After reading the article I'm still not seeing the problem. The sentences in the article are factual information, there is no obvious editorial bias like a CNN or Fox article, and there is nothing telling you how to feel (e.g. "You should be afraid" NYT title).
Reuters still seems pretty good compared to what's available out there.
> Two people having breakthrough infections for any variant is not at all unlikely
The point is that this fact isn't newsworthy... unless Reuters is running an agenda. This article is blatant fearmongering.
People flagging this thread are in denial. This is an event of direct relevance to the justification for government policies affecting billions of people, that's why Reuters considers it newsworthy.
...and that's a non-news. We know that, we didn't expect anything else for a long time now since it's also true for other variants. Booster policies were made with that information already taken into account.
Stop pushing this agenda. It is ignorant and false.
What you're arguing is that this event is merely an extreme fluke that a hungry press managed to dredge out of ... somewhere. That doesn't hold water because Omicron is only days old as a recognized variant at all, and these aren't 'two random people' but rather one clearly and recognizably infecting another in a low density space (e.g. not a conference or other big accumulation of people), despite that they're doctors and thus highly vaccinated.
Now, here's something to chew on. The claims of vaccine efficacy you keep reading are all wrong. They aren't measures of relative likelihoods of getting infected as you might imagine. They are heavily adjusted using a statistical methodology that's known to malfunction in the presence of variants. The raw, unadjusted data is unfortunately hidden almost everywhere, except England, where the public health authorities publish it alongside the adjusted numbers. And the raw numbers show that vaccination makes people more likely to get infected, not less. The rates per 100k are higher in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated.
This has led to the ultimate absurdity of the UK public health agency claiming, "Comparing case rates among vaccinated and unvaccinated populations should not be used to estimate vaccine effectiveness against COVID-19 infection".
https://eugyppius.substack.com/p/ukhsa-efficacy-stats-death-...
Someone made a dashboard you can use the explore the UK numbers here:
https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/t.coddington/viz/UKRe...
That said, I don't see that as egregious and of interest because the effectiveness of the vaccine against this mutation is as well. It does not provide answers and the focus on the researchers is questionable, but I don't really see it as a problem or fear mongering.
- higher exposure
but also
- better, and stricter safety measures that are really followed
I guess it’s just a symptom of the attention economy and the bad state of education and ability for independent thought everywhere.
I am confident that the people giving out so called “Herman Cain Awards” for COVID will be judged as harshly as we judge those who called HIV the gay plague.
They deny the virus exists/ is dangerous.
They don’t take precautions, like masks or get vaccinated.
The advocate against folks who get vaccinated calling them “sheep” or other names.
On one hand, many of these folks have fallen victim to disinformation and one political party in America that’s trying to actively hurt them for some sort of gain. So yea maybe it’s not their fault. On the other hand, my friend got accosted trying to get his kiddo vaxxed by one of these folks. Not cool.
I’m not so sure. If there were a safe, free and widely available vaccine for HIV and gay men were going out of their way to shout about not taking it then I think the situation may have been comparable.
Ignoring it is irresponsible. Panicking is irresponsible. This isn’t a difficult or new concept! Each year the flu is a new “variant” and every single year it has the _potential_ to be 1918 all over again. But we don’t close borders and force quarantine until we have proof it isn’t 1918 bad. We study it, we prepare vaccines and we take reasonable precautions
It isn't asking for much after what we've been through to go a month with more caution. If we had a 1918 flu, and then another strain worse than that within 2 years, of course we might take some precautions when we find a 3rd strain overtaking the 2nd strain.
And the pointless emotional fact that they are doctors, as if any virus considers ones CV. And the excessive use of “probably” in this story.
I get that COVID was a ~bane~ (I meant boon) for the news industry and that people scared shitless are more likely to click but this shit is getting borderline irresponsible.