I'm not sure why you're being downvoted, aside from knee-jerk reactions to any questioning of taking the vaccine being perceived as being in bad faith. Which is perhaps fair as of late. But I think your comment asks a fair question, too.
I would then it would then look beyond the benefit to the self and take into account civic duty. If your own personal probability of mortality is exactly the same with the vaccine and without, then we need to ask, what is then best for the system within which I live? (Remember, never send to know for whom the bell tolls.)
myocarditis isn't contagious, but covid is, and if left unchecked, might (will?) mutate into something that might be a lot more than 1% deadly to you. So you expected value of taking the covid vaccine will be higher than not.
I really think we should encourage people to be willing to think objectively like this. There IS a set of efficacy and risk numbers that would make the vaccines not worth it. They're just obviously not the numbers we have (which make it very worth it). It's just unfortunate that such an astonishingly large portion of the populace apparently can't do the math right enough or objectively enough to come to the same conclusion.
"...By analyzing viral loads of over 16,000 infections during the current, Delta-variant-dominated pandemic wave in Israel, we found that BTIs in recently fully vaccinated individuals have lower viral loads than infections in unvaccinated individuals. However, this effect starts to decline 2 months after vaccination and ultimately vanishes 6 months or longer after vaccination..."
Sure. Eating is similar; after a while, you have to do it some more. As a result, we build a large infrastructure to ensure people can get new food when they need it, so starvation isn't endemic.
If vaccines and their boosters infer temporary immunity, there's a certain level of rapid vaccine production and administration that can leverage that temporary immunity. Whether we can reach it is somewhat of a political problem.
First, the risk of getting myocarditis after vaccination seems to be around 14 in 100,000.
"As of June 11, 2021, approximately 296 million doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines had been administered in the United States, with 52 million administered to persons aged 12–29 years; of these, 30 million were first and 22 million were second doses. Within the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) (4), the national vaccine safety passive monitoring system, 1,226 reports of myocarditis after mRNA vaccination were received during December 29, 2020–June 11, 2021."
Second, the risk of death is much lower:
"Of the 323 persons meeting CDC’s case definitions, 309 (96%) were hospitalized. Acute clinical courses were generally mild; among 304 hospitalized patients with known clinical outcomes, 95% had been discharged at time of review, and none had died."
Based on total yearly cases of myocarditis, your yearly risk of getting myocarditis without vaccination is around 1 in 1,000-10,000. This suggests that many of the events reported in VAERS is due to random happenstance, not any causative effect of the vaccine.
(Many, but not all--from the EU data, IIRC, excess myocarditis events were in the range of about 1 in 100,000, not 1 in 10,000.)
That would be clear. Except "1%" isn't some "small number". The actual rate of myocardial problems, in young men due to covid vaccination is nearly 100x less than that at .014%.
you should listen to the health authorities, who have already done these calculations and considered a wide range of other evidence, and continue to recommend that poeople get vaccinated, instead of not.
Risk of covid is cumulative, wheras vaccine is one time risk.
Also long covid is present in 5-10% of infections. For some those are life affecting changes.
Why do you think the vaccine is a one time risk? In the US, you are "highly motivated" in many circumstances to take two doses, and people under 30 are getting booster doses, even though FDA advisory committee members thought that was going to kill more people in that group than help.
I would then it would then look beyond the benefit to the self and take into account civic duty. If your own personal probability of mortality is exactly the same with the vaccine and without, then we need to ask, what is then best for the system within which I live? (Remember, never send to know for whom the bell tolls.)
myocarditis isn't contagious, but covid is, and if left unchecked, might (will?) mutate into something that might be a lot more than 1% deadly to you. So you expected value of taking the covid vaccine will be higher than not.
I really think we should encourage people to be willing to think objectively like this. There IS a set of efficacy and risk numbers that would make the vaccines not worth it. They're just obviously not the numbers we have (which make it very worth it). It's just unfortunate that such an astonishingly large portion of the populace apparently can't do the math right enough or objectively enough to come to the same conclusion.