Covid-19 miscellany

[Metaphor]

I doubt I will get a second booster anytime soon, I'm not convinced it is necessary. I will get an annual flu shot later in the year.

I got a second booster because I'm not convinced it is not necessary. Maybe we should adjust Pascal's wager to something meaningful: You should get it because if you needed it will prevent premature death or long Covid and if you didn't need it it cost nothing.

That fails for the same reason Pascal's wager fails. Being religious doesn't cost you nothing. In fact, it is often time-consuming and expensive and boring.

What exactly did the booster cost me? (Not time. My wife gave it to me when I picked her up for dinner.)

I have no idea what it cost you. If it was free to you, that means someone else paid. If you don't mind a needle in the arm, you didn't pay that price.

Why on earth do you think your subjective evaluation of something is everyone else's?

 

[Metaphor]

I doubt I will get a second booster anytime soon, I'm not convinced it is necessary. I will get an annual flu shot later in the year.

I got a second booster because I'm not convinced it is not necessary. Maybe we should adjust Pascal's wager to something meaningful: You should get it because if you needed it will prevent premature death or long Covid and if you didn't need it it cost nothing.

That fails for the same reason Pascal's wager fails. Being religious doesn't cost you nothing. In fact, it is often time-consuming and expensive and boring.

What exactly did the booster cost me? (Not time. My wife gave it to me when I picked her up for dinner.)

Got my second booster at a pharmacy around the corner. Could walk there in under 5 minutes, and pick up prescriptions at the same time.

I'm so glad nobody has ever paid any price for a booster, including the government providing it to you.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I doubt I will get a second booster anytime soon, I'm not convinced it is necessary. I will get an annual flu shot later in the year.

I got a second booster because I'm not convinced it is not necessary. Maybe we should adjust Pascal's wager to something meaningful: You should get it because if you needed it will prevent premature death or long Covid and if you didn't need it it cost nothing.

That fails for the same reason Pascal's wager fails. Being religious doesn't cost you nothing. In fact, it is often time-consuming and expensive and boring.

What exactly did the booster cost me? (Not time. My wife gave it to me when I picked her up for dinner.)

I have no idea what it cost you. If it was free to you, that means someone else paid. If you don't mind a needle in the arm, you didn't pay that price.

Why on earth do you think your subjective evaluation of something is everyone else's?

So is that anti-vax or just being argumentative? I mean, it isn't much more than a stone throw to say the same about measles and mumps, and that kills fewer.

We have the stats showing that vax'ing greatly reduces need for hospitalizations (which costs a lot of money to insurance companies and corporations that provide health care to their workers), and death (a terminal condition). We also have the data showing there is a waning of the vaccine over a six to eight month period of time. And we currently have two philosophies as to whether a second booster is needed (and for whom)... none of which invoke a Pascal Wager.

Regarding costs, the company I work for paid out $1 million in hospital costs due to Covid-19 transmission. And we aren't a huge company.

 

[Artemus]

What exactly did the booster cost me? (Not time. My wife gave it to me when I picked her up for dinner.)

I have no idea what it cost you. If it was free to you, that means someone else paid. If you don't mind a needle in the arm, you didn't pay that price.

Why on earth do you think your subjective evaluation of something is everyone else's?

Pascal's wager applies at the personal level. In terms of societal cost, boosters save far more money in terms of health care costs and lost productivity than they cost to administer. So zero to lose, much to gain at both personal and societal levels.

If you don't mind a needle in the arm

That is not a cost for anyone.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Exactly. It saves corporations money. It saves the potential patient money. It helps the economy by reducing temporary worker shortages. AND the vaccinated people have a much less chance at hospitalization and death.

This is a two foot putt on a flat green to win the US Open at the 18th hole and Metaphor (the golfer), starts thinking to himself:

"I'm an awesome golfer. Why do I need to sink this putt to get a bunch of golf establishment types approval of my greatness? I don't need the US Open, I don't their adoration. I'm the greatest!" *grabs driver and smacks the ball, which crushes into some person's skull*

 

[Metaphor]

I doubt I will get a second booster anytime soon, I'm not convinced it is necessary. I will get an annual flu shot later in the year.

I got a second booster because I'm not convinced it is not necessary. Maybe we should adjust Pascal's wager to something meaningful: You should get it because if you needed it will prevent premature death or long Covid and if you didn't need it it cost nothing.

That fails for the same reason Pascal's wager fails. Being religious doesn't cost you nothing. In fact, it is often time-consuming and expensive and boring.

What exactly did the booster cost me? (Not time. My wife gave it to me when I picked her up for dinner.)

I have no idea what it cost you. If it was free to you, that means someone else paid. If you don't mind a needle in the arm, you didn't pay that price.

Why on earth do you think your subjective evaluation of something is everyone else's?

So is that anti-vax or just being argumentative? I mean, it isn't much more than a stone throw to say the same about measles and mumps, and that kills fewer.

We have the stats showing that vax'ing greatly reduces need for hospitalizations (which costs a lot of money to insurance companies and corporations that provide health care to their workers), and death (a terminal condition). We also have the data showing there is a waning of the vaccine over a six to eight month period of time. And we currently have two philosophies as to whether a second booster is needed (and for whom)... none of which invoke a Pascal Wager.

Regarding costs, the company I work for paid out $1 million in hospital costs due to Covid-19 transmission. And we aren't a huge company.

I am not anti-vax. I am vaxxed and boostered. But it's simply dishonest to say getting another shot costs nothing.

 

[Metaphor]

What exactly did the booster cost me? (Not time. My wife gave it to me when I picked her up for dinner.)

I have no idea what it cost you. If it was free to you, that means someone else paid. If you don't mind a needle in the arm, you didn't pay that price.

Why on earth do you think your subjective evaluation of something is everyone else's?

Pascal's wager applies at the personal level. In terms of societal cost, boosters save far more money in terms of health care costs and lost productivity than they cost to administer. So zero to lose, much to gain at both personal and societal levels.

Do you mean a second booster, a third, a fourth?

Do you think we can go on vaxxing the entire population every six months forever?

If you don't mind a needle in the arm

That is not a cost for anyone.

Of course it is.

 

[ZiprHead]

Do you think we can go on vaxxing the entire population every six months forever?

Yes, if need be. Why do you think we can't?

 

[Metaphor]

Do you think we can go on vaxxing the entire population every six months forever?

Yes, if need be. Why do you think we can't?

Because we can't. It's ludicrous to think vaccinating 7 billion people every six months is sustainable. It's not. It is politically impossible because the population won't do it.

 

[TomC]

Do you think we can go on vaxxing the entire population every six months forever?

Assuming you're talking about 1st world people as "the entire population" (a common issue amongst 1st world people) there's no reason why vaccination every six months is a problem.

It's a cost/benefit equation. Is providing vaccines a more economical policy than not providing them?
I'm pretty sure it is.
Tom

 

[TomC]

It's ludicrous to think vaccinating 7 billion people every six months is sustainable.

Do you understand the point to herd immunity?

Herd immunity is where so many people are protected from a particular illness that most people don't need to worry about it.
It's not eradication.

The antivaxxers who insist on remaining plague rats are the moral problem. Not the people who don't have access to the vaccines.
Tom

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I doubt I will get a second booster anytime soon, I'm not convinced it is necessary. I will get an annual flu shot later in the year.

I got a second booster because I'm not convinced it is not necessary. Maybe we should adjust Pascal's wager to something meaningful: You should get it because if you needed it will prevent premature death or long Covid and if you didn't need it it cost nothing.

That fails for the same reason Pascal's wager fails. Being religious doesn't cost you nothing. In fact, it is often time-consuming and expensive and boring.

What exactly did the booster cost me? (Not time. My wife gave it to me when I picked her up for dinner.)

I have no idea what it cost you. If it was free to you, that means someone else paid. If you don't mind a needle in the arm, you didn't pay that price.

Why on earth do you think your subjective evaluation of something is everyone else's?

So is that anti-vax or just being argumentative? I mean, it isn't much more than a stone throw to say the same about measles and mumps, and that kills fewer.

We have the stats showing that vax'ing greatly reduces need for hospitalizations (which costs a lot of money to insurance companies and corporations that provide health care to their workers), and death (a terminal condition). We also have the data showing there is a waning of the vaccine over a six to eight month period of time. And we currently have two philosophies as to whether a second booster is needed (and for whom)... none of which invoke a Pascal Wager.

Regarding costs, the company I work for paid out $1 million in hospital costs due to Covid-19 transmission. And we aren't a huge company.

I am not anti-vax. I am vaxxed and boostered. But it's simply dishonest to say getting another shot costs nothing.

Cost to immunize, what 25 to 100 people, costs about the the price hospitalize 1 person. That Immunize price includes every cost since day one to develop.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Do you mean a second booster, a third, a fourth?

Do you think we can go on vaxxing the entire population every six months forever?

Why not? We do annual flu shots.

 

[Metaphor]

Do you think we can go on vaxxing the entire population every six months forever?

Assuming you're talking about 1st world people as "the entire population" (a common issue amongst 1st world people) there's no reason why vaccination every six months is a problem.

It's a cost/benefit equation. Is providing vaccines a more economical policy than not providing them?
I'm pretty sure it is.
Tom

No. I'm not talking about only the first world.

I said nothing about providing vaccines, though if course there is a cost to that. The world is not going to do it. It is not going to set up a vaccinate forever model for its entire population.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Cost to immunize, what 25 to 100 people, costs about the the price hospitalize 1 person. That Immunize price includes every cost since day one to develop.

And that way understates the cost of Covid. What about the death and disability? And even the days off work?

Vaccines are generally a very good deal.

 

[Metaphor]

Do you mean a second booster, a third, a fourth?

Do you think we can go on vaxxing the entire population every six months forever?

Why not? We do annual flu shots.

No, you don't. Select people get annual flu shots.

The entire population has never gotten vaxxed every six months.

It won't happen. I'm not even making a moral argument. It is political reality.

 

[Metaphor]

I doubt I will get a second booster anytime soon, I'm not convinced it is necessary. I will get an annual flu shot later in the year.

I got a second booster because I'm not convinced it is not necessary. Maybe we should adjust Pascal's wager to something meaningful: You should get it because if you needed it will prevent premature death or long Covid and if you didn't need it it cost nothing.

That fails for the same reason Pascal's wager fails. Being religious doesn't cost you nothing. In fact, it is often time-consuming and expensive and boring.

What exactly did the booster cost me? (Not time. My wife gave it to me when I picked her up for dinner.)

I have no idea what it cost you. If it was free to you, that means someone else paid. If you don't mind a needle in the arm, you didn't pay that price.

Why on earth do you think your subjective evaluation of something is everyone else's?

So is that anti-vax or just being argumentative? I mean, it isn't much more than a stone throw to say the same about measles and mumps, and that kills fewer.

We have the stats showing that vax'ing greatly reduces need for hospitalizations (which costs a lot of money to insurance companies and corporations that provide health care to their workers), and death (a terminal condition). We also have the data showing there is a waning of the vaccine over a six to eight month period of time. And we currently have two philosophies as to whether a second booster is needed (and for whom)... none of which invoke a Pascal Wager.

Regarding costs, the company I work for paid out $1 million in hospital costs due to Covid-19 transmission. And we aren't a huge company.

I am not anti-vax. I am vaxxed and boostered. But it's simply dishonest to say getting another shot costs nothing.

Cost to immunize, what 25 to 100 people, costs about the the price hospitalize 1 person. That Immunize price includes every cost since day one to develop.

I bought some pork yesterday and ate it. It was delicious and I would buy it again. But just because I got net value from the pork doesn't mean it cost me nothing. I still paid for the pork.

 

[Metaphor]

It's ludicrous to think vaccinating 7 billion people every six months is sustainable.

Do you understand the point to herd immunity?

Herd immunity is where so many people are protected from a particular illness that most people don't need to worry about it.
It's not eradication.

The antivaxxers who insist on remaining plague rats are the moral problem. Not the people who don't have access to the vaccines.
Tom

No country is going to set up a permanent vaccine every six months model for the entire population. I'm sorry if this reality bothers you.

 

[TSwizzle]

Do you mean a second booster, a third, a fourth?

Do you think we can go on vaxxing the entire population every six months forever?

If it is being administered every six months or more regular, is it really a vaccine?

 

[TomC]

No country is going to set up a permanent vaccine every six months model for the entire population. I'm sorry if this reality bothers you.

No country will have reason to do so once we reach herd immunity.

It's not impossible. But there are better ways to accomplish the goal of reducing C19 to a problem on par with colds.
Tom