a thoughtful web.
Share good ideas and conversation.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by b_b
b_b  ·  133 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: How the wealthy will cut the line for the coronavirus vaccine

I've said elsewhere that I would have paid a grand for it. My work fucked up and gave it to me anyway, but I have no problem with this idea. I'm not sure any really rich people would pay $100k, let alone $100M, but more power to them if they would.

wasoxygen  ·  133 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I’m curious to know what benefit you perceive justifying that willingness to pay. It doesn’t seem like there are any lifestyle benefits while the world remains locked down.

You’ll be 95% less likely to be a vector for someone else’s infection, offset by any behavior changes you make due to the lower risk. You could still plausibly transmit a virus that kills someone more vulnerable later, just like always.

If there were abundant supplies, there wouldn’t be much downside, but then there wouldn’t be a line to jump either.

WanderingEng  ·  133 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I'd be tempted to pay to avoid the possibility of long term effects. I've seen anecdotal reports of long recoveries including for healthy runners.

What are the vectors for a vaccinated person to infect others? Do they have and shed viruses or is it through contact like touching an infected person and then touching an unvaccinated person? It's something I know nothing about.

wasoxygen  ·  133 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I assume that 95% effectiveness means there is a 5% chance a vaccinated person will get infected and sick just like anyone who hasn't had the vaccine. There are reasons why the number in practice will be worse: vaccinated people will be more confident to take fewer precautions compared to people in the clinical trials (who did not know if the vaccine was effective, or if they received a placebo). The clinical trials did not try to detect asymptomatic infections. People who volunteer for the trial may be healthier than average. NYT explains the difference between efficacy and effectiveness, adding that the FDA might have approved a vaccine with even 50% effectiveness.

On long term consequences, I've also seen anecdotal reports, but when I click through to the data in studies of long-term effects, the "young people" always turn out to be of retirement age.

I got the flu in early 2018 and I would be willing to pay a little for a vaccine that reduces my risk of getting sick and spending a week in bed, and possibly spreading a virus that kills many people every year. Half an hour at the pharmacy for a "free" flu shot is the smaller cost, the bigger (and probably more effective) effort is habitual germophobic practices. For the new vaccine, while supplies are limited I think they should be reserved for people at greater risk than me.

WanderingEng  ·  132 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Your point about taking more risks is a good one. This summer my parents said they went to a farmer's market, but it was ok because they wore masks. I politely scolded them for that, and I could see myself forgetting that vaccination or no, we're still in a pandemic.

I agree there are much higher risk people than me. I worry I'll be annoyed with work, that they'll argue most or all staff needs to be vaccinated on a higher priority. As a utility we do have critical staff who should be higher priority, but I can work from home and socially distance. Staff at grocery stores are higher priority than me.