Should we get vaccinated for COVID-19?

[Corpus]

10 minutes ago, Forestluv said:

 

Due to the severity of covid, vaccine development has been accelerated. As well, there are likely some profit motives to accelerate the process. There will be higher risks than vaccines developed over 3+ years.

A beautiful demonstration of self-interest, which is always calculated. It makes one wonder if the other diseases for which vaccines have been tardily developed could have come to fruition quicker if selflessness was actually the case, instead of just opined. 

[Consept]

32 minutes ago, Preety_India said:

I'm scared that they won't test it sufficiently and release it in a hurry. That can be a problem with the initial batch of vaccinated people showing bad effects 

If it were an old vaccine, no problem 

In that case it would be on you to thoroughly research what exactly theyve done and how theyve tested etc and how that compares to previous vaccines. If you havent done this your assumptions are not coming from a place of knowing its just speculation from ignorance of the subject matter. 

[knakoo]

1 hour ago, Forestluv said:

The issue is far more complex than myopically looking at death rates. The rabies virus has a very high death rate, yet it isn't that harmful to society since it's frequency and contagion is low and it quickly kills the person it infects. The rabies virus doesn't cripple the economy and health care system.

In addition to crippling the economy, covid cripples the health care system. When hospitals are at 90% capacity due to covid, healthcare for ALL illness is impacted. People in car accidents, people with chest pain, people needing chemotherapy etc. The ENTIRE healthcare system is brought to it's knees. It doesn't matter if 98% of covid patients survive. A high survival rate for hospitalized patients actually puts MORE stress on the healthcare system. A covid patient needing 10 days of intensive treatment to survive is much more demanding on a healthcare system than if covid patients quickly died within 2hrs of reaching the hospital. 

As well, a certain percentage of a society needs to take a vaccine for the vaccine to be effective (at the societal level). A vaccine that is very effective at the individual level, will not be very effective at the societal level if only 50% of the population get vaccinated. The individual may be protected from coronavirus, yet their world would be crumbling around them due to covid impacts. 

I think you need 50-60% of people having contracted the virus to get to herd immunity. Someone who gets vaccinated can still be contagious ? If no then if 50% of the population gets vaccinated, and 10+% actually got the virus, then we get to herd immunity no ?

[Forestluv]

9 minutes ago, Corpus said:

A beautiful demonstration of self-interest, which is always calculated. It makes one wonder if the other diseases for which vaccines have been tardily developed could have come to fruition quicker if selflessness was actually the case, instead of just opined. 

In terms of profit motives for pharmaceutical industries, developing vaccines is not a money-maker. The big profits are generating medication for chronic illness that people need to take daily the rest of their lives - and then fight to extend patents and raise drug costs.

Covid vaccination is an exception since it is a global pandemic threatening the structure of economic, healthcare and social systems. There is a lot of government funding going into development of a covid vaccine - as well as intense competition. In a sense, healthy capitalism is good here - yet there is also a price to pay. . . One thing that cannot be accelerated are clinical trials looking at long-term effects. Trials looking at side-effects two years after vaccination take at least two years to complete. There won't be those types of long-term studies for the first generation of covid vaccinations.

Another issue will be who has access, hyper capitalism and toxic competition. For example, there will be a profit motive to charge people for the vaccination (even though it was developed with taxpayer dollars). The problem with this is that a high percentage of people need to be vaccinated for it to be developed. So if people say "Why should lazy people on welfare get a free covid vaccination when I have to pay $20 for it" - it shoots society in the foot. 

As well, which countries will have access to the vaccine? Will this be a situation like Africa not having access to HIV medication since they are so poor? Will countries like the U.S. and U.K. try to claim patent rights on it and deny access to certain countries like China and Syria for political purposes? Will some countries try to harm foreign economies by blocking them vaccine access? Or will we have more global perspective and see that in this context the coronavirus does not respect arbitrary national boundaries drawn on maps? I have some hope, yet I also have my doubts. There is a sense that we are all in the pandemic together, yet there is also a sense of blaming other people and countries. I could see a situation arise similar to climate change in which some politicians in more powerful countries like the U.S. say "We invested $1 trillion in this vaccine. We should we give some countries in Central / South America for free? What's in it for the U.S.?". . . I could definitely see Trump taking this stance. Yet I doubt Biden will. However, I could see corporations resisting production without a profit motive and vaccine assistance to poor countries being delayed for one reason or another". They would just rationalize and minimize it - similar to limiting access of HIV medication. Yet it will may be harder to do since there is so much human traffic between countries. Vaccinated countries would have to ban travel from unvaccinated countries - which I definitely could see Trump doing since it is aligned with nationalism and ethnocentrism. Not so much with Biden though. 

[Vipassana]

Who are we kidding guys? When it gets down to it, this vaccine will be mandatory. They might not announce it as such but your access to life in society will be severely constrained without taking this vaccine. Travel, most jobs, concerts etc are already instilling policies that require you to have a 'health passport'. Just like you can't open your business, travel to other countries or walk into a store without a face mask, you won't be able to walk around society without this vaccine. 

https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/pubs_archive/pubs-pdfs/2020/200709-The-Publics-Role-in-COVID-19-Vaccination.pdf

something that will really be a bummer is if Government benefits comes with COVID-19 vaccine as a package. In other words, they can easily say that your health care plan will be disqualified without taking this vaccine. 

Edited November 16, 2020 by Vipassana

[Kalki Avatar]

@Consept Get vaccinated, then I will tell you. 

[Consept]

6 minutes ago, Kalki Avatar said:

@Consept Get vaccinated, then I will tell you. 

If you know something theyve missed then why not say?

[Forestluv]

8 minutes ago, knakoo said:

I think you need 50-60% of people having contracted the virus to get to herd immunity. Someone who gets vaccinated can still be contagious ? If no then if 50% of the population gets vaccinated, and 10+% actually got the virus, then we get to herd immunity no ?

I used a simplistic binary explanation for "effective". It is a spectrum of effectiveness as well as timing. The RO contagion for any virus will decrease the more people that are protected via vaccination. The higher the RO contagion, the higher % of people that need to be vaccinated for a significant effect. Once the RO is under 1.0, it's considered "under control", yet there is still the risk of it mutating and evading the vaccination. The coronavirus will evolve to survive the vaccine, so the higher the % of vaccinated, the better (assuming low vaccine risk).

The coronavirus has an RO of about 2.5 (without mitigation). From what I've read in this area, 50% of the population vaccinated + 10% infected would have a significant effect - it is essentially creating "social distancing" since only 40% are at risk. Yet I doubt yet I doubt it would be enough to "get back to normal", especially large gathering. Imagine sporting events or concerts with 20,000+ in close proximity. That is 8,000 people at risk. Yet in other contexts, like restaurants it would be much harder for the virus to spread. 

There is also the issue of eradicating the virus quickly since the virus has the potential to mutate and develop new resistance to the vaccine. If only 50% of the population gets vaccinated, we could likely return to almost normal (except for very large gatherings), yet a low rate of coronavirus could persist for a while. If it mutates into a new strain resistant to the vaccine - it could start spreading again since people would be immune (or would have partial immunity). Yet scientists know this and are preparing for it. 

I used the 90% number as the high end. 90% vaccinated is highly effective up to a RO of around 12. If 90% of a population got vaccinated with a vaccine that is 94% effective - the current strains of coronavirus would be nearly eliminated within a month (in that population). 

[Forestluv]

20 minutes ago, Vipassana said:

Who are we kidding guys? When it gets down to it, this vaccine will be mandatory. They might not announce it as such but your access to life in society will be severely constrained without taking this vaccine. Travel, most jobs, concerts etc are already instilling policies that require you to have a 'health passport'. Just like you can't open your business, travel to other countries or walk into a store without a face mask, you won't be able to walk around society without this vaccine. 

https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/our-work/pubs_archive/pubs-pdfs/2020/200709-The-Publics-Role-in-COVID-19-Vaccination.pdf

something that will really be a bummer is if Government benefits comes with COVID-19 vaccine as a package. In other words, they can easily say that your health care plan will be disqualified without taking this vaccine. 

I can definitely see governments taking this approach. In an altruistic sense, it would help to eliminate the virus. If only 60% of the population got vaccinated, restricting the 40% without immunity would help reduce the RO. I can see various agencies and employers creating policies that make the vaccine mandatory, unless there is a health exemption and possibly restricting movement. I could also see people getting 'marked' as being vaccinated. 

I suppose this could be used for nefarious purposes, yet it can also be altruistic. For example, not being able to walk into a store without a face mask is a good thing. It is good for society at large, since it reduces coronavirus spread. Anti-maskers tend to be anti-science and hyper libertarian. In general, I don't think identifying people as vaccinated and giving them greater access until the coronavirus is under control is that problematic. I think there are other areas of greater concern in government over-reach. I would put widespread use of facial recognition as much more potentially dangerous for government over-reach. 

[PurpleTree]

It will probably be like

"Hi Sir, oh you want to get into that cinema, yesss pls we'd love to have you as a guest but you need a vaccination first"

or "Hey Madam, you would like to board our plane and enjoy some time on the beach in Greece, lovely the weather is great there,

but first you need to take the vaccine, thank youuuu"

[Vipassana]

@Forestluv considering all the conspiracies and 'mark of the beast' christian prophecies, i'm thinking 75% of people that voted for Trump & equal amount of new age stage green anti vaxer soccer moms and their children will avoid the vaccine like a plague which leaves atleast 65% of the population with open arms to be vaccinated. 

I personally will be avoiding this vaccine like a plague for selfish reasons. 

[Preety_India]

For some weird reason, I'm just as scared of this vaccine as I'm of the coronavirus if not more. 

It's like a mental process. The body subconsciously wants to reject anything associated with that pesky virus. 

@Vipassanahow about a fake vaccine certificate  you know how it works in India!! 

Edited November 16, 2020 by Preety_India

[Forestluv]

2 minutes ago, Vipassana said:

@Forestluv considering all the conspiracies and 'mark of the beast' christian prophecies, i'm thinking 75% of people that voted for Trump & equal amount of new age stage green anti vaxer soccer moms and their children will avoid the vaccine like a plague which leaves at least 65% of the population with open arms to be vaccinated. 

I personally will be avoiding this vaccine like a plague for selfish reasons. 

65% seems like a reasonable estimate if the vaccine is voluntary. That would be high enough to have a significant effect. 

I would also add in people that identify as having a health issue and have anxiety about a vaccine. Yet they might also have anxiety about getting coronavirus - so this group could go both ways. 

[PurpleTree]

5 minutes ago, Vipassana said:

@Forestluv considering all the conspiracies and 'mark of the beast' christian prophecies, i'm thinking 75% of people that voted for Trump & equal amount of new age stage green anti vaxer soccer moms and their children will avoid the vaccine like a plague which leaves atleast 65% of the population with open arms to be vaccinated. 

I personally will be avoiding this vaccine like a plague for selfish reasons. 

This might actually cause some really big violent protests if made mandatory

[Preety_India]

1 minute ago, Forestluv said:

 

I would also add in people that identify as having a health issue and have anxiety about a vaccine. Yet they might also have anxiety about getting coronavirus - so this group could go both ways. 

I'm in that group unfortunately. Oh, maybe I'm fortunate. 

[Forestluv]

Just now, PurpleTree said:

This might actually cause some really big violent protests if made mandatory

The government will need to be careful how they present it and if it comes across as "forced". Biden and Democrats will likely be on board. Trump has been hyping a vaccine for months and took experimental drugs when he had covid. Trump has been pro corporate pharmaceutical. So at this point, most Trumpers won't have a *strong* revulsion to a vaccine. Yet this could change if Trump and republicans want to be antagonistic and turn into a unified party of anti-vaxxer, anti-science etc. Yet then it will leak that those same Republicans and their family members are getting the vaccine.

I think if the government and the medical community comes across as transparent, I think 65%+ would volunteer for the vaccine. In the U.S. the majority of people think vaccines have done more good than harm. And most people want to protect themselves from covid - especially older people. 

[PurpleTree]

12 minutes ago, Forestluv said:

The government will need to be careful how they present it and if it comes across as "forced". Biden and Democrats will likely be on board. Trump has been hyping a vaccine for months and took experimental drugs when he had covid. Trump has been pro corporate pharmaceutical. So at this point, most Trumpers won't have a *strong* revulsion to a vaccine. Yet this could change if Trump and republicans want to be antagonistic and turn into a unified party of anti-vaxxer, anti-science etc. Yet then it will leak that those same Republicans and their family members are getting the vaccine.

I think if the government and the medical community comes across as transparent, I think 65%+ would volunteer for the vaccine. In the U.S. the majority of people think vaccines have done more good than harm. And most people want to protect themselves from covid - especially older people. 

Yea but i mean not just in the US, even in Europe and other places.

People are already agitated with the lockdowns etc.

Although it might be worse in the US because of all the weapons, fundamental christians who believe in the mark of the beast, polarity etc etc.

[Forestluv]

9 minutes ago, PurpleTree said:

Yea but i mean not just in the US, even in Europe and other places.

People are already agitated with the lockdowns etc.

It could be framed such that the vaccine will eliminate the need for lockdowns. The whole point of the vaccine is to prevent lockdowns and get back to normal.

It would be like telling a child "You can't leave the house until you take your medicine". That is incentive for the child to take the medicine.

[PurpleTree]

8 minutes ago, Forestluv said:

It could be framed such that the vaccine will eliminate the need for lockdowns. The whole point of the vaccine is to prevent lockdowns and get back to normal.

It would be like telling a child "You can't leave the house until you take your medicine". That is incentive for the child to take the medicine.

For sure, people who won't take the vaccine will just not have access to free-travel and many places but already now these people are saying it's all a scam, the government or "Bill Gates etc. are trying to fool us" etc. and they are already pretty let's say stubborn or militant and unstable.

Also "conspiracy theorists" have been talking about forced vaccinations, the mark of the beast, rfid chips etc. for decades so it will be messy either way imo.

[Axiomatic]

I just want this shit to go away and life to go back to normal. So whatever the best method for that is...