Hacker News Reader

Comment by Clubber | Hacker News Reader

I don't think that's accurate. Do you have some links or anything to back that up? Like actual transcripts, not some media interpretation.

"People say, do you think it's safe to get vaccinated? I've said, yeah, I think for the most part it's safe to get vaccinated. I do. I do," Rogan said on the podcast. "But if you're like 21 years old, and you say to me, should I get vaccinated? I'll go no. Are you healthy? Are you a healthy person?"

"If you're a healthy person, and you're exercising all the time, and you're young, and you're eating well," Rogan continued, "like, I don't think you need to worry about this."

If this is what you are referring to, is that really anti-vax?

View on HN

Of course that's anti-vax.

The main purpose of getting the vaccine isn't just to protect yourself -- it's to reduce the chances of you transmitting it to others. It's about herd immunity, not personal immunity. Whether you're young and healthy is irrelevant.

> The main purpose of getting the vaccine isn't just to protect yourself -- it's to reduce the chances of you transmitting it to others. It's about herd immunity, not personal immunity.

Not about personal immunity? Why did we roll it out by age group then?

Older people as a group require more care when they get sick. Additionally, elderly group living was being hit the hardest by the pandemic, especially early on.

It wasn't about saving the most lives per se. It was about reducing the load on the medical system. I suspect those outcomes are strongly correlated.

> It wasn't about saving the most lives

How can you think it was about anything but saving lives? The cognitive dissonance and mental gymnastics in this thread is incredible. The vaccine offers personal immunity thats why we gave it to the most at risk groups first.

Herd immunity is not possible with our current vaccines[1], which means that coronavirus will continue to propagate through society whether you decide to get vaccinated or not.

You can make the argument that getting vaccinated reduces the risk of you being hospitalized, which keeps a bed and a nurse available for someone else. Thats a much more valid argument to make.

[1]: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00728-2

Edit: for those downvoting me, I’ve added a reference for more information

>Herd immunity is not possible with our current vaccines, which means that coronavirus will continue to propagate through society

This is my understanding as well, which was why I decided to get vaccinated. If avoiding infection is impossible in the long run, I should help my immune system prepare for it.

I wonder how differently things would be going if the campaign was "Covid is here to stay. You will get it. Get vaccinated."

Maybe it would help, maybe not.

>I wonder how differently things would be going if the campaign was "Covid is here to stay. You will get it. Get vaccinated."

I actually heard someone say that today, but I don't remember where. Maybe Breaking Points, but not sure.

I was certainly rattled when I saw amateur video of hospital workers stacking bodies in a freezer truck in NYC. They should do more like that. As morbid as it is, it gets the point across.

https://nypost.com/2020/03/30/disturbing-footage-shows-dead-...

This wasn't the one I saw but you get the idea.

> should I get vaccinated? I'll go no.

Yes that's anti-vax. We get vaccinated not just to protect ourselves from death, but also to protect those around us by reducing the transmission of disease.

Acknowledging that vaccines have some risk & at a certain risk reward trade-off you would not take the vaccine is not anti-vax.

False. The vaccinated can and do transmit the disease. Vaccination only protects you. It doesn’t protect others around you.

It reduces the chance of transmission. That's how it protects others...

> Vaccination only protects you

False. Vaccinated people can still get sick, and vaccination reduces the spread of disease, protecting people that aren't you.

http://cdc.org/

Except that all the existing evidence suggests your argument is backwards. Whilst Covid-19 vaccination doesn't provide full protection for either the vaccinated or those around them, it seems to be much more effective at protecting the person being vaccinated against severe symptoms, hospitalization and death than it does at stopping them catching and spreading the virus to others. As far as I can tell, literally the only reason vaccination is primarily framed as a way of protecting others is because that framing fits better into left-wing politics; it has nothing to do with the actual evidence.

According to the CDC, each vaccine efficacy at preventing the recipient from catching the virus. To your point they also reduces severity of symptoms. Looks like the J&J one ain't that great at prevention.

Based on evidence from clinical trials in people 16 years and older, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 95% effective at preventing laboratory-confirmed infection with the virus that causes COVID-19 in people who received two doses and had no evidence of being previously infected.

Based on evidence from clinical trials, in people aged 18 years and older, the Moderna vaccine was 94.1% effective at preventing laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection in people who received two doses and had no evidence of being previously infected.

The J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine was 66.3% effective in clinical trials (efficacy) at preventing laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 infection in people who received the vaccine and had no evidence of being previously infected. People had the most protection 2 weeks after getting vaccinated.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/different...

That's from the clinical trials, which are like two variants behind what people are actually being exposed to in the wild right now. The vaccines are much less effective at preventing people from catching and spreading the currently-circulating Delta variant than the original one which those numbers were based on. Firstly, they don't stop people from catching the virus nearly as well, and secondly vaccinated people who do catch the virus seem to have comparable viral load and spread it just as well as the unvaccinated. Also, the Delta variant is just better at spreading in general, which itself means a more effective vaccine would be needed in order to prevent everyone from inevitably catching it.

It's more nuanced than that. Prior to the delta variant, there was strong evidence that the vaccines also prevented you from being a carrier of the virus in most cases.

The calculus with delta is different, as it does seem that vaccinated people can spread delta. But the severity of that spread, as well as the amount of time a vaccinated person can spread it, is certainly lower than that of an unvaccinated person.

Yeah, it is! People thinking they don't need the vaccine are contracting COVID and acting like human petri dishes for new variants to arise from. It's also ignoring the reality of COVID aftereffects (like parosmia) that affect young people who recover too.

How do you come to that conclusion? Specifically your conflusion that Joe Rogan is "anti-vax" from your sample of him replying "I'll go no". If that's all it takes for you to label someone, is someone saying "I'll go no" to a homosexual encounter also anti-gay? Is someone who doesn't agree with their governments policy anti-government? Might want to relax a bit...I hear opinions are like certain body parts. We've all got them, including Joe Rogan, and getting up in arms about it doesn't help you or anyone else.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com