Now, it is clear that these numbers have been statistically “adjusted” to account for various factors such as the number of people already vaccinated (see page 29 of 44 of the presentation), which enhanced the benefits of the vaccine. The starting point for the CDC’s calculations is the hospitalization rate 8 per million boys aged 12-17 During the week ending May 22nd. Without these adjustments, the raw numbers are lower: Assuming these young adults were vaccinated at that time, and the vaccine is about 90% effective, and establishing a rule of three to extend the period to 120 days, we arrive at 123 hospitalizations averted per million boys They are between 12 and 17 years old.
Are CDC statistical adjustments unreasonable or unrealistic? I have no reason to believe it – after all, experts at the CDC know it’s 100 times better than I know. And in any case, even with the raw numbers, the metrics are skewed in the vaccine side, albeit by huge margins. In addition, the 120-day period used in the calculation gives a very conservative measure of the benefits of a vaccine, against which the final duration of protection is still unknown but may exceed a year. Because vaccine-associated myositis/pericarditis occurs over the five days following injection, doing this calculation over 1 year would triple the number of hospital admissions avoided without increasing the number of cardiac infections. So the CDC estimate is likely to underestimate the benefit of the vaccine more than the other way around.
Yes, but I will be told that myocarditis/pericarditis are not the only serious side effects associated with vaccines. This is absolutely true. Except that in adolescence, this is by far the main danger. The CDC document states that this occurs at a rate of 63 per million second doses in boys between the ages of 12 and 17, while, to give a point of comparison, the rate of anaphylactic shock (that is, very severe allergic reactions, which are among the most common). associated with vaccines) About 2 to 5 per million.
So it looks like I’m going to have to correct myself: The COVID vaccine is not primarily a “altruistic” vaccine in the sense that its protective effects seem to clearly outweigh its severe side effects. There is a “win” for the young vaccinated themselves.
Still, I’ll keep a bit of an “agnostic skepticism,” let’s put it this way. Despite all of the above, the fact remains that the risks associated with COVID-19 are minimal among 12-17 year olds, so in the end the payoff can’t be too negligible either. That gain is there, and we agree: The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention numbers show it. But if 5,000 adolescents need to be vaccinated to avoid a single hospitalization (more than 120 days), then that suggests the benefit is marginal — and again, these numbers include at-risk clients, with the gain being lower for people aged 12 and 17 years old are in good health.
“Music guru. Incurable web practitioner. Thinker. Lifelong zombie junkie. Tv buff. Typical organizer. Evil beer scholar.”
When killer whales play with boats
My faith is enchanted Espace Avel vor, in Plougastel-Daoulas – Plougastel-Daoulas
metasense? A bit complicated but necessary