The Vaccine

[scbruet]

Yeah.....the problem is the risk analysis is being done with false data.

 

[AZMark]

Perception is important. A .05% chance of dying from COVID. It is what it is, statistically. You might think that's high, I think it's low.

More reading:

Estimating everyday risk: Subjective judgments are related to objective risk, mapping of numerical magnitudes and previous experience

We aimed to investigate individual differences that associate with peoples’ acute risk perception for activities such as walking and giving birth, including objective risk and the mapping of numerical magnitudes. The Amazon Mechanical Turk platform ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I’m not saying it’s high or low. I’m saying including 100% subjective items in your analysis doesn’t make any sense.

Now of course you would include them in the final decision you make, but if the math of your expected infection probability x expected rate of severe negative outcome is not lower than your expected rate of a severe negative outcome from the vaccine and you still choose to not get the vaccine then you aren’t really basing it on a risk analysis. It’s then based on fear, religion, politics, something other than pure risk.

 

[scbruet]

Perception is important. A .05% chance of dying from COVID. It is what it is, statistically. You might think that's high, I think it's low.

More reading:

Estimating everyday risk: Subjective judgments are related to objective risk, mapping of numerical magnitudes and previous experience

We aimed to investigate individual differences that associate with peoples’ acute risk perception for activities such as walking and giving birth, including objective risk and the mapping of numerical magnitudes. The Amazon Mechanical Turk platform ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

You can thank the vaccines for that .05% rate though.

 

[Adrian @ JB Solutions]

I’m not saying it’s high or low. I’m saying including 100% subjective items in your analysis doesn’t make any sense.

Now of course you would include them in the final decision you make, but if the math of your expected infection probability x expected rate of severe negative outcome is not lower than your expected rate of a severe negative outcome from the vaccine and you still choose to not get the vaccine then you aren’t really basing it on a risk analysis. It’s then based on fear, religion, politics, something other than pure risk.

Or you base it on unknown factor X. (In this case, long-term affects), and also previous infection. Realistically no one is crunching numbers like this though.

 

[Adrian @ JB Solutions]

You can thank the vaccines for that .05% rate though.

I would bet the rate is much lower than .05%. This has been around well before it was even identified (March). Also tons of people that didn't get tested but just stayed at home.

 

[Julian]

Perception is important. A .05% chance of dying from COVID. It is what it is, statistically. You might think that's high, I think it's low.

More reading:

Estimating everyday risk: Subjective judgments are related to objective risk, mapping of numerical magnitudes and previous experience

We aimed to investigate individual differences that associate with peoples’ acute risk perception for activities such as walking and giving birth, including objective risk and the mapping of numerical magnitudes. The Amazon Mechanical Turk platform ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Yeah.....the problem is the risk analysis is being done with false data.

Yup...combine these two posts.....where did the .005% come from? Thus far we have 645,000 dead, plus a solid understanding that, from excess death data, that is probably a 20% undercount. So 645K*1.2=774,000. Population of the US=331,449,000. So 774000/331,449,000= 0.2335% chance of dying or 2.3 per 1000.

Even if you just take the 645K it is 1.94 per thousand (so not much different).

What is interesting is how data can be manipulated/represented.

@AZMark - good points - which is why the swiss cheese analogy I posted earlier is helpful. Each slice being each persons situation and relevant measures taken, or able to be taken.

 

[Adrian @ JB Solutions]

And this is why we don't believe anything. They claim it is partly false, but essentially say its true.

Fact check: Viral video misleads on individuals' risk of COVID-19 transmission, death

The likelihood that someone will get COVID-19 and die depends on many individual factors.

www.usatoday.com

"Based on our research, we rate PARTLY FALSE the claim that a given person has a 2.4% chance of getting COVID and a 0.05% chance of dying from it. These figures are roughly correct on a global scale, but at an individual level the risk varies hugely, experts say. The chances of getting sick or dying from COVID-19 vary based on individual factors like age, health history and location. "

 

[scbruet]

I would bet the rate is much lower than .05%. This has been around well before it was even identified (March). Also tons of people that didn't get tested but just stayed at home.

Agree.... it's likely much lower than .05% now, thanks to the vaccines.

 

[AZMark]

Or you base it on unknown factor X. (In this case, long-term affects), and also previous infection. Realistically no one is crunching numbers like this though.

True and true.

There are many pretending or maybe just ignorant to the fact that that same long term unknown factor X exists equally on both sides (ie no one knows the potential long term effects of covid on the body).

 

[AZMark]

And this is why we don't believe anything. They claim it is partly false, but essentially say its true.

Fact check: Viral video misleads on individuals' risk of COVID-19 transmission, death

The likelihood that someone will get COVID-19 and die depends on many individual factors.

www.usatoday.com

"Based on our research, we rate PARTLY FALSE the claim that a given person has a 2.4% chance of getting COVID and a 0.05% chance of dying from it. These figures are roughly correct on a global scale, but at an individual level the risk varies hugely, experts say. The chances of getting sick or dying from COVID-19 vary based on individual factors like age, health history and location. "

It’s a USA Today analysis of a viral video originally posted on TikTok, come on man don’t lose your faith in society based on that!

 

[the MfM]

True and true.

There are many pretending or maybe just ignorant to the fact that that same long term unknown factor X exists equally on both sides (ie no one knows the potential long term effects of covid on the body).

I remember an early press conference with Fauci and Trump where the Dr said something to the effect that there would be no vaccine for two to three years. And he also said if there was one that we could not be sure if it would be safe.

apparently he changed his risk analysis

 

[Adrian @ JB Solutions]

It’s a USA Today analysis of a viral video originally posted on TikTok, come on man don’t lose your faith in society based on that!

To be fair, I would trust you or anyone on this forum over anything in the media (left or right) lol

My faith in mainstream news has completely eroded over the past 5-8 years. It seems everything has a bias and some sort of agenda. Off topic - I recently started following Roca News.... seems to be the most neutral and fact driven news source I've seen in years.

 

[MidnightRider]

I understand your point, it’s just incorrect.

Analyzing and accepting/ignoring are two different things. Don’t need to be a professor to understand that.

If you are saying you analyze risk in your life and come to decisions based purely only on numbers and data, devoid of past experiences, emotions (fear, belief, hate, love)and other human factors than I call a big fat hot steaming Bull Shit.

 

[BigN8]

This Non-vaccine or vaccine echo chamber is so worn out. Aren't you guys sick and tired of going on and on about this by now. The sad part is you're arguing with like, 5 people out of the 30,000 that are on this forum. Close this damn thread already and just let everybody do what they are going to do. The simple fact is you are not going to change anyone's mind on here, or anywhere for that matter. People will decide when it affects them. Case in point my sales rep. He was an anti vaxxer, got Covid a few weeks ago, fell off the face of the Earth and finally surfaced yesterday. Said it was the worst 19 days of his life. He and his family are going to get the vaccine now. It will take more and more people just like him to force change.

Enough already......

 

[scbruet]

If you are saying you analyze risk in your life and come to decisions based purely only on numbers and data, devoid of past experiences, emotions (fear, belief, hate, love)and other human factors than I call a big fat hot steaming Bull Shit.

100% we all use feelings over hard data. Which is why it's a good thing to have influences in your life to reel you in, and for you to do that to help other people.

 

[the MfM]

This Non-vaccine or vaccine echo chamber is so worn out. Aren't you guys sick and tired of going on and on about this by now. The sad part is you're arguing with like, 5 people out of the 30,000 that are on this forum. Close this damn thread already and just let everybody do what they are going to do. The simple fact is you are not going to change anyone's mind by on here, or anywhere for that matter. People will decide when it affects them. Case in point my sales rep. He was an anti vaxxer, got Covid a few weeks ago, fell of the face of the Earth and finally surfaced yesterday. Said it was the worst 19 days of his life. He and his family are going to get the vaccine now. It will take more and more of people just like him to force change.

Enough already......

Your right. Maybe it’s time to start a mask thread.

Because the homemade masks with poor fit and people who constantly adjust their masks or pull them down are a pet peeve of mine.

 

[AZMark]

If you are saying you analyze risk in your life and come to decisions based purely only on numbers and data, devoid of past experiences, emotions (fear, belief, hate, love)and other human factors than I call a big fat hot steaming Bull Shit.

We’re miscommunicating.

Those factors definitely matter in the decision of whether I take a risk or not. They still have no bearing on the actual risk, which is what you’re trying to isolate as objectively as possible in a risk analysis. Past experiences can be an important one to fill in the unknowns in an analysis, emotions are not.

 

[the MfM]

The home made masks seem akin to building a four foot high chain link fence around your yard to keep the bees out.

 

[mrmeaniemeateaterman]

This Non-vaccine or vaccine echo chamber is so worn out......
Enough already......

Agree, for a forum that doesn't allow politics (for the sole reason to not pit 1/2 the group against the other 1/2 of the group) I can't believe this has been alive for 81 pages and 5 months.

 

[AZMark]

This Non-vaccine or vaccine echo chamber is so worn out. Aren't you guys sick and tired of going on and on about this by now. The sad part is you're arguing with like, 5 people out of the 30,000 that are on this forum. Close this damn thread already and just let everybody do what they are going to do. The simple fact is you are not going to change anyone's mind by on here, or anywhere for that matter. People will decide when it affects them. Case in point my sales rep. He was an anti vaxxer, got Covid a few weeks ago, fell of the face of the Earth and finally surfaced yesterday. Said it was the worst 19 days of his life. He and his family are going to get the vaccine now. It will take more and more of people just like him to force change.

Enough already......

It’s entertainment, just like most of this site. Humans like to debate. This one has gotten close to off the rails a few times but it seems to get back on track. I don’t understand the getting upset about it existing.