Support the GITP forums on Patreon
Help support GITP's forums (and ongoing server maintenance) via Patreon
Page 2 of 18 FirstFirst 123456789101112 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 60 of 533
  1. - Top - End - #31
    Titan in the Playground
     
    DrowGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by Rogar Demonblud View Post
    What outcome? The first half injections are trickling out to those who need them. We won't start to have outcomes until a couple weeks after people start getting the second shot and immunity kicks in.
    The effect of the vaccination to see if it's 100% effective. That's the outcome.
    It's time to get my Magikarp on!

  2. - Top - End - #32
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tail of the Bellcurve
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by Bartmanhomer View Post
    The effect of the vaccination to see if it's 100% effective. That's the outcome.
    The vaccines are not 100% effective, basically nothing is 100% effective. With two doses they appear to prevent about 95% of infections. IIRC single dose looks like as about 70%.
    Blood-red were his spurs i' the golden noon; wine-red was his velvet coat,
    When they shot him down on the highway,
    Down like a dog on the highway,
    And he lay in his blood on the highway, with the bunch of lace at his throat.


    Alfred Noyes, The Highwayman, 1906.

  3. - Top - End - #33
    Troll in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by warty goblin View Post
    The vaccines are not 100% effective, basically nothing is 100% effective. With two doses they appear to prevent about 95% of infections. IIRC single dose looks like as about 70%.
    Afraid it's less for Pfizer.

    From the research paper for Pfizer-BioNTech: "Between the first dose and the second dose, 39 cases in the BNT162b2 group and 82 cases in the placebo group were observed, resulting in a vaccine efficacy of 52% (95% CI, 29.5 to 68.4) during this interval and indicating early protection by the vaccine, starting as soon as 12 days after the first dose."

    the Moderna vaccine...

    "Findings were similar across key secondary analyses (Table S16), including assessment starting 14 days after dose 1 (225 cases with placebo, vs. 11 with mRNA-1273, indicating a vaccine efficacy of 95.2% [95% CI, 91.2 to 97.4]), and assessment including participants who were SARS-CoV-2 seropositive at baseline in the per-protocol analysis (187 cases with placebo, vs. 12 with mRNA-1273; one volunteer assigned to receive mRNA-1273 was inadvertently given placebo], indicating a vaccine efficacy of 93.6% [95% CI, 88.6 to 96.5])"
    Last edited by sihnfahl; 2021-01-06 at 06:52 PM.
    May you get EXACTLY what you wish for.

  4. - Top - End - #34
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by Bartmanhomer View Post
    Oh, I see but I think we have a great chance to vaccinated everybody and the outcome is very good so far.
    Now I'm not sure I agree.

    While it is easy to dismiss the lunatic fringe like the pharmacist that left some vaccine out on purpose it is harder to dismiss the number of people who are refusing the vaccine. When I'm not on mobile I'll link the LA Times article I saw but I seen several that are talking about refusal rates over 20% (some places up to 40%) for medical staff working in hospitals. These are people on the front line of this, seeing the death tolls firsthand, with medical and scientific training....and they are saying thanx, but no thanx...which implies that we could well see a higher refusal rate in the general population. . .

    So I could easily see areas where we don't get to a vaccination rate high enough to take R0<1 for an extended period of time. . . And then get a mutation that can jump the vaccine.

    Because 20% isn't some fringe...it's a big chunk of the population. ..they can not just be dismissed as nutters. i think we have seen such a deep collapse of trust in the system (and the system for producing scientific data) (for corporate propaganda purposes for hitting management targets to trigger bonuses, undermining trust of an other for ratings or votes, and the list goes on and on) That the "Trust us" that the vaccine implies is reaching out for a thing that is no longer there.
    And I think for many it is a form of control over their lives in a time when they feel they have less of that...be it lockdowns or "personalized ads or whatever.
    And trust, like respect, can't be demanded. It can not be bought or acquired. It can only be earned. And that takes time. That takes good decisions and in many cases decisions of various authorities have been ridiculed (sometimes for political or commercial purpose...sometimes for being nonsensical) and the trust in the system has been going down not up.

    The boy who cried wolf abused the trust of his fellow villagers and when he needed it later it was not there....I think we may be seeing a dangerous demonstration of a similar idea.

  5. - Top - End - #35
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Forum Explorer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by Tvtyrant View Post
    I looked up the wages and that is one dead end job. The average pharmacy tech makes just over minimum wage, and it has no college requirements. It's analogous to a forklift driving certification.
    The USA has some really critical jobs be payed way too little. No idea why.

    Quote Originally Posted by comicshorse View Post
    I believe the first shot does provide partial immunity
    Yeah, I've heard it debated on if it's better to delay the second shot to get more people at least partially immune.

    Quote Originally Posted by sktarq View Post
    Now I'm not sure I agree.

    While it is easy to dismiss the lunatic fringe like the pharmacist that left some vaccine out on purpose it is harder to dismiss the number of people who are refusing the vaccine. When I'm not on mobile I'll link the LA Times article I saw but I seen several that are talking about refusal rates over 20% (some places up to 40%) for medical staff working in hospitals. These are people on the front line of this, seeing the death tolls firsthand, with medical and scientific training....and they are saying thanx, but no thanx...which implies that we could well see a higher refusal rate in the general population. . .

    So I could easily see areas where we don't get to a vaccination rate high enough to take R0<1 for an extended period of time. . . And then get a mutation that can jump the vaccine.

    Because 20% isn't some fringe...it's a big chunk of the population. ..they can not just be dismissed as nutters. i think we have seen such a deep collapse of trust in the system (and the system for producing scientific data) (for corporate propaganda purposes for hitting management targets to trigger bonuses, undermining trust of an other for ratings or votes, and the list goes on and on) That the "Trust us" that the vaccine implies is reaching out for a thing that is no longer there.
    And I think for many it is a form of control over their lives in a time when they feel they have less of that...be it lockdowns or "personalized ads or whatever.
    And trust, like respect, can't be demanded. It can not be bought or acquired. It can only be earned. And that takes time. That takes good decisions and in many cases decisions of various authorities have been ridiculed (sometimes for political or commercial purpose...sometimes for being nonsensical) and the trust in the system has been going down not up.

    The boy who cried wolf abused the trust of his fellow villagers and when he needed it later it was not there....I think we may be seeing a dangerous demonstration of a similar idea.
    I'd say it points to a different problem, why are so many people willing to reject reality for their own personal beliefs? The events that happened today were in much the same category, people refuse to accept what actually happens and than take drastic action to support their beliefs.

    You point to mistrust, but I disagree. I feel the inability for people to handle reality has been an ongoing problem I've been seeing. People have been expressing an inability to handle hearing or seeing certain things, and society has been accommodating them. I feel this is just a new version of that same attitude.
    Spoiler: I'm a writer!
    Show
    Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"
    Show
    here[/URL]
    ]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha

    I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP

    Procrastination: MLP



    Spoiler: Original Fiction
    Show
    The Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.



  6. - Top - End - #36
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Grey_Wolf_c's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2007

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by sktarq View Post
    Because 20% isn't some fringe...it's a big chunk of the population. ..they can not just be dismissed as nutters.
    The two things are not contradictory. I can absolutely consider them nutters, while also acknowledging they are a significant percentage of the population.

    That said, amongst the medical professionals I've talked to about this, rejection of the vaccine is more of a distrust of the speed with which it was tasted that makes them a bit worried about potential side effects - so they'll take it... but they want others to be the guinea pigs. Which, on one hand, egoist of them. On the other, if anyone is allowed to be a bit egoist, it's the people that've been risking their lives for 12 months. On the third paw, it's a bit nutter to keep risking your health as a doctor when you could take the shot and reduce the risk by two thirds.

    Grey Wolf
    Interested in MitD? Join us in MitD's thread.
    There is a world of imagination
    Deep in the corners of your mind
    Where reality is an intruder
    And myth and legend thrive
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Ceterum autem censeo Hilgya malefica est

  7. - Top - End - #37
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by Forum Explorer View Post
    I'd say it points to a different problem, why are so many people willing to reject reality for their own personal beliefs? The events that happened today were in much the same category, people refuse to accept what actually happens and than take drastic action to support their beliefs.

    You point to mistrust, but I disagree. I feel the inability for people to handle reality has been an ongoing problem I've been seeing. People have been expressing an inability to handle hearing or seeing certain things, and society has been accommodating them. I feel this is just a new version of that same attitude.
    My problem with your statement is that I think it shows you think you have the correct "reality". . . which honestly most people do. To say I've basically heard this same thing from a number of different faith based persons of highly different stripes would be an understatement. Even many of the quacks would use and think similar things...just that you are the one who can not handle reality.

    For example. The concept of masks protecting from Sars-cov-2 transmission. You'd probably say that is a statement of reality. But why? have you used various micronfilters and scanning electron microscopes to confirm it? probably not. But the WHO, CDC, Health Canada, various papers in Scientific/Medical Journals (Science, Nature, New England Journal of Medicine, Lancet, JAMA, whathaveyou) have all said that it is true. And thus you find it makes sense to put your trust in these people to act arbiters of reality (which can largely make sense if they have access to tools like those electron microscopes, thousands of man-years of training, etc) but other people may look at their histories with opioids, celebrex (and other Cox-2 inhibitors), placement of paid consultants on supervisory panels, not publishing studies whose results they don't like, p-hacking, that some scientific papers are being written by "independent" scientists who are by contract not allowed to see the data collected-just whatever data the contractor collecting the data wants to give them, the replication crisis of psychiatry and psychology, where funding coming from being shown to be highly linked to medical study results, the revolving door of staff between regulators and the regulated, or even just the massive fines being paid out by drug manufacturers for various misleading statements, manipulations, and a whole list of other scandals and problems) and come to the conclusion that these groups are not trustworthy arbiters of reality. And that does make a degree of sense...one can point to a standing pattern of behavior that is inconsistent with producing valid or even safe results. Even people who believe in the sated method ("Scientific method" in this case) may well believe that the system is corrupt and simply paints a coating of science on marketing documents...and sometimes they have found marketing teams have been involved in writing the scientific papers and then basically paid scientist to put their names on...so kinda have a point (not one I find find tips the balance to full distrust and dismissal but still). . . They stop having trust in the arbiters of reality that most of us do.

    So that when those (CDC, FDA, Journals) groups say that masks are effective it is no different for the distrustful individual than those people who were trying to sell silver dust to kill covid on contact on various talk shows (I'll not name names for religion and political reasons).

    which isn't to say that some are not just as you say but I'm rather leery of saying I'm any better.


    That said...I'm fully masked up and planning to get the vaccine ASAP



    GW....yes there is mostly mistrust in the medical community about the speed of how quickly it has come out. But that is basically looking at the papers, companies, and government institutions that have declared it safe and saying "We don't trust you".
    Last edited by sktarq; 2021-01-06 at 09:14 PM.

  8. - Top - End - #38
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by sktarq View Post
    My problem with your statement is that I think it shows you think you have the correct "reality". . . which honestly most people do. To say I've basically heard this same thing from a number of different faith based persons of highly different stripes would be an understatement. Even many of the quacks would use and think similar things...just that you are the one who can not handle reality.

    For example. The concept of masks protecting from Sars-cov-2 transmission. You'd probably say that is a statement of reality. But why? have you used various micronfilters and scanning electron microscopes to confirm it? probably not.
    I've tried to disturb bits of paper my breath with and without masks, and used that test to compare a couple different masks when I was first shopping around to basically see how far my breath retained force for (repeating the experiment right now with a flour pile and an ordinary mask I have on hand, I couldn't make the flour move a centimeter from my face with the mask, but I could from about half a meter away without it; I'd try with an N95, but I can't get much closer than 1cm...). Creating overly complicated barriers of proof for some things but not others is a kind of cognitive bias, as well as a way to deflect criticism of beliefs. It's one thing not to trust a source, but it's another for someone to bar themselves the use of tools to actually check things because it might lead to reaching conclusions that would agree with a source one has pre-emptively chosen to disagree with on the basis of that lack of trust. The difference between ignoring something and being vulnerable to reverse psychology.

    Another thing I've seen from anti-maskers is insisting on framing everything in terms of the mask protecting them and deflecting when the subject of wearing masks primarily to reduce transmission to others comes up - thats less something that can be explained so simply as a lack of trust, and goes to the point of an expression of values. Or at least that they're staring at something which is too big to really internalize (all of the people who died last year from Covid, and all of the people who are going to die this year) much less begin to see ways of taking responsibility for without becoming incapable of function or incapable of seeing themselves as good people. So its a lot easier to decide 'this isn't real' or 'there's nothing I can do' and then be able to just not have to deal with it. Or, they really actually just don't value the lives and health of others at all beyond the social act of saying they do, but that's the less charitable interpretation.
    Last edited by NichG; 2021-01-06 at 09:57 PM.

  9. - Top - End - #39
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Grey_Wolf_c's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2007

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by sktarq View Post
    GW....yes there is mostly mistrust in the medical community about the speed of how quickly it has come out. But that is basically looking at the papers, companies, and government institutions that have declared it safe and saying "We don't trust you".
    On the contrary, it is looking at the papers, companies, and government institutions that have declared it safe and saying "you have not had time to check for long-term secondary effects, as per established protocol xyz. We accept your results that this isn't going to cause any immediate secondary effects, but you have no data beyond that"

    GW
    Interested in MitD? Join us in MitD's thread.
    There is a world of imagination
    Deep in the corners of your mind
    Where reality is an intruder
    And myth and legend thrive
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Ceterum autem censeo Hilgya malefica est

  10. - Top - End - #40
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Forum Explorer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by sktarq View Post
    My problem with your statement is that I think it shows you think you have the correct "reality". . . which honestly most people do. To say I've basically heard this same thing from a number of different faith based persons of highly different stripes would be an understatement. Even many of the quacks would use and think similar things...just that you are the one who can not handle reality.

    For example. The concept of masks protecting from Sars-cov-2 transmission. You'd probably say that is a statement of reality. But why? have you used various micronfilters and scanning electron microscopes to confirm it? probably not. But the WHO, CDC, Health Canada, various papers in Scientific/Medical Journals (Science, Nature, New England Journal of Medicine, Lancet, JAMA, whathaveyou) have all said that it is true. And thus you find it makes sense to put your trust in these people to act arbiters of reality (which can largely make sense if they have access to tools like those electron microscopes, thousands of man-years of training, etc) but other people may look at their histories with opioids, celebrex (and other Cox-2 inhibitors), placement of paid consultants on supervisory panels, not publishing studies whose results they don't like, p-hacking, that some scientific papers are being written by "independent" scientists who are by contract not allowed to see the data collected-just whatever data the contractor collecting the data wants to give them, the replication crisis of psychiatry and psychology, where funding coming from being shown to be highly linked to medical study results, the revolving door of staff between regulators and the regulated, or even just the massive fines being paid out by drug manufacturers for various misleading statements, manipulations, and a whole list of other scandals and problems) and come to the conclusion that these groups are not trustworthy arbiters of reality. And that does make a degree of sense...one can point to a standing pattern of behavior that is inconsistent with producing valid or even safe results. Even people who believe in the sated method ("Scientific method" in this case) may well believe that the system is corrupt and simply paints a coating of science on marketing documents...and sometimes they have found marketing teams have been involved in writing the scientific papers and then basically paid scientist to put their names on...so kinda have a point (not one I find find tips the balance to full distrust and dismissal but still). . . They stop having trust in the arbiters of reality that most of us do.

    So that when those (CDC, FDA, Journals) groups say that masks are effective it is no different for the distrustful individual than those people who were trying to sell silver dust to kill covid on contact on various talk shows (I'll not name names for religion and political reasons).

    which isn't to say that some are not just as you say but I'm rather leery of saying I'm any better.


    That said...I'm fully masked up and planning to get the vaccine ASAP



    GW....yes there is mostly mistrust in the medical community about the speed of how quickly it has come out. But that is basically looking at the papers, companies, and government institutions that have declared it safe and saying "We don't trust you".
    The difference is that when I have doubts about the validity of their work, I can look at their work, attempt to have it replicated, and see if their results match my experiences. Because that's how science works. It can be replicated.


    In this case, I fully understand and agree with the logic behind masks. My breath can't travel as far, my sneezes and coughs are contained, thus it is much harder for me to infect other people. I also get secondary protection in keeping my hands off my face, and keeping larger dust particles that may contain the virus out of my sinuses. It doesn't protect against the virus itself, if someone with Covid breathed on my face directly, the mask wouldn't be much help. That's why we need as many people as possible wearing masks. Not to protect yourself from coronavirus, but to protect others from you if you catch it.
    Spoiler: I'm a writer!
    Show
    Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"
    Show
    here[/URL]
    ]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha

    I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP

    Procrastination: MLP



    Spoiler: Original Fiction
    Show
    The Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.



  11. - Top - End - #41
    Troll in the Playground
     
    georgie_leech's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by Grey_Wolf_c View Post
    On the contrary, it is looking at the papers, companies, and government institutions that have declared it safe and saying "you have not had time to check for long-term secondary effects, as per established protocol xyz. We accept your results that this isn't going to cause any immediate secondary effects, but you have no data beyond that"

    GW
    Which is certainly more-or-less the position of some of the people I know. Yet... I find myself wondering why the same doesn't apply to Covid itself, if that makes sense? Like, it seems unlikely that the long term effects of the vaccine would be worse than the long term effects of Covid, even absent serious cases.
    Quote Originally Posted by Grod_The_Giant View Post
    We should try to make that a thing; I think it might help civility. Hey, GitP, let's try to make this a thing: when you're arguing optimization strategies, RAW-logic, and similar such things that you'd never actually use in a game, tag your post [THEORETICAL] and/or use green text
    Quote Originally Posted by Lvl 2 Expert View Post
    So a ranger is like a Bachelor of Applied Druidology.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kid Jake View Post
    What's the word for 'fear of being eaten by a mounted bear in half-plate' again? Because that's the one I have.

  12. - Top - End - #42
    Titan in the Playground
     
    DrowGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by warty goblin View Post
    The vaccines are not 100% effective, basically nothing is 100% effective. With two doses they appear to prevent about 95% of infections. IIRC single dose looks like as about 70%.
    But we are making progress, right?
    It's time to get my Magikarp on!

  13. - Top - End - #43
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Forum Explorer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by Bartmanhomer View Post
    But we are making progress, right?
    Progress to what? A 100% effectiveness? That's not possible with out currently medical technology. The individual difference between people will prevent that from occurring. But something like a 90% vaccination will be more than sufficient to snuff out the disease, assuming everyone takes it.

    Thing of it this way. Out of 10 people who get the vaccine, 1 person will still get sick. However, that person cannot spread the disease to any of those 9 people, because the vaccine did work on them.

    Make it 20 people. 1 Person gets sick, 18 people are immune, and 1 person can, maybe, get sick. That 1 person would need to somehow come into close contact with the 1 other person who can get sick in the first place before they recover from the disease. That is possible of course, but difficult as if they get sick and notice, they stay home and isolate.
    Spoiler: I'm a writer!
    Show
    Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"
    Show
    here[/URL]
    ]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha

    I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP

    Procrastination: MLP



    Spoiler: Original Fiction
    Show
    The Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.



  14. - Top - End - #44
    Titan in the Playground
     
    DrowGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by Forum Explorer View Post
    Progress to what? A 100% effectiveness? That's not possible without current medical technology. The individual difference between people will prevent that from occurring. But something like a 90% vaccination will be more than sufficient to snuff out the disease, assuming everyone takes it.

    Think of it this way. Out of 10 people who get the vaccine, 1 person will still get sick. However, that person cannot spread the disease to any of those 9 people, because the vaccine did work on them.

    Make it 20 people. 1 Person gets sick, 18 people are immune, and 1 person can, maybe, get sick. That 1 person would need to somehow come into close contact with the 1 other person who can get sick in the first place before they recover from the disease. That is possible of course, but difficult as if they get sick and notice, they stay home and isolate.
    Look I just want to know the progress to make the vaccine 100% effective and I know it's very effective with the science and the medical technology. Like medical history has proved itself time and time again. I was just only asking a simple and basic question if we're making progress to have the COVID Vaccine 100% effective so that way people will get less sick and not continue spreading COVID. And more importantly, I know how science works when it comes to vaccines and immunities.
    Last edited by Bartmanhomer; 2021-01-07 at 01:56 AM.
    It's time to get my Magikarp on!

  15. - Top - End - #45
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Mystic Muse's Avatar

    Join Date
    Mar 2009

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by Bartmanhomer View Post
    Look I just want to know the progress to make the vaccine 100% effective
    0% because as they've mentioned it's literally impossible for us to make it 100% effective.

    The vaccine is 90-95% effective depending on which one you get. And unfortunately, less than 1% of the population of the US has received it so far.

  16. - Top - End - #46
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Forum Explorer's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by Bartmanhomer View Post
    Look I just want to know the progress to make the vaccine 100% effective and I know it's very effective with the science and the medical technology. Like medical history has proved itself time and time again. I was just only asking a simple and basic question if we're making progress to have the COVID Vaccine 100% effective so that way people will get less sick and not continue spreading COVID. And more importantly, I know how science works when it comes to vaccines and immunities.
    Like Mystic Muse said, 0%. No vaccine has EVER been 100% effective. The good news is that it doesn't need to be. 90% and above is more than enough to eradicate the Coronavirus, assuming nearly everyone gets the vaccine.
    Spoiler: I'm a writer!
    Show
    Spoiler: Check out my fanfiction[URL="https://www.fanfiction.net/u/7493788/Forum-Explorer"
    Show
    here[/URL]
    ]Fate Stay Nano: Fate Stay Night x Magical Girl Lyrical Nanoha

    I Fell in Love with a Storm: MLP

    Procrastination: MLP



    Spoiler: Original Fiction
    Show
    The Lost Dragon: A story about a priest who finds a baby dragon in his church and decides to protect them.



  17. - Top - End - #47
    Titan in the Playground
     
    DrowGuy

    Join Date
    Dec 2015

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by Mystic Muse View Post
    0% because as they've mentioned we can't make it 100% effective.

    The vaccine is 90-95% effective depending on which one you get. And unfortunately, less than 1% of the population of the US has received it so far.
    Quote Originally Posted by Forum Explorer View Post
    Like Mystic Muse said, 0%. No vaccine has EVER been 100% effective. The good news is that it doesn't need to be. 90% and above is more than enough to eradicate the Coronavirus, assuming nearly everyone gets the vaccine.
    Thank you both for telling me this. I didn't mean to give everyone a hard time.
    It's time to get my Magikarp on!

  18. - Top - End - #48
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by Forum Explorer View Post
    T


    Yeah, I've heard it debated on if it's better to delay the second shot to get more people at least partially immune.
    That's the approach the government here in the UK are taking. Lets hope they're right

    Posted by sktarq

    For example. The concept of masks protecting from Sars-cov-2 transmission. You'd probably say that is a statement of reality. But why? have you used various micronfilters and scanning electron microscopes to confirm it? probably not. But the WHO, CDC, Health Canada, various papers in Scientific/Medical Journals (Science, Nature, New England Journal of Medicine, Lancet, JAMA, whathaveyou) have all said that it is true. And thus you find it makes sense to put your trust in these people to act arbiters of reality (which can largely make sense if they have access to tools like those electron microscopes, thousands of man-years of training, etc) but other people may look at their histories with opioids, celebrex (and other Cox-2 inhibitors), placement of paid consultants on supervisory panels, not publishing studies whose results they don't like, p-hacking, that some scientific papers are being written by "independent" scientists who are by contract not allowed to see the data collected-just whatever data the contractor collecting the data wants to give them, the replication crisis of psychiatry and psychology, where funding coming from being shown to be highly linked to medical study results, the revolving door of staff between regulators and the regulated, or even just the massive fines being paid out by drug manufacturers for various misleading statements, manipulations, and a whole list of other scandals and problems) and come to the conclusion that these groups are not trustworthy arbiters of reality. And that does make a degree of sense...one can point to a standing pattern of behavior that is inconsistent with producing valid or even safe results. Even people who believe in the sated method ("Scientific method" in this case) may well believe that the system is corrupt and simply paints a coating of science on marketing documents...and sometimes they have found marketing teams have been involved in writing the scientific papers and then basically paid scientist to put their names on...so kinda have a point (not one I find find tips the balance to full distrust and dismissal but still). . . They stop having trust in the arbiters of reality that most of us do.
    But how many people thinking of refusing the vaccine are doing so for these reasons and how many have never heard of any of this but are doing so because of a video they saw on Youtube
    All Comicshorse's posts come with the advisor : This is just my opinion any difficulties arising from implementing my ideas are your own problem

  19. - Top - End - #49
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Grey_Wolf_c's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2007

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by georgie_leech View Post
    Which is certainly more-or-less the position of some of the people I know. Yet... I find myself wondering why the same doesn't apply to Covid itself, if that makes sense? Like, it seems unlikely that the long term effects of the vaccine would be worse than the long term effects of Covid, even absent serious cases.
    To be clear, I'm on your side of this - I too don't quite understand the logic. Best I can guess is that it might have to do with known risk versus unknown risk. The consequences of Covid are now reasonably well understood, and they have internalised that risk. The consequences of the vaccine are utter unknowns after the three-month mark, and thus they are wary of it.

    Grey Wolf
    Interested in MitD? Join us in MitD's thread.
    There is a world of imagination
    Deep in the corners of your mind
    Where reality is an intruder
    And myth and legend thrive
    Quote Originally Posted by The Giant View Post
    But really, the important lesson here is this: Rather than making assumptions that don't fit with the text and then complaining about the text being wrong, why not just choose different assumptions that DO fit with the text?
    Ceterum autem censeo Hilgya malefica est

  20. - Top - End - #50
    Troll in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by Grey_Wolf_c View Post
    The consequences of the vaccine are utter unknowns after the three-month mark, and thus they are wary of it.
    Moderna's vaccine went Phase II and the first injections were in June.

    So it's a bit more than three months...
    May you get EXACTLY what you wish for.

  21. - Top - End - #51
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    England
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by Forum Explorer View Post
    Like Mystic Muse said, 0%. No vaccine has EVER been 100% effective. The good news is that it doesn't need to be. 90% and above is more than enough to eradicate the Coronavirus, assuming nearly everyone gets the vaccine.
    OK but in the UK we will be extensively using the Oxford vaccine which is, I believe, 70 % effective. Where does that leave us ?
    All Comicshorse's posts come with the advisor : This is just my opinion any difficulties arising from implementing my ideas are your own problem

  22. - Top - End - #52
    Troll in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by comicshorse View Post
    OK but in the UK we will be extensively using the Oxford vaccine which is, I believe, 70 % effective. Where does that leave us ?
    That 70% efficacy came with a caveat.

    "There were 131 cases of symptomatic COVID-19 in LD/SD or SD/SD recipients who were eligible for inclusion in the primary efficacy analysis more than 14 days after the second dose of vaccine (table 2). There were 30 (05%) cases among 5807 participants in the vaccine arm and 101 (17%) cases among 5829 participants in the control group, resulting in vaccine efficacy of 704% (958% CI 548806; table 2; figure). In participants who received two standard-dose vaccines, vaccine efficacy was 621% (95% CI 410757), whereas in those who received a low dose as their first dose of vaccine, efficacy was higher at 900% (674970; pinteraction=0010; table 2; appendix 1 pp 1213)."

    So they learned that, to push it to 90%, they had to give a smaller initial dose compared to the second one. So it's a roughly 4% difference when you change the dosing strategy, which I would say that the NHS would pursue.
    Last edited by sihnfahl; 2021-01-07 at 09:52 AM.
    May you get EXACTLY what you wish for.

  23. - Top - End - #53
    Titan in the Playground
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Tail of the Bellcurve
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by sihnfahl View Post
    Moderna's vaccine went Phase II and the first injections were in June.

    So it's a bit more than three months...
    It's worth emphasizing that complications from vaccines occur very soon after taking them. It's not like they hang around in your body for months; the mRNA vaccines are cleared in like 2 days or less. The immune response to the spike protein can last a bit longer, but the drug itself is completely gone. If the vaccine was unsafe, we would know by now.

    Quote Originally Posted by comicshorse View Post
    OK but in the UK we will be extensively using the Oxford vaccine which is, I believe, 70 % effective. Where does that leave us ?
    If everyone gets the vaccine, and it renders 70% of those taking it immune, then you probably clear the herd immunity threshold for original covid. 70% of the population immune is in the upper range of numbers I've seen for herd immunity, others have gone as low as 50%. Since not everyone is able or willing to get the vaccine, reaching 50% population immunity may still be a reach - back of the envelope math suggests you need about 70% of the population vaccinated to hit the mark. This is pessimistic though, since it doesn't include people get infected and become naturally immune.

    But since we're dealing with the newer, more infectious strain now, the herd immunity threshold has almost certainly been moved up considerably. Since not a huge amount is known about the new strain, I don't have any good information on what that threshold might be. If the vaccination effort falls short of herd immunity, then covid becomes essentially endemic. This is bad for a couple of reasons; most obviously people keep getting sick and dying. Also the disease can stick around and continue to mutate, potentially in ways that bypass existing immunity, whether from a vaccine or previous infection.

    As an individual matter, well that's harder to say in some ways. If you and the 9 people closest to you get vaccinated at 70% effectiveness, there's about a 97% chance at least one of you are still at risk. But the actual risk of you and your nearest and dearest catching covid will be substantially less than that, since that requires exposure, and exposure rate remains variable and to some extent controllable.

    Short version, it improves things by quite a bit. How much I don't know, since that depends on some not fully understood disease dynamics, population behavior, and whatever mutations covid picks up next.
    Blood-red were his spurs i' the golden noon; wine-red was his velvet coat,
    When they shot him down on the highway,
    Down like a dog on the highway,
    And he lay in his blood on the highway, with the bunch of lace at his throat.


    Alfred Noyes, The Highwayman, 1906.

  24. - Top - End - #54
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    Flumph

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by comicshorse View Post
    But how many people thinking of refusing the vaccine are doing so for these reasons and how many have never heard of any of this but are doing so because of a video they saw on Youtube
    Probably quite a lot if not in an intellectually aware state.
    It comes from seeing how many news stories of the medical companies or the FDA doing those various things or various "don't trust X,Y, or Z" stuff bandied about be supposedly serious and trustworthy sources... Until the distrust is built...then some youtube video, aunt on FB, or particularly smarmy TV guy comes along and triggers it. It becomes easy to me the trigger, and it does carry some blame, means that those who disagree can also dismiss the challenge to their own assumptions implied in that behavior (yes I'm including myself here) but the fact that such a youtube video worked, that people were turning to it in such numbers (there will always be a % you can't reach) implies that it is more than just a personal failing.

  25. - Top - End - #55

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    From what our paper said about the local hospital staff who aren't getting the vaccine it split almost evenly between those who want more data (a couple of whom want to read the actual studies when they get the time) and those who don't feel a need to rush since they've already had COVID-19 and recovered.

  26. - Top - End - #56
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by warty goblin View Post
    It's worth emphasizing that complications from vaccines occur very soon after taking them. It's not like they hang around in your body for months; the mRNA vaccines are cleared in like 2 days or less. The immune response to the spike protein can last a bit longer, but the drug itself is completely gone. If the vaccine was unsafe, we would know by now.



    If everyone gets the vaccine, and it renders 70% of those taking it immune, then you probably clear the herd immunity threshold for original covid. 70% of the population immune is in the upper range of numbers I've seen for herd immunity, others have gone as low as 50%. Since not everyone is able or willing to get the vaccine, reaching 50% population immunity may still be a reach - back of the envelope math suggests you need about 70% of the population vaccinated to hit the mark. This is pessimistic though, since it doesn't include people get infected and become naturally immune.

    But since we're dealing with the newer, more infectious strain now, the herd immunity threshold has almost certainly been moved up considerably. Since not a huge amount is known about the new strain, I don't have any good information on what that threshold might be. If the vaccination effort falls short of herd immunity, then covid becomes essentially endemic. This is bad for a couple of reasons; most obviously people keep getting sick and dying. Also the disease can stick around and continue to mutate, potentially in ways that bypass existing immunity, whether from a vaccine or previous infection.

    As an individual matter, well that's harder to say in some ways. If you and the 9 people closest to you get vaccinated at 70% effectiveness, there's about a 97% chance at least one of you are still at risk. But the actual risk of you and your nearest and dearest catching covid will be substantially less than that, since that requires exposure, and exposure rate remains variable and to some extent controllable.

    Short version, it improves things by quite a bit. How much I don't know, since that depends on some not fully understood disease dynamics, population behavior, and whatever mutations covid picks up next.
    If you get everyone at 70% and also keep up things like school closures, distancing, PPE, having as many jobs as possible be WFH, reduced indoor dining capacities, etc until you can switch over to a contact tracing regime for flareups, then elimination of the new strains should still be possible since the ballpark I've heard is ~50% more infectious. That means effective R's for the new strains with all of that stuff in place (but no vaccination) are ~1.5, which you only need ~ an additional 40% immunity to get below 1. The problem is if everyone gets only 70% immunity and says 'I'm vaccinated now, all of these measures aren't justified so we should open everything back up' while there's still a high level of Covid in the community. But 70% immunity along with a will to actually drive the disease to zero would be a great tool. Even without a willingness to pursue those things, and even with a 10% effective vaccine, I'd still say get everyone vaccinated - every little bit helps, and at the very least there's the side benefit of apparently reducing the severity of cases.

    But, if people aren't going to keep up those measures or don't want to, I think its a good idea to push to use the most effective vaccine and vaccination schedule that we have available, and not sacrifice effectiveness for reduced cost, ease of storage, or convenience.

    Even if Covid evolves to become much more infectious, people managed to eliminate measles (which is about 3 times as infectious as the new strains) within the US using a 97% effective vaccine (and with how infectious measles is, its worth dealing with a booster shot scheduled a year later to get from the initial 93% to achieve that 97%). Looking at measles stats, actually, we should have used that as the analogue disease to think about Covid - it has similar fatality rate, similar tendency to produce long-term effects, and its a virus we managed to successfully eliminate despite being more infectious. If I ever get a time machine...
    Last edited by NichG; 2021-01-07 at 01:08 PM.

  27. - Top - End - #57
    Troll in the Playground
     
    DwarfClericGuy

    Join Date
    Jun 2007

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by NichG View Post
    people managed to eliminate measles
    Measles hasn't been eliminated.

    Smallpox has.

    Measles still has outbreaks.
    May you get EXACTLY what you wish for.

  28. - Top - End - #58
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by sihnfahl View Post
    Measles hasn't been eliminated.

    Smallpox has.

    Measles still has outbreaks.
    No measles cases in the last 19 years within the US. Which is a nice counter-argument to the 'even if NZ/Aus/etc can get to zero Covid, the US is bigger/different so we can't do it' way of thinking.

  29. - Top - End - #59
    Bugbear in the Playground
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by sihnfahl View Post
    Measles hasn't been eliminated.

    Smallpox has.

    Measles still has outbreaks.
    Sure.
    But I think we can all agree that getting COVID down to the approximate threat level of measles would be a definite win, and is something we'd all be comfortable with.
    That's all I can think of, at any rate.

    Quote Originally Posted by remetagross View Post
    All hail the mighty Strigon! One only has to ask, and one shall receive.

  30. - Top - End - #60
    Troll in the Playground
     
    georgie_leech's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Calgary, AB
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: This year we kill it: Corona Virus Thread Mark II

    Quote Originally Posted by NichG View Post
    No measles cases in the last 19 years within the US. Which is a nice counter-argument to the 'even if NZ/Aus/etc can get to zero Covid, the US is bigger/different so we can't do it' way of thinking.
    .......uh......
    Last edited by georgie_leech; 2021-01-07 at 03:20 PM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Grod_The_Giant View Post
    We should try to make that a thing; I think it might help civility. Hey, GitP, let's try to make this a thing: when you're arguing optimization strategies, RAW-logic, and similar such things that you'd never actually use in a game, tag your post [THEORETICAL] and/or use green text
    Quote Originally Posted by Lvl 2 Expert View Post
    So a ranger is like a Bachelor of Applied Druidology.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kid Jake View Post
    What's the word for 'fear of being eaten by a mounted bear in half-plate' again? Because that's the one I have.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •