[cleanwater]

Vaccines are NOT 100% effective. 5-10% of vaccinated people can become infected.

[Tmarkwald]

Originally Posted by gdennis317

95% effective means 5 out of 100 get it

So, you are inferring that if nobody got vaccinated, 100% of the population would get infected.

Simply not true. 95% effective means 5 out of 100 are susceptible to exposure.

We know that of those susceptible, 95% will not get it, and of the 5% that will get it, 98% will survive.

The math gets rather long but of a sampling of 50,000, 2500 are susceptible

Of that 2500, 100 will get Covid.

Of that 100, more than 98 will survive

So effectively, 1 in 50,000 will not survive....

That's the math...

[Tmarkwald]

Originally Posted by merrymini

I am not an antivaxxer, I just do not want this vaccine. There is too much unknown and all these “experts” are not credible. More than 10 people HAVE died from the vaccine 13 in Norway alone.

That's already been debunked by Norway and the US as well.

I'd rather have a 99.999% chance at life, than a 2% chance of death

[Tmarkwald]

Originally Posted by cleanwater

Vaccines are NOT 100% effective. 5-10% of vaccinated people can become infected.

5% CAN be infected. of those, 95% will not, and of those, 98% will survive.

[allsport]

Have you even been reading the science, the new variant is spreading rapidly among kids and the sick kids require hospitalization. It is increasing cases around the country.

[blueash]

Originally Posted by gdennis317

Not True

95% effective means 5 out of 100 get it, symptoms can be none to typically mild.
.

Sorry but you are wrong. 95% effective means that in a situation where 100 people who are not vaccinated get sick, only 5 with vaccine get sick. Think of it this way. If seat belts are 60% effective at reducing crash deaths, it does not mean that 40% of seat-belt wearers will die in a car crash.

More technically, start with 10000 people. Give 5000 the shots. Watch them for 3 months. If out of the vaccinated 5000 you get 5 sick people and out of the not vaccinated group you get 100 sick people the vaccine was 95% effective. It reduced cases by 95%

Your statement that 5% of the vaccinated group gets sick is wrong. In my example 5% of the 5000 people would mean 250 get sick using your misunderstanding. As you can see that is not how the statistic is calculated. 95% efficacy does not mean that 5% of the vaccinated people will get sick.

[G.R.I.T.S.]

Originally Posted by DeanFL

I'm CONFUSED. So if we get the vaccine (we have) WHY does Fauci and others STILL insist that we must wear masks (two), restrict travel and other activities etc etc. EVEN with SCIENCE apparently countering with scientific data - clinical trials and real-world data - HER WORDS. What ?????

......................................
The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in a new interview celebrated data suggesting that those who have been vaccinated against COVID-19 largely "do not carry the virus."

CDC director Dr. Rochelle Walensky told MSNBC's Rachel Maddow on Monday that "our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus" or get sick.

"It's not just in the clinical trials, but it's also in real-world data," she added.

Her comments seemed to be in reference to a CDC study released earlier on Monday that examined Moderna's and Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccines and found that in real-world conditions, they reduced the risk of infection by 90 percent two or more weeks after the second dose was administered. The CDC said the study demonstrated that the vaccines "can reduce both asymptomatic and symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections."

Though Walensky expressed optimism over this finding and said "we can kind of almost see the end" of the pandemic based on the rate of vaccinations in the United States, she also reiterating her concern about COVID-19 cases ticking up.

"What I really would hate to have happen is to have another oncoming surge just as we're reaching towards getting so many more people vaccinated," she said.

Walensky had previously expressed similar concerns on Monday about a potential fourth surge in COVID-19 cases, saying in a briefing she has a feeling "of impending doom" while urging Americans to "please hold on a little while longer."
.
.

CDC director: Data suggests vaccinated people largely 'do not carry the virus'

https://twitter.com/therecount/statu...185100232.html

Man, you're not the only one confused! If I'm vaccinated, and therefore "protected" and don't "spread" the virus I don't carry, it matters not if others are not vaccinated. Now, in six months (which is what I'm hearing currently regarding the length of said protection) I'll be digging out my mask to don until further info on re-vaccination or if efficacy is beyond six months.

[tthdr]

95 % effective is not 100%. If you are around a carrier you can still get sick. You may avoid hospitalization and serious illness but still get sick. So particularly if you have underlying medical issues it can be a problem

[blueash]

Originally Posted by Tmarkwald

So, you are inferring that if nobody got vaccinated, 100% of the population would get infected.

Simply not true. 95% effective means 5 out of 100 are susceptible to exposure.

We know that of those susceptible, 95% will not get it, and of the 5% that will get it, 98% will survive.

The math gets rather long but of a sampling of 50,000, 2500 are susceptible

Of that 2500, 100 will get Covid.

Of that 100, more than 98 will survive

So effectively, 1 in 50,000 will not survive....

That's the math...

See above. You do not understand how effectiveness is calculated so please until you do stop trying to tell people "that's the math". Efficacy has nothing to do with susceptible.

[blueash]

Originally Posted by G.R.I.T.S.

,, Now, in six months (which is what I'm hearing currently regarding the length of said protection) I'll be digging out my mask to don until further info on re-vaccination or if efficacy is beyond six months.

What you might be hearing is that the data analyzed shows that the vaccine continues to work for the entire length of the study which was six months. No drop in protection has been detected. This does not mean it stops working after six months. If I invent a new roof shingle and six months after installation there are no leaks that does not mean it will fail now. It means simply that based on the available data I can say the roof lasts six months and I can't say anything about it beyond what has been studied.

[Tmarkwald]

Originally Posted by G.R.I.T.S.

Man, you're not the only one confused! If I'm vaccinated, and therefore "protected" and don't "spread" the virus I don't carry, it matters not if others are not vaccinated. Now, in six months (which is what I'm hearing currently regarding the length of said protection) I'll be digging out my mask to don until further info on re-vaccination or if efficacy is beyond six months.

The 6 months is rather inaccurate news.

I think people like to 'stir the pot' and substantiate their anti-vaxxing/alternative medicine agenda!

The vaccine hasn't been out that long. Previous testing 10 years ago with the SARS and MERS vaccines (same basic vaccine) did not test the long term viability of the vaccine because SARS and MERS went away rather fast.

You can paint your house. Six months later you can say the paint has lasted 6 months.

But a booster is a small price to pay, and certainly not a reason to ignore the science and refuse the inoculation.

[Tmarkwald]

Originally Posted by blueash

See above. You do not understand how effectiveness is calculated so please until you do stop trying to tell people "that's the math". Efficacy has nothing to do with susceptible.

Ok, so educate us if all of us aren't doing the math right....

[doccraig]

The real answer is that they are lying to maintain the hoax.

[tuccillo]

The correct way to interpret the statistics from the trials is as follows. If you are fully vaccinated and two weeks after your second shot, the probability of developing symptoms (look at the trial studies for the exact definition of what symptoms, how many symptoms, and the level of symptoms they call "positive") if you are exposed is reduced by 20x (95% efficacy) compared with not having been vaccinated. Your probability of developing symptoms if you are exposed and not vaccinated is not precisely known but is generally a small number. In the trials, they don't know who was exposed. So, the vaccine reduces this unknown, but small number, by 20x. Some early numbers from Washington state have the breakthrough rate at 0.01%. Also, if you are vaccinated, your probability of developing serious disease symptoms that lead to hospitalization and possibly death is essentially zero. By any objective measure, the vaccines are extremely effective at doing what we would hope they would do; prevent serious disease and death.

Originally Posted by cleanwater

Vaccines are NOT 100% effective. 5-10% of vaccinated people can become infected.

[pgettinger01]

Because you can infect people who have not had vaccine. Also the vaccine is not approved for children less than 12 years old.