Hacker News Reader

Comment by myko | Hacker News Reader

https://twitter.com/JohnsHopkinsSPH/status/14816875061481185...

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/vaccinated-people-can...

It is well known that vaccination helps to reduce spread. It isn't perfect, but it is better than being unvaccinated.

The data is clear but you can also reason about this and feel like it is intuitively true - those that are vaccinated face better outcomes and are sick for shorter periods of time, the shorter period of time they are infected leads to them being unable to infect others for as long. It's pretty simple, really.

edit: multiple studies by scientists in different countries is more reliable than marketing text from any specific manufacturer. The data is available, just read the studies mentioned in the article I linked, or research on your own.

View on HN

Shouldn't people be isolating regardless of vaccination status, so the argument that they're sick for shorter amount of time is redundant?

Why do we care about the virus spreading, it's always going to spread.. the concern should be giving the vaccine to the vulnerable that need it; the main benefit is reducing severity for them. For everyone else, its main benefit is securing revenue for the leading drug manufacturers.

If I'm unvaccinated and testing negative, then what is the problem?

This feels a bit like moving the goal post like a few different times. This is about the claim that vaccines don't reduce spread, that appears to be false. You're reacting like this is about if people have at least a moral obligation to get vaccinated. While I do think that's true, I think it's more productive to stay strictly to the facts.

Ok though if we're going to move the goal post.

> Shouldn't people be isolating regardless of vaccination status, so the argument that they're sick for shorter amount of time is redundant?

Maybe, but we all know that people aren't isolating every time they have cold symptoms, certainly not universally and probably not the people who aren't current vaccinated.

> Why do we care about the virus spreading, it's always going to spread.

That is only true now that we've given it time to become one of the most infectious viruses ever. A quick rollout of vaccines combined with a few common since interventions did (perhaps) have the potential to achieve herd immunity, but regardless the speed at which it spreads is of literally deadly importance. Overwhelming hospitals kills people (and kills people well before they are literally out of beds).

One of the single most important things we can do to slow the spread, is isolate when we're sick or in contact with someone that tests positive. If we did this one step effectively, it would reduce infection significantly. It's something done extremely well in countries like SK, Japan, China.

People who need to isolate should be sent care packages so they don't need to go out to the shop, they should update their status regularly and be given what they need to pay bills.

Well sure, but vaccination helps too, we can and should do both and not throw up our hands and do nothing because we aren't doing the optimal thing

If the vaccines reduce spread, the manufacturers would say so. I asked for such a claim from any one of them.

Edit:

>multiple studies by scientists in different countries is more reliable than marketing text from any specific manufacturer.

I agree. The problem is, no such marketing text exists.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com