020:

> Fauci Predicts U.S. Could See Signs Of Herd Immunity By Late March Or Early April

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/1...

> "I would say 50% would have to get vaccinated before you start to see an impact," Fauci said. "But I would say 75 to 85% would have to get vaccinated if you want to have that blanket of herd immunity."

Talking about herd immunity doesn't make sense unless the vaccine prevented transmission.

Then, May 2021:

> Masks off? Fauci confirms ‘extremely low’ risk of transmission, infection for vaccinated

https://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/dr-fauci-confirms-extreme...

Herd immunity != getting vaccinated means you can't ever transmit the virus to anyone else.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com