Does anyone expect covid to be a significant cause of death in the US past, say, May 15? I guess if we get another wave very soon, maybe it could persist. But it just seems like this is on its way out between organic immunity and vaccine immunity (especially because the latter was focused on the vulnerable).<p>I'm not an expert, so don't take this as advice to go coughing on everyone. But we all have to make some decisions based on imperfect information and it seems like covid is nearly knocked out.<p>There is some concern over another wave, but it might just be minor cases from unvaccinated young people. That hopefully won't lead to a lot more deaths.
I’m seeing a lot of similar concerns in the comments so I just want to post this video from Vox. They did a great job explaining this issue.<p>Effectiveness doesn’t really mean much between approved vaccines in the US. Please watch this video:
<a href="https://youtu.be/K3odScka55A" rel="nofollow">https://youtu.be/K3odScka55A</a><p>From what we know so far, any of the approved vaccines are excellent and no one knows for sure if one is better than the other. The only logical thing to do is get what is offered to you as soon as possible.<p>That being said, this is excellent news that Pfizer is protective against the SA Variant. Not trying to minimize that news, just point out that it still is better to just get whatever approved vaccine you can.
I'm always confused about "effectiveness" numbers. Are these "effective at preventing severe disease" or "effective at preventing symptomatic disease" or against transmission period? The article seems to suggest it's the latter, but it seems somewhat ambiguous. Does this term have a specific definition in epidemiology that journalists and pharma marketers assume everyone understands what kind of "effectiveness" they're talking about?
I wish it was easier to tell which vaccine was the better one to take. I know the "correct" answer is "whichever one is available to you", but let's pretend we're free-agent adults here and put the infantile answers aside for a moment.<p>There seems to be a very strong urge not to compare any of them as <i>better</i>, which puts users in a position of information asymmetry where they might not make the best health choices for themselves.<p>Is there any realistic way to compare which of the vaccine selections available in the USA is better given certain conditions? For example, if someone has a history of reacting to vaccines (GBS), is the attenuated adenovirus from J&J a better choice compared to the mRNA alternatives?
Funny how US media write 'Pfizer' and EU media write 'Biontech'. Patriotism, probably. Or for Reuters, maybe Brexit!? What's it usually called in Asian, South American, or African media?<p>'Pfizer/Biontech' or 'Biontech/Pfizer' is just too long!
It's a comparison between two control groups and the amount that were infected.<p>X - vaccine - 25 people get it
Y - no vaccine - 250 people get it<p>That would mean it's 1 - 25/250 * 100 = 90% effective.
Sorry but I don't believe it.<p>In the very beginning of the South African variant there was a report that it wouldn't protect against it and other variants.
They're the most expensive vaccine and they want to keep selling their product.<p>I just lost faith in anything. When politicians make a profit from a prolonged emergency situation they have no reason to shorten the pandemic period.
I'm talking about German politicians getting a commission on masks, and them being the ones who decide which kinds of masks are required.
It's all so corrupt.<p>I'm waiting for the Russian and/or Chinese vaccine, maybe travel to Serbia to get my Sputnik V shots, since the EU is playing it political.
About a month ago they were even suggesting that "Can we trust the Russian vaccine or is it a Trojan Horse" I mean, suggesting that the Russians would knowingly kill the population of the EU. How through and through Nazified is Germany?<p>Why would I pick the Sputnik V one over all others?
Because they have prior knowledge and are doing 2 vectors (I'm not an expert but I read something about them doing ... well 2 vectors so the virus can't develop a resistence against the vaccine).
I trust the Russian government more than my own, who has time and against lied and deceived me, even denounced what we were demonstrating against the new copyright laws and upload filters. The EU is corrupt through and through and they walk over dead bodies.
Especially this new EU council lead by Ursula von der Leyen.<p>Who even elected her? No one that's who. She has a past where she was involved in a corruption scandal and the phone with evidence on it, a state owned phone, was magically erased just when the evidence was to be secured.<p>So yeah I don't trust anything that's developed in the EU and much less GB who voted pro those harmful "copyright" laws so they could have an advantage when they brexitted.<p>Astazenica kills people. A Vaccine that kills people. WTF.
And politicians are debating that it should now be used on the elderly, because hey fuck the elderly right, they're old and almost dead anyway...<p>I can't eat how much I could puke.
If you told me that in 2021 there would be a global genetic engineering campaign I would have said you were crazy. But here we are. What an amazing time.
There are many businesses that have adapted to and prefer pandemic life. They, perhaps even more so than the hysterics, are our major blockers to returning to normalcy.
It's good day to announce this. People are taking all announcements today very seriously.
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v53EUMNSdQs" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v53EUMNSdQs</a>
Hilarious that they still label it as a country variant, as if the variant carries a genetic “country” code that determines the origin. Plain stupidity.<p>[Edit] To elaborate since there is so much negativity to my original comment. There is no absolute proof that the variant originated in South Africa, so calling it by a country’s name is an insult to human intelligence. We refer to the virus as the Coronavirus and not the Chinese virus. Why should the variant be any different? (This variant being actually called 501.V2)
As a layman who is generally skeptical of media promotions, 91% sounds wonderful. According to a recent study 100% of young teenagers found it effective. On face value the marketing sounds good.<p>However, I wouldn't be interested personally. If after long term use these vaccines prove to be everything they are promised to be _and_ coronvirus remains an issue, I would gladly take it. As it is I am relatively healthy and not at risk.<p>Reasonable people can disagree on the trustworthiness of media, government and technocrats.<p>Ultimately, trust is earned. It is up to the individual to decide for himself. Attempts to scare people into vaccination or mandate use don't help the sale. Trust has been lost. Until this has been addressed, the optics surrounding the promotion of these vaccines can appear as hard sell, urgency, "act now while supplies last" scare techniques.<p>I know many here are convinced. Hopefully this gives some insight into the skeptical view. Tinfoil or microchip implants don't play a role.
Expect to get vaccinated several times a year. No kidding.<p><a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu-vaccines-idUSKCN2AV0H6" rel="nofollow">https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-eu-vac...</a><p>"The European Union aims to increase the region’s COVID-19 vaccine production capacity to 2-3 billion doses per year by the end of 2021"<p>Hint: The EU has about 400 Million people