If you’re in an at-risk group, yes. But you don’t need to be vaccinated if you’re under-60 and healthy, because the vaccines only protect you, not anyone else as you can still pass it on. So the whole period with vaccine passports and other nonsense was stupid, harmed the cause of getting people vaccinated and led to increased scepticism of vaccines in general.
What you seem to be saying here is that if you are under 60 vaccines aren’t worth the risk to you personally, and that they don’t stop transmission thereby failing to remove a risk to others over 60. Tell me if I got that wrong.
Assuming that I didn’t, let’s unpick that:
If you’re in an at-risk group, yes. But you don’t need to be vaccinated if you’re under-60 and healthy,
It is correct that the risks of Covid to younger people are less than older people, but they are not zero. Your statement implies that it is only older people who are at risk, which is not correct. Vaccines still reduce the risk for younger people too:
“Among hospitalized adolescent patients, two doses of the BNT162b2 vaccine were highly effective against Covid-19–related hospitalization and ICU admission or the receipt of life support.” www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMoa2117995
In fact, while younger people are less likely to suffer severe adverse symptoms from Covid, vaccination actually has a GREATER protective effect for young people against potential severe consequences . i.e. the consequences are mitigated more for young people than older people.
“We found a substantial effect of age on the results. Many HRs in younger individuals (<60 years-old) were in general lower (i.e. favouring vaccination even more) for outcomes significantly associated with vaccination” www.sciencedirect.com/…/S0889159122001118
as you can still pass it on
The r value for vaccinated people is lower than for unvaccinated people. That is, a vaccinated person with Covid will expose less people to Covid than an unvaccinated person will, which is safer for everyone else.
So in conclusion, vaccination does reduce the risks of Covid injury in people under 60 (as well as those over 60), and does reduce the rate of transmission.
When it comes to complex issues like this, the only sources of information that should be considered can best be found on Google Scholar.
It’s a common mistake to believe that our personal experiences are typical. It even has a name, the Availability Heuristic. Some use the term anecdote.
But when making decisions about things like whether to vaccinate or not vaccinate, it’s important to look at probabilities. And to do that we have to look at what happens to large groups of people. Thankfully, this has been done. Various studies have been conducted which looked at large groups of people, literally millions in some cases and their conclusions have remained consistent.
They are that the vaccine has some risks, but they generally are mild. But more importantly, the risks of the vaccine are lower than the risks from getting Covid.
That doesn’t mean that everyone who gets vaccinated won’t have a side effect, or that everyone who isn’t vaccinated will suffer be injured by Covid, but it does mean that, on average, you are far better to be vaccinated than unvaccinated.
Calling an entire generation lazy and unreliable isn’t a helpful contribution to the community. I’m going to leave this comment up, but please be aware that it was a line ball whether to remove. Please be conscious of Rule 1.
I’m not surprised tbh. Having perused some of the text training datasets they were pretty bad. The classification is dodgy too. I ended up starting my own dataset because of this.
I’m not anti-Fediverse here, but tbf it would be ridiculously easy for data harvesting companies to plug into the API and fingerprint individual users from their activity. Admittedly, I don’t see how browser based fingerprinting could be done without hosting an instance.