Hacker News Reader

Comment by kasey_junk | Hacker News Reader

Pretext implies dishonesty. Is that the word you meant? Do you also believe tetanus or influenza vaccines have a similar “pretext”?

View on HN

The difference is that influenza isn’t required to work, attend a concert, eat in NYC, ect. When the vaccine is so directly tied to your ability to participate in society, it becomes a concerning scenario because of conflicts of interest, ect. The pharmaceutical industry doesn’t have a great track record of doing what’s best for you, and frankly, neither does the government. See the opioid epidemic for exhibit A and the financial bailouts for exhibit B.

At least in my state a tetanus vaccine and booster schedule is required to attend school…

And only to attend school, and until 4 or 5 years ago it was probably very easy to get an exemption. And every one of those vaccines had been in existence and monitored for safety concerns for years before they were ever mandated.

In my state, at least, the restrictions on the tetanus vaccine for school is more restrictive than any covid restriction on public life.

I’m not sure how any of this has to do with using the term “pretext” to describe booster shots. They are a normal and accepted part of public health immunization plans and have been for as long as I’ve been alive. Pretext, at least to me, implies that there is no health reason for boosters and if anything this study suggests the opposite.

And to immigrate to the country in the first place, and to be a nurse ...

The ellipsis seems to imply something else. Is there anything else or have we enumerated them exhaustively?

I know at least a couple of nurses who were able to get around the flu shot requirements, probably because it was pretty well understood they only reduce transmission marginally at best.

I immigrated to the country exactly once. I do not plan to immigrate again any time soon.

> The difference is that influenza isn’t required to work, attend a concert, eat in NYC, ect.

Look at the average number of flu cases and deaths per year, then look at how many COVID cases and deaths just this year, and maybe you'll understand why.

> The pharmaceutical industry doesn’t have a great track record of doing what’s best for you

This argument is so silly to me, because it's CLEARLY not thought through.

A vaccine is NOT in the best interest of Big Pharma. They stand to make MORE money by not making the vaccine and allowing the virus to rip through the population and selling treatments.

When the disease has something like 99.999% survival rate, no. Treating sick people is not as lucrative as forcing 90% of the population to get a shot every 6 months to keep their job.

Focusing on survival rates ignores the overflowing ICUs, not to mention a lot of people coming out of it with long-lasting lung damage.

But what really irks me is the hypocrisy. Everyone crying about not wanting to get the jab because they don't trust the drug companies will run to the hospital and take everything they'll offer when they get COVID.

> Look at the average number of flu cases and deaths per year, then look at how many COVID cases and deaths just this year, and maybe you'll understand why.

I just took another look at the numbers, the flu kills ~27k people total every year and Covid kills ~33k under 50's every year, which largely covers the attend a concert and eat in NYC crowd.

Not that it means anything, I'm deliberately comparing different age groups and those numbers would certainly be higher if not for lock-downs and vaccines. I just find it interesting how close the numbers are.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/2018-2019.html

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1191568/reported-deaths-...

Not sure why you are deliberately comparing different age groups but from your own source influenza killed ~1800 “under 50s” in the 2018-2019 season.

The numbers aren’t remotely close.

it's not to minimize the dangers of covid, if anything this reinforces it's many times more dangerous than the flu.

but i think it's interesting context in terms of risk assessment to realize that under 50's account for 2/3 of the population yet only 6.7% of fatal covid cases.

> I just took another look at the numbers, the flu kills ~27k people total every year and Covid kills ~33k under 50's every year, which largely covers the attend a concert and eat in NYC crowd.

I have never seen a more clear example of "The statistics don't fit my narrative, so I'm going to abuse them".

Compare the COVID deaths under 50 with the Flu deaths under 50.

How am I abusing the data and what narrative am I claiming to have? I know the audience on HN and I know I don't need to hand-hold anyone here when presenting statistics. I even included a disclaimer for people like you.

>The pharmaceutical industry doesn’t have a great track record of doing what’s best for you

I'd say it has a pretty damn good record if you look at the full picture and don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

There have been some terrible cases over the years, but At Large, companies have made thousands of new drug and S Saved hundred of millions of lives, let blind people see, and prevented horrible illnesses.

Sure, they did it for money, but that's how you motivate people to go to work in the morning.

First, vaccinations are required for schools as an example.

Second, this should only be temporary until the burden on the health care is reduced. The fundamental problem is not enough people getting vaccinated. None of this would be necessary if more people were vaccinated.

Influenza vaccines have a rather poor efficiency record. In a good year 50-60%, in a bad one as little as 10-20%, i.e. mostly useless.

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/vaccines-work/past-seasons-estimates...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com