Vaccinated people get in contact with the virus as much as the non vaccinated.

The virus invades the bodies and start multiplying in both populations.

The difference is that the vaccinated body is prepared to immediately attack the virus, something that takes weeks for the unvaccinated body to figure out.

So during the short interval when the vaccinated body hasn't yet wiped out the virus, the person is technically infected, will test positive, and can probably transmit some of the few viruses it has.

But that both vaccinated and unvaccinated can transmit the virus does NOT mean the danger levels are anywhere near similar!

This is probably why so many athletes get positive tests. If you get tested every day, you can get a positive test while a minor infection is defeated, even though you don't feel any symptoms.

> Vaccinated people get in contact with the virus as much as the non vaccinated.

Is this known to be true, or is it an assumption you're making in your analysis?

Just curious, because I would have expected people who refuse to be vaccinated to also be more likely to socialize in ways that expose them to the virus.

I should probably have said "as easily". I doubt anyone knows which group is more exposed, and it's not very important for the argument.

Personally, I expose myself to a lot more virus risks than before I got vaccinated, if you want an opposing argument.

I think you are a robot. Look I made an assumption too :) just like you. I have no evidence for what I ve said, again just like you.

Dude, please stop watching the news and read more books.

how does one flag a comment @dang?

How I do this is:

On the main page, the comment has a header, e.g. "peakaboo 1 hour ago [–]"

Click on the "1 hour ago" (will be later for you, obviously)

Now you see just the 1 comment, and a reply form.

But now the header has more options, "peakaboo 1 hour ago | parent | flag | favorite"

I have clicked "flag", to help take out the trash on this one too.

> If someone is vaccinated AND still spreading the virus, is it any different from having an asymthomatic case of COVID?

It carries about an order of magnitude lower risk of hospitalization or death, so... yes. Yes, it is very different. We don't know about long term effects, those are, y'know, long term and hard to study in this kind of timeframe. Which is why the linked article is notable.

Also note that risk of transmission is about 10x lower (vs. delta, better vs. the older variants) for the vaccinated. So even if they're just as likely to see long term CNS issues from infection they're vastly less likely to be infected in the first place.

I don't think this article changes the vaccine calculus at all. Get your shot. It's your best protection against everything to do with covid.

I'm glad no one asked for your expert opinion then.

I'm sorry, but that seems to be an impossible claim. In fact there are zero cases (edit: two people have come by to cite statistics on all-cause death numbers, which aren't responsive here. PLEASE be careful with your numbers, people, those values include folks who died of car accidents and heroin overdoses, etc...) where the Pfizer or Moderna vaccines are generally believed to have caused death, and 3 (three) deaths in the US from clotting associated with the J&J vaccine. It strains credulity that two of those three were associates of yours, sorry.

In fact IIRC the overall death rate (i.e. just counting how many people died of all causes following vaccine administration) has, in fact (this is hardly surprising given the general pandemic environment) been shown to be significantly lower for the vaccinated.

I don't know what you're citing, but it doesn't track with existing science, sorry.

> I would be fired for even sharing my opinions.

My guess is it would be your factual assertions and not your "opinions" that would get you in trouble.

Here is data for Canada.

"Up to and including July 16, 2021, a total of 152 deaths were reported after the administration of a vaccine."

https://health-infobase.canada.ca/covid-19/vaccine-safety/#a...

The vaccine isn't expected to prevent all-cause mortality, though.

People will die no matter whether they're vaccinated or not, the question is a) will they die because of covid and b) will they die because of the vaccine. Your statistics do not even approach this question.

This is governments own website, not "my statistics". Its a tracking system to report suspected adverse effects. As in a physician reported an adverse effect they noticed in the patient, soon after the admission of the vaccine. It does not include any potential long term effects. As we don't know them yet.

Directly after the quote you mentioned:

- 33 are under investigation

- 61 unrelated to the vaccine

- 52 had insufficient information to determine if the vaccine was linked to the death

and finally the piece of information we're interested in:

- 6 due to TTS (a known side-effect), all from people who received the COVISHIELD/AstraZeneca vaccine

Sure except, I wish you just quoted directly. "61 of these deaths are unlikely linked to a COVID-19 vaccine."

Is not the same as 61 unrelated to the vaccine.

Sorry, you don't get to cite data incorrectly, get corrected, and then perform your own amateur epidemiology live on the internet to nitpick your way back to the argument. If you genuinely believe the vaccine is killing people, you need to find an expert saying that.

> Is not the same as 61 unrelated to the vaccine.

You do understand it also does not mean they are related to the vaccine, right?

I mean, putting aside the grasping as straws aspect of this claim, let's look at your original claim: in a country where there are already 20 million person's who already were administered the vaccine, and given that by your own account you can only put together two dozen cases among those 20 million that are not ruled out vaccine side-effects, don't you agree that the tradeoff is clear?

Well you don't know the long term effects. So you can't say the trade off is worth it. It's just blind optimism on your part, not even shared by the vaccine manufacturers, that put in their government contracts clauses that they will not guarantee that it works or take liability for any side effects. Despite making billions on these drugs.

> Well you don't know the long term effects.

To put it accurately, there is absolutely no indication that any vaccine has any long-term effect whatsoever.

Doesn't this mean you are trying to analyze tradeoffs of a problem that does not exist in the plane of reality?

Read about Marek's disease. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marek%27s_disease

"However, the leaky vaccine changes this evolutionary pressure and permits the evolution of highly virulent strains.[13] The vaccine's inability to prevent infection and transmission allows the spread of highly virulent strains among vaccinated chickens."

You are missing a vital information. 152 death in how many vaccinations?

44,694,799 total doses administered, if all of these were two shots than that would be over 22,000,000 people.

What is the death rate of 22,000,000 infected people without vaccination?

Here is why this is a bad hypothetical:

1) You are assuming that the current set of vaccines will stop the spread of this disease. This is already in doubt due to break away strains. In fact, it's possible that the currently vaccinated will be more susceptible to spread the new strains. This week's mask mandate was all about the vaccinated spreading the delta strain and having more viral load in their nose . Naturally gained immunity is know to offer more protection from being reinfected with the virus. People that carry antibodies because they had the disease are more resilient because their immune system recognizes the virus by more than just the spike protein.

2. You are assuming 22,000,000 would otherwise get infected with Covid. This is not necessarily true. Young people don't get sick. Herd immunity, therapeutics and better future treatments make this unlikely.

3. We don't know the long term effects of the vaccine yet, thus can't make an ultimate call on the actual comparative rates of deaths. Hypothetically, what if the vaccine reduces life expectancy by 10 years, of millions of people. Would it still be better than natural herd immunity.

1) Studies show that vaccinated don't stop the spread of the variants but still slow it down compared to the not vaccinated. >In fact, it's possible that the currently vaccinated will be more susceptible to spread the new strains. On what is that assumption based? The vaccination effect is based on normal antibodies of the immune system, so there is no big difference between vaccinated and recovered.

2) You are confusing infection with infection disease. You can be sure you will get infected by the corona virus but that doesn't mean you'll get COVID. If 22,000,000 people get the corona virus if with low IFR like 0.003 you get 660 deaths and that's only for people under 30. Additionally you are ignoring the effect of the variants you are referencing in 1) Young people are more likely to get sick by the variants and herd immunity is based on antibodies and therefore have the same problem as he vaccine based antibodies. A new variant could make them equally useless.

3) We don't know the long term effects by corona either. In contrast to the vaccines, we have already found evidence of organ damage in the heart , lungs and kidneys with Corona, which may not disappear even in the long term.

The bottom line is that the risk without vaccination is much higher than with vaccination.

Note that this number includes e.g. people who were hit by a bus after leaving the vaccination centre. It’s not at all a useful statistic for determining vaccine safety.

"Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 342 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through July 26, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 6,340 reports of death (0.0019%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine."

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

Exactly, that is an overall death rate, which IIRC is lower than the death rate among the unvaccinated population! It shows the opposite of what you think it does.

Do tell. What was I thinking?

Other vaccine trials were shut down immediately with less than 100 deaths. Suddenly we are accepting of THOUSANDS of deaths due to a vaccine, possibly more unreported? Utter Scientific Religion level beliefs going on here.

VAERS is not, by any means, verified side effects or deaths of the vaccine. It's first-line, unverified reports.

This is also not a vaccine trial, there are far more people who have been vaccinated than would be in any trial, by orders of magnitude.

I sincerely question this. Please provide references, as I’m seeing single digit numbers of documented cases for both DIC and Transverse Myelitis caused by the vaccine.

I in no way think those numbers are complete, but given the number of doses given and the astonishing rarity of those very specific issues, I have to question your comment.

I’m in an extraordinarily healthy population (military) and I know of no one that has had any reactions at all, as a counterpoint. Given the political leanings of my peer group, I’m positive I would have heard about it.

> I know two physicians who died from the vaccine, one who bled to death with DIC in my care. I know of another in our area who is permanently disabled with transverse myelitis after the vaccine.

Do you have a VAERS ID number? Do you have a link to a news report you can share? Not to be dark, but do you have a link to an obituary?

Because it's a little hard to take your claims as anything more than unsourced anecdotes that can be summed up by the CDCs adverse events statistics.

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

I could go looking for trouble in the VAERS database but I think aggregate statistics are better for getting a feel for how safe the vaccine is.

Back that up with some evidence. I doubt you’re even a physician.

> We don't know about long term effects, those are, y'know, long term and hard to study in this kind of timeframe. Which is why the linked article is notable.

This is priceless, as, for the same reasons, we do not know the long term effects of any of the vaccines either.

They are regarded as very safe compared to other approaches.

That's a great question. Another interesting one is whether these vaccines are preventing cases of Long Covid. I feel World leaders are conveniently being quiet about these questions, and focusing too much on the drop of death counts only. It's an attempt to rush and re-open the economy at any cost.

As far as I'm aware, the answers to these questions is currently not known.

One might reasonably extrapolate from a 10x (100x?) reduction in deaths to a 10x reduction in brain damage.