Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Living in Switzerland > Daily life  
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #27541  
Old 19.07.2021, 23:02
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Frick, Aargau
Posts: 2,865
Groaned at 58 Times in 50 Posts
Thanked 3,996 Times in 1,888 Posts
HickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
Genuine question -- what exactly do we mean by '90% effective' (or any other percentage)?

Does it mean that in all circumstances in a given period there will 100% protection for 9 people out of 10, regardless of one's behaviour? So that if 10 double-vaccinated people spent a year in the the company of infected people, and spent their evenings dancing the night away in crowded nightclubs, then only 1 out to of those 10 people would eventually get infected? Or does it mean that if just one person behaved like that and was tested once a month for 10 months, they would probably test positive in one of those months? Or does it mean that if a person behaved exactly the same way as they did before being vaccinated, they would reduce their risk by 90%? (And there are plenty more suggested interpretations of 90% effectiveness.)

The point I'm making is to question whether we are comparing like with like. From this lay person's position, the graphs clearly show a strong reduction in infection for those who are double vaccinated. And when questioned on whether this trend was changing, a very interesting point was made by Van Tam in tonight's UK press conference, when he said that it's a statistical fact that higher rates of doubly vaccinated people will test positive as more and more people are vaccinated. I'm paraphrasing but he asked us to look at it logically, and said something like: "When everyone in the country has been vaccinated, 100% of all Covid infections will be in doubly vaccinated people".

The powerful logic of that statement has stuck with me. Yes, it's obvious that a higher proportion of positive tests will be from doubly vaccinated people, the closer we get to full vaccination because the number of unvaccinated people will be vanishingly small.

I'm not trying to trick you, or anyone else. I'm asking some real questions about how some of these figures are presented and processed into misinformation (possibly on both sides). But one thing is certain -- the Covid pandemic, once over, will provide a very fertile area for Philosophy classes when discussing examples of faulty logic, false syllogisms, and biased premises driven by pre-existing prejudices.
90% effective to me means at any one time positivity of fully vaccinated people taken as a whole is 10% of the value that would be observed in immunologically naive people.

For instance if 1% of hitherto immunologically naive are infected in a given week, you'd expect 0.1% of fully vaccinated people to be infected that week.
The following 3 users would like to thank HickvonFrick for this useful post:
  #27542  
Old 19.07.2021, 23:03
TonyClifton's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Hopefully soon to be Aargau
Posts: 1,635
Groaned at 575 Times in 328 Posts
Thanked 4,035 Times in 1,701 Posts
TonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
Genuine question -- what exactly do we mean by '90% effective' (or any other percentage)?

Does it mean that in all circumstances in a given period there will 100% protection for 9 people out of 10, regardless of one's behaviour? So that if 10 double-vaccinated people spent a year in the the company of infected people, and spent their evenings dancing the night away in crowded nightclubs, then only 1 out to of those 10 people would eventually get infected? Or does it mean that if just one person behaved like that and was tested once a month for 10 months, they would probably test positive in one of those months? Or does it mean that if a person behaved exactly the same way as they did before being vaccinated, they would reduce their risk by 90%? (And there are plenty more suggested interpretations of 90% effectiveness.)

The point I'm making is to question whether we are comparing like with like. From this lay person's position, the graphs clearly show a strong reduction in infection for those who are double vaccinated. And when questioned on whether this trend was changing, a very interesting point was made by Van Tam in tonight's UK press conference, when he said that it's a statistical fact that higher rates of doubly vaccinated people will test positive as more and more people are vaccinated. I'm paraphrasing but he asked us to look at it logically, and said something like: "When everyone in the country has been vaccinated, 100% of all Covid infections will be in doubly vaccinated people".

The powerful logic of that statement has stuck with me. Yes, it's obvious that a higher proportion of positive tests will be from doubly vaccinated people, the closer we get to full vaccination because the number of unvaccinated people will be vanishingly small.

I'm not trying to trick you, or anyone else. I'm asking some real questions about how some of these figures are presented and processed into misinformation (possibly on both sides). But one thing is certain -- the Covid pandemic, once over, will provide a very fertile area for Philosophy classes when discussing examples of faulty logic, false syllogisms, and biased premises driven by pre-existing prejudices.
It’s very simple, 90% efficacy means that 90% of people who have been fully vaccinated will not develop symptomatic Covid. Not having symptoms means that one is far less likely to transmit the virus. Data from Israel for the Pfizer-Biontech now places this value at 64% and dropping. This trend is being reflected in other countries like the UK, Malta and Gibraltar which has high rates of vaccination.

The saving grace is that until now the vaccines do appear to be holding ground on their efficacy against serious illness and death, although this too is starting to show signs of now being as effective as the trials for all vaccines suggested.
The following 2 users would like to thank TonyClifton for this useful post:
  #27543  
Old 19.07.2021, 23:07
TonyClifton's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Hopefully soon to be Aargau
Posts: 1,635
Groaned at 575 Times in 328 Posts
Thanked 4,035 Times in 1,701 Posts
TonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
It's not that long since you were lamenting the increased suffering, or even loss of life, among those whose treatment had to be postponed due to covid. Now you argue for action that would cause exactly that, no wonder you annoy just about everybody.
I annoy people because I’ve been right, I was right about the danger posed by Covid, I was right about masks, and now I’ll be right about vaccines too. This is because I follow data and not dogma.
The following 6 users would like to thank TonyClifton for this useful post:
The following 4 users groan at TonyClifton for this post:
  #27544  
Old 19.07.2021, 23:09
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Frick, Aargau
Posts: 2,865
Groaned at 58 Times in 50 Posts
Thanked 3,996 Times in 1,888 Posts
HickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond reputeHickvonFrick has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
It’s very simple, 90% efficacy means that 90% of people who have been fully vaccinated will not develop symptomatic Covid. Not having symptoms means that one is far less likely to transmit the virus. Data from Israel for the Pfizer-Biontech now places this value at 64% and dropping. This trend is being reflected in other countries like the UK, Malta and Gibraltar which has high rates of vaccination.

The saving grace is that until now the vaccines do appear to be holding ground on their efficacy against serious illness and death, although this too is starting to show signs of now being as effective as the trials for all vaccines suggested.
That's not what efficacy means,

I think you've been perceptive on some other issues but on this one I honestly think you don't properly understand what the percentages mean.

WHO:

A vaccine’s efficacy is measured in a controlled clinical trial and is based on how many people who got vaccinated developed the ‘outcome of interest’ (usually disease) compared with how many people who got the placebo (dummy vaccine) developed the same outcome.

In this case the Israel % you have quoted is dropping because the placebo group increasingly is not a placebo group but includes many and increasing numbers with antibodies. You can't just ignore failure of the control group as it does result in a false dropping of the measured efficacy.

This is why efficacy has to be calculated in clinical trials.

Last edited by HickvonFrick; 19.07.2021 at 23:19.
The following 6 users would like to thank HickvonFrick for this useful post:
  #27545  
Old 19.07.2021, 23:26
Pachyderm's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Zurich
Posts: 1,516
Groaned at 74 Times in 53 Posts
Thanked 3,314 Times in 1,131 Posts
Pachyderm has a reputation beyond reputePachyderm has a reputation beyond reputePachyderm has a reputation beyond reputePachyderm has a reputation beyond reputePachyderm has a reputation beyond reputePachyderm has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
It’s very simple, 90% efficacy means....
Quote:
View Post
That's not what efficacy means.......
This is why I said that it's unclear to me what the stats really mean.
  #27546  
Old 19.07.2021, 23:41
marton's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kt. Zürich
Posts: 11,006
Groaned at 505 Times in 430 Posts
Thanked 19,825 Times in 10,472 Posts
marton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
I annoy people because I’ve been right, I was right about the danger posed by Covid, I was right about masks, and now I’ll be right about vaccines too. This is because I follow data and not dogma.
24/7 Rentfree
Mask Derangement Symptom

You do follow data but sadly often draw false conclusions or misunderstand basic concepts like efficacy.
  #27547  
Old 19.07.2021, 23:42
TonyClifton's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Hopefully soon to be Aargau
Posts: 1,635
Groaned at 575 Times in 328 Posts
Thanked 4,035 Times in 1,701 Posts
TonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
This is why I said that it's unclear to me what the stats really mean.
You can ignore the previous post, it’s just muddying the waters with a scientific explanation for what efficacy means. To all intensive purposes my simple description is what we’re discussing.

For example:

Quote:
How well it works: 94.1% effective at preventing symptomatic infection in people with no evidence of previous COVID-19 infection.
https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/co...ine-comparison

What is important, in fact it’s the most important factor at the moment, is that this figure is dropping as more real world data becomes available.
This user would like to thank TonyClifton for this useful post:
  #27548  
Old 20.07.2021, 00:17
Pachyderm's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Zurich
Posts: 1,516
Groaned at 74 Times in 53 Posts
Thanked 3,314 Times in 1,131 Posts
Pachyderm has a reputation beyond reputePachyderm has a reputation beyond reputePachyderm has a reputation beyond reputePachyderm has a reputation beyond reputePachyderm has a reputation beyond reputePachyderm has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
You can ignore the previous post, it’s just muddying the waters with a scientific explanation....
Quote:
View Post
I annoy people because I’ve been right,....

Maybe it's just the way you phrase things.
The following 3 users would like to thank Pachyderm for this useful post:
  #27549  
Old 20.07.2021, 00:20
marton's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Kt. Zürich
Posts: 11,006
Groaned at 505 Times in 430 Posts
Thanked 19,825 Times in 10,472 Posts
marton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond reputemarton has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
You can ignore the previous post, it’s just muddying the waters with a scientific explanation for what efficacy means. To all intensive purposes my simple description is what we’re discussing.

For example:

https://www.yalemedicine.org/news/co...ine-comparison

What is important, in fact it’s the most important factor at the moment, is that this figure is dropping as more real world data becomes available.
No, your article does not show the figure is dropping, simply you do not understand the difference between vaccine efficacy and vaccine effectiveness?

The two terms efficacy and effectiveness are not interchangeable, read the article I have linked to above.
  #27550  
Old 20.07.2021, 00:21
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,330
Groaned at 338 Times in 275 Posts
Thanked 26,177 Times in 10,978 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
A vaccine’s efficacy is measured in a controlled clinical trial and is based on how many people who got vaccinated developed the ‘outcome of interest’ (usually disease) compared with how many people who got the placebo (dummy vaccine) developed the same outcome.
Hang on, so there are placebo groups?

So they inject something into them and tell them it's the vaccine but in reality it isn't?

So what does it say in their vaccine passport?
The following 3 users would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #27551  
Old 20.07.2021, 00:25
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: Kt Zurich
Posts: 938
Groaned at 35 Times in 27 Posts
Thanked 2,984 Times in 1,055 Posts
ennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond reputeennui has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
You can ignore the previous post, it’s just muddying the waters with a scientific explanation for what efficacy means. To all intensive purposes my simple description is what we’re discussing.


.
Well, I learned something new. “To all intensive purposes” is an eggcorn of “for all intents and purposes”

https://www.merriam-webster.com/word...rposes-intents

‘When mistaken formations of words or phrases are used in a seemingly logical or plausible way, like "for all intensive purposes," it's known as an eggcorn. (The word eggcorn itself comes from people hearing the word acorn as eggcorn enough that linguists adopted it as the term.) A similar mishearing that is a linguistic venial sin goes by the name mondegreen. Unlike a mondegreen, however, an eggcorn generally retains the same meaning as the original form (e.g., "for all intensive purposes"). Perhaps, you were one of the schoolchildren who stood up each morning, hand on heart, to pledge allegiance "to the Republic for Richard Stans" (instead of "to the Republic for which it stands"). If so, you've been duped by the mondegreen.”

Some pedantry to end the day (or start it, whatever)
The following 8 users would like to thank ennui for this useful post:
  #27552  
Old 20.07.2021, 00:41
amogles's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Zurich
Posts: 12,330
Groaned at 338 Times in 275 Posts
Thanked 26,177 Times in 10,978 Posts
amogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond reputeamogles has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
‘When mistaken formations of words or phrases are used in a seemingly logical or plausible way, like "for all intensive purposes," it's known as an eggcorn. (The word eggcorn itself comes from people hearing the word acorn as eggcorn enough that linguists adopted it as the term.) A similar mishearing that is a linguistic venial sin goes by the name mondegreen. Unlike a mondegreen, however, an eggcorn generally retains the same meaning as the original form (e.g., "for all intensive purposes"). Perhaps, you were one of the schoolchildren who stood up each morning, hand on heart, to pledge allegiance "to the Republic for Richard Stans" (instead of "to the Republic for which it stands"). If so, you've been duped by the mondegreen.”
I previously had a boss who wrote "by enlarge" and insisted it was correct.
This user would like to thank amogles for this useful post:
  #27553  
Old 20.07.2021, 00:49
Never TheLess's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Around and about
Posts: 59
Groaned at 6 Times in 2 Posts
Thanked 80 Times in 35 Posts
Never TheLess has earned the respect of manyNever TheLess has earned the respect of manyNever TheLess has earned the respect of many
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
A misleading statistic!
The latest Public Health England (PHE) figures show there were 92,029 confirmed Delta cases between 1 February and 22 June, only 8% were fully vaccinated.

If the vaccine weren't helping, it would be expected to be more than half the cases.
Under 50 maybe https://www.walesonline.co.uk/
This user would like to thank Never TheLess for this useful post:
  #27554  
Old 20.07.2021, 00:57
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: SG
Posts: 9,292
Groaned at 480 Times in 361 Posts
Thanked 12,369 Times in 6,420 Posts
Urs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond reputeUrs Max has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
I annoy people because I’ve been right, I was right about the danger posed by Covid, I was right about masks, and now I’ll be right about vaccines too. This is because I follow data and not dogma.
I disagree.
Something tells me 4 million people would agree with me if they were still alive.
The following 4 users would like to thank Urs Max for this useful post:
  #27555  
Old 20.07.2021, 07:09
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Nyon
Posts: 5,200
Groaned at 292 Times in 206 Posts
Thanked 7,108 Times in 3,345 Posts
bowlie has a reputation beyond reputebowlie has a reputation beyond reputebowlie has a reputation beyond reputebowlie has a reputation beyond reputebowlie has a reputation beyond reputebowlie has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Canada opening up … for vaccinated travellers.

https://www.canada.ca/en/public-heal...nts-of-th.html

9 Aug for US citizens and residents,
7 Sep for everybody else.
  #27556  
Old 20.07.2021, 07:38
TonyClifton's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Hopefully soon to be Aargau
Posts: 1,635
Groaned at 575 Times in 328 Posts
Thanked 4,035 Times in 1,701 Posts
TonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond reputeTonyClifton has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
Canada opening up … for vaccinated travellers.

https://www.canada.ca/en/public-heal...nts-of-th.html

9 Aug for US citizens and residents,
7 Sep for everybody else.
Bully for Canada, in Israel they’re delaying the arrival of vaccinated tourists having realised they can still exacerbate rates of infection. One double vaxxed Israeli citizen has been blamed for infecting 75 people! One can just imagine Sajid Javid waltzing up to Canada immigration and flashing his vaccine passport

https://jpost.com/breaking-news/coro...ositive-674215

https://www.timesofisrael.com/offici...riant-spreads/

Quote:
View Post
I disagree.
Something tells me 4 million people would agree with me if they were still alive.
Mainly aged over 80 and out of of 7,5 billion on the planet. FWIW, I was also right about lockdowns, Sweden and natural immunity being more effective than the vaccines.

Now what we’re seeing more diversionary tactics over the meaning of efficacy, or figures of speech. Ultimately this shouldn’t detract from we’re seeing in the real world in that vaccines are not as effective as we thought at preventing the spread of infection. Real world data is all that matters.
The following 3 users would like to thank TonyClifton for this useful post:
  #27557  
Old 20.07.2021, 08:02
AbFab's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Zürich
Posts: 8,331
Groaned at 353 Times in 241 Posts
Thanked 12,262 Times in 4,202 Posts
AbFab has a reputation beyond reputeAbFab has a reputation beyond reputeAbFab has a reputation beyond reputeAbFab has a reputation beyond reputeAbFab has a reputation beyond reputeAbFab has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
Hang on, so there are placebo groups?

So they inject something into them and tell them it's the vaccine but in reality it isn't?

So what does it say in their vaccine passport?
This refers to volunteers in small groups undergoing clinical trials. I guess there's no passport for either group, just a big 'thank you' from the rest of us...
  #27558  
Old 20.07.2021, 08:12
fatmanfilms's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Verbier
Posts: 21,378
Groaned at 460 Times in 352 Posts
Thanked 23,089 Times in 11,824 Posts
fatmanfilms has a reputation beyond reputefatmanfilms has a reputation beyond reputefatmanfilms has a reputation beyond reputefatmanfilms has a reputation beyond reputefatmanfilms has a reputation beyond reputefatmanfilms has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
This refers to volunteers in small groups undergoing clinical trials. I guess there's no passport for either group, just a big 'thank you' from the rest of us...
I had a friend who took part in the J+J trials around November, she was told early summer that she got the vaccine & was considered fully vaccinated.
This user would like to thank fatmanfilms for this useful post:
  #27559  
Old 20.07.2021, 08:12
Belgianmum's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Neuchâtel
Posts: 13,051
Groaned at 231 Times in 194 Posts
Thanked 21,572 Times in 8,837 Posts
Belgianmum has a reputation beyond reputeBelgianmum has a reputation beyond reputeBelgianmum has a reputation beyond reputeBelgianmum has a reputation beyond reputeBelgianmum has a reputation beyond reputeBelgianmum has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post
Hang on, so there are placebo groups?

So they inject something into them and tell them it's the vaccine but in reality it isn't?

So what does it say in their vaccine passport?
It’s how all clinical trials work. Some participants receive the real thing and some receive the placebo but none of them know what they have received.

I don’t imagine any of the trial participants actually have a vaccine passport linked to the trial. I would be interested to see how it actually works for them.
  #27560  
Old 20.07.2021, 08:21
Talk to you later's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: ZH
Posts: 1,468
Groaned at 67 Times in 36 Posts
Thanked 2,793 Times in 1,008 Posts
Talk to you later has a reputation beyond reputeTalk to you later has a reputation beyond reputeTalk to you later has a reputation beyond reputeTalk to you later has a reputation beyond reputeTalk to you later has a reputation beyond reputeTalk to you later has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Coronavirus

Quote:
View Post

So they inject something into them and tell them it's the vaccine but in reality it isn't?
They must get informed eventually.


Btw, some people from poorer countries are telling me that corrupt people are re-using the vaccine vials and injecting patients with fake liquid to make money

Quote:
So what does it say in their vaccine passport?
"Computer says no"?
This user would like to thank Talk to you later for this useful post:
 

Tags
cold, corona, coronavirus, covid, covid-19, flu, health, medical, virus




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 4 (0 members and 4 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Coronavirus Jokes makeabigwish Daily life 229 15.09.2021 22:34
Coronavirus closed janvier Forum support 18 01.11.2020 13:12
Paid holidays and coronavirus Curtiss Employment 2 20.04.2020 09:22
Coronavirus scammers are out there - be warned Medea Fleecestealer Daily life 9 18.04.2020 18:53
Leaving Switzerland for UK during coronavirus barkingtreewolf Leaving Switzerland 19 11.04.2020 11:45


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 22:31.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0