|
|
|
|
|
by anotherevan
1296 days ago
|
|
Dropping the metaphor, absolutely not looking to heckle those who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons (those pedestrians unable to be fitted with forcefields). The wilfully unvaccinated (the "ran their car off the road because they perceived (possibly incorrectly) some danger that they were attempting to avoid" group) are making it harder for those that are medically unable and those with chronic health concerns as the less virus circulating the less risk for the more vulnerable among us. While this generates feeling of ill-will within me, I personally am not advocating the heckling of anyone. My, "not 100% full-proof, although they can help reduce the impact," analogy was addressing that while it is still possible to catch COVID even if you are fully vaccinated, it is less likely and usually the severity will be less than it will have been otherwise if you do catch it. |
|
Fifteen percent transmission attenuation is a huge contrast to the public health messaging during much of the vaccination campaign, which was that vaccination would invariably protect the vulnerable. It never did, and public health experts knew it.
Is 15% better than zero? Sure. But to claim that vaccination would protect others is and was a total lie, or if you want to be more charitable, only 85% of a total lie.