[ben_w]

Only in the parallel reality where the SS was famous for trying to prevent a transmissible illness. Given our reality is one where the SS were racist paramilitaries that industrialised homicide, you seem to be regurgitating from the "everyone I disagree with is literally hitler" school of rhetoric.

[cempaka]

There was no "trying to prevent a transmissible illness" once the CDC's Provincetown study made it clear in late July 2021 that the vaccines didn't prevent transmission. After that point, it was purely enforcing a purity ritual and loyalty test on people, and was even couched in those terms: "we're not accepting the refusal of this undertested therapeutic from those anti-social anti-vaxxers!"

[ben_w]

> the vaccines didn't prevent transmission

Tell me you don't know how vaccines work without telling me you don't know how vaccines work.

Preventing transmission is a nice to have, not a must have. Less serious symptoms (which can include, but are absolutely not limited to, death, not for Covid not for anything else) are the requirement for them to be useful.

> CDC's Provincetown study

Tell me you don't know Baysean statistics etc.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2021/08/08/cdc-re...

--

Comments like yours are why I wrote the other day:

"I think people expect cancer cures to be as effective as vaccines really are, while also expecting vaccines (and antibiotics) to be as effective as a Potion of Cure Disease in Skyrim."

[cempaka]

What was the justification for firing people from their jobs or excluding them from public accommodations for not taking a non-sterilizing vaccine?

The USA Today article you link is just a lot of the usual verbal gymnastics that was rolled out at the time: they still work against severe outcomes, sure lots of vaccinated people are getting infected but you have to use Bayesian analysis and compare against the proportion of the base population that was vaccinated, no vaccine is 100% effective so let's pretend these ones are just as good as the ones that are 99% effective, etc.

[ben_w]

> just as good as the ones that are 99% effective

How many vaccines do you think are 99% effective? Or even 90%?

The covid vaccine researchers would've been happy if it had only been 50% effective.

[kiltedpanda]

Gosh I wonder where they got that idea

"When people are vaccinated, they're not going to get infected" - Fauci

"You're not going to get Covid if you get these vaccinations" - Biden

"Vaccinated people do not carry the virus and don't get sick" - Walensky (Head of CDC)

"There is no variant that escapes the protection of our vaccines" - Bourla (Pfizer CEO)

"Emergency uses of the vaccine have not been approved or licensed by US FDA but have been authorized to prevent COVID-19 in ages 5+." - Pfizer Inc.

[ben_w]

> "When people are vaccinated, they're not going to get infected"

> "There is no variant that escapes the protection of our vaccines"

I googled these two then stopped, because you know what results I see? Conspiracy theorists quoting each other. I don't actually see a single reference to any source material to verify the original statements.

To put that another way: https://www.ideatovalue.com/insp/nickskillicorn/2021/04/dont...

> "Emergency uses of the vaccine have not been approved or licensed by US FDA but have been authorized to prevent COVID-19 in ages 5+." - Pfizer Inc.

This I can believe (it's close enough to the docs I can find even though it's not actually a quotation from any of them), but I have no idea why you think this quote is supposed to support your point.

[kiltedpanda]

Here you go:

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/04/cnbc-exclusive-cnbc-transcri...

https://twitter.com/i/status/1555369351238537216

"I have no idea why you think this quote is supposed to support your point."

Because it says "authorized to prevent COVID-19 in ages 5+". It does no such thing obviously.