The decision is between people dying now and a (very) small chance some adverse side effects could pop up later, which can be dealt with later.

I get your sentiment, I'm not sure about vaccinating young people either. Although most of that is that priority should be given to vaccinating the vulnerable across the world, before starting on children in wealthy countries with great healthcare.

Fact is, it's a small sacrifice to make for the greater good. A small risk to take for the benefit of all. We can't keep on doing lock downs forever. Plus would you rather take your chances with Covid-19 or with an approved vaccine? You can't keep on hiding forever either.

You're kinda just kicking the problem down the road though.

I'd rather take my chances with a vaccine for sure, the way it's managed here in Australia though means for the most part, I don't have to do either. I'm in a full lockdown now with only 26 cases reported today. 26!! 24 of them were also in lockdown and the other 2 were barely out in the public at all.

I'll take 2 months of lockdown (I'ts been about a month thus far this year) spread out accross the entierty of the year over having to face either issue.

You're probably right... I think I'll take my mates word for it though. He's a legitimate practicing doctor...

Though, he also did nangs at the aformentioned party so...

I found this for India:

So some 4% of deaths are among those under 30 in India vs. 0.47% in the US for the same age group, according to data from heritage.org. That age group is 53% of the population of India vs. 38.7% of the population of the US according to heritage.org. How does that compare in terms of IFR?

We have a recent seroprevalence study that 67% of India had Covid. 67% x 53% x 1.4 billion = 497,140,000 people under 30 had Covid there. Now, deaths in India are likely underreported by a factor of 5 - 10 times, but these same studies point out these are concentrated among the elderly. The IFR estimate in India for this age group would range from 0.0032% to 0.032% - the low estimate assuming all deaths were reported and the high estimate that deaths were underreported by a factor of 10.

In the US, we can assume virtually all deaths from Covid were reported in this age group. Using a conservative estimate of 25% seroprevalence under the age of 30, then 25% x 38.7% x 328 million = 31,734,000 cases in this age group in the US and ~ 2820 deaths. In the US, then, IFR would be 0.0088% with 25% seroprevalence.

Hard to say where that leaves us until we have more precise estimates of excess deaths by age group in India. It could be anything from Covid was twice as deadly under the age of 30 in the US to being three times as deadly in India.

Just got my second shot of Pfizer; now I just gotta sit tight for a week or two til my antibodies build up, and I'll be right to get back out there in the world again, once lockdown ends of course.

Looking forward to seeing friends I haven't been able to catch up with in person since early 2020, and getting back into the dating game haha.

I feel like a weight has been lifted from my shoulders, and I'm deeply thankful to the countless scientists, research staff, and frontline workers who busted their asses under the most difficult circumstances so I could have this opportunity.

Well, I guess being in lockdown is the perfect opportunity for you to sit tight for another 2 weeks or so.

You're in Vic yeah? Proably expect the lockdown to get exgended by anotherr 5- days and we'll be out again I hope.

A study from Canada showed a single AZ dose was 82% effective in preventing hospitalization and death among the elderly against the Gamma variant, while a Brazilian study with the first dose of the same vaccine showed a 55 - 61% efficacy against hospitalization and death among the elderly for the same variant. So, which one is it?

The hidden factor likely at play here: control groups of the unvaccinated are increasingly seropositive. Even if you screen everyone who had a positive test, that still leaves 50 - 95% of people who actually had Covid as a part of your control group depending on the country. And since both vaccine and convalescence offer high levels of protection, that will lead to a downward bias in VE estimates.

Recent data shows the convalescent were 84% protected in SA during the Beta variant wave, and in the UK the chance of reinfection for Delta compared to Alpha is just 1.5x higher (so, 85 - 92% instead of 90% - 95%).

New data from Israel and the United Kingdom painted a confusing and contradictory picture on Thursday as to the effectiveness of Pfizer’s COVID-19 vaccine in fighting off the Delta variant of the coronavirus.

New Health Ministry statistics indicated that, on average, the Pfizer shot — the vaccine given to nearly all Israelis — is now just 39% effective against infection, while being only 41% effective in preventing symptomatic COVID. Previously, the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was well over 90% effective against infection.

Meanwhile, a new UK study published this week in The New England Journal of Medicine found the same vaccine to be 88% effective in preventing symptomatic COVID — more than twice the rate found in the Israeli data.

Israel’s research agreed, at least, that the shot was highly effective in avoiding serious illness, at 91.4% effectiveness.

Some analysts have warned that the figures on vaccine effectiveness are prone to major inaccuracies because of a range of factors, including questions over whether there is accurate data on infection levels among the non-vaccinated, which is vital for such stats.

Davidovitch added: “It’s still excellent, very good in preventing severe cases and death, but less so in preventing transmission. And this is why we can’t rely on vaccinations alone, but also need Green Passes, testing, masks, and the like.”

https://www.timesofisrael.com/israeli-uk-data-offer-mixed-signals-on-vaccines-potency-against-delta-strain/

I think part of the problem in Israel could stem from control group issues. But the high efficacy against serious illness indicates that the unvaccinated seropositive aren't mostly to blame for it. Neither are waning IgG antibody levels, which are still higher at 6-9 months for Pfizer than AZ's peak.

I've seen the following hypothesis: you need a decent level of IgA antibodies to have sterilizing immunity against most diseases. Vaccines generate no IgA antibodies whatsoever, but compensate by B-cells rapidly moving to the upper respiratory tract and shedding a lot of IgG antibodies in case you come into contact with the virus.  It could be that with time their levels rapidly wane in the blood.

Edit - I was mistaken about the first point: it's possible to have an artificially low eff. against symptomatic disease and high against severe disease if one is being calculated as odds ratio instead of risk reduction compared to overall cases.

Israel was the first to vaccinate en masse. Perhaps the immune response goes down faster over time than previously assumed. Still plenty to fight off serious disease, but not enough prevent some illness. Here they are already talking about the need for booster shots for the most vulnerable groups.

Latest news here is

In studies, the two-dose COVID-19 vaccines by Pfizer and Moderna were around 95% effective at preventing illness. If you do end up getting sick despite vaccination, experts say the shots are very good at reducing the severity of the illness - the main reason to get vaccinated.

Health officials are also watching for signs that breakthrough cases are rising, which could signal that protection from the vaccines is fading and boosters are needed.

Maderna is now also approved for 12 to 18 year olds in Europe. Better vaccinate the rest of the world first, that will be more effective. People won't stop traveling anyway.