|
| ▲ | pygy_ 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| The vaccinnated group was 1 year older on average, and had mode cardiovascular risk factors. Covid has long term health consequences, and these are proportional to the severity of the acute infection. People who died of a stroke of a heart infarction 6 months down the line were not counted as "covid death", even though covid is known to increase their incidence in the next year. |
| |
|
| ▲ | lesuorac 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Covid hospitalizations where half in the vaccinated group (as % of pop) than unvaccinated. That's extremely desirable when you're in a situation where you have do dedicate whole wings (and then some) of hospitals to a singular disease. Sure, it's not a silver bullet but it's at least stainless steel. |
| |
| ▲ | zosima 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I am speaking about what the paper shows. There are other sources of evidence for efficacy. This paper is not a very strong source of evidence for efficacy due to some obvious uncontrolled difference between groups. | | |
| ▲ | gopher_space 5 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | I wouldn't bother critiquing methodology without current, masters-level experience in the domain. I make incorrect assumptions when I'm even narrowly outside my own lane, and end up asking questions that clearly demonstrate e.g. my inability to parse fig. 4a. | |
| ▲ | _DeadFred_ 21 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | OP's point was more 'How would you measure unvaccinated people that lived because vaccinated people weren't filling the ER, so there were beds/staff to spare'? That unvaxed outcome would need to go in the 'vaxed lives saved' column somehow, or else it looks like 'outcomes were the same either way' because the lives saved from vaccination spill over into the non-vaxed group because the vaccine prevented the healthcare system from melting down. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | stocksinsmocks an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I don’t think it’s possible to know anything conclusive about the safety for a few decades and a generation or two of affected kids can be observed. Given that finding harm would embarrass important aristocrats, I don’t think that evidence would ever be found in the foreseeable future. That mRNA and lipid nano particles were never found to be safe until the exact moment of crisis is awfully convenient for its investors. I say decades because of the study below. Certainly, the authors could have published it for engagement bait or malice or some reason. https://www.gavinpublishers.com/article/view/detection-of-pf... |
| |
| ▲ | vineyardmike 40 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Where do you get decades? That study says 200 days. | | |
| ▲ | stocksinsmocks 30 minutes ago | parent [-] | | You really aren’t going to know how this MRNA in egg and sperm cells are going to affect offspring until you have offspring to observe. Effects like wolbachia could take multiple generations to observe. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | jmull an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > but quite weak evidence for the vaccine being efficacious That’s directly contradicted by the results of the study. E.g., “Vaccinated individuals had a 74% lower risk of death from severe COVID-19 (weighted hazard ratio [wHR], 0.26 [95% CI, 0.22-0.30]) and a 25% lower risk of all-cause mortality (wHR, 0.75 [95% CI, 0.75-0.76])…” It’s pretty clear a lot of unvaccinated people who died of covid would be alive today had they gotten vaccinated. (I would point out the current yearly vaccine they are putting out is potentially a different story since covid is changing and so is the vaccine. I’d talk to my dr about whether to get that or not.) |
|
| ▲ | pama an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The simple explanation is that the causal agent for the excees of the non-covid deaths is the same SARS-CoV2 virus, but death comes later and not at the acute phase of the disease. |
| |
| ▲ | Chris612 an hour ago | parent [-] | | If the vaccine was randomly administered among the study population, I'd buy this as the simple explanation. Not sure it follows so cleanly with the actual study setup | | |
|
|
| ▲ | underlipton 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| There was a study that showed that cancer patients who receive a MRNA COVID vaccine live longer. This could also be for extrinsic reasons, but IIRC the study considered the reason to be a pronounced immune response that also attacked cancer cells. So there's a chance that the vaccine provokes a general immune response that's protective against a number of mortality-causing issues. |
|
| ▲ | DebtDeflation 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| A 25% reduction is huge, even if you account for the fact that people who get vaccines tend to be more health conscious to begin with, when you consider that outside of the very sick and very old Covid has a mortality rate under 1%. |
| |
| ▲ | soperj 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | 1 out of 100 when billions are getting it is gonna be a large number. Mortality rate has gone down substantially since the vaccines. | | |
| ▲ | ceejayoz 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I like to ask people who talk about a 1% mortality rate if they'd go to a football game in a stadium with 100k seats if 1k of those seats randomly had a small bomb attached. | | |
| |
| ▲ | altcognito 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | > Covid has a mortality rate under 1%. I hate it when blanket statements like this creep in. Which Covid? The initial version was definitely more deadly than later versions. What about future covids? Are you willing to guarantee every version of covid from here on out will be less deadly? It is the general case to be true, but it is not some sort of law. | |
| ▲ | 16 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
