Only 36% in USA have been fully vaccinated. 28% in my state. Why nobody in masks in supermarkets?

[Doodley]

I am sorry, but this is the stupidest thing to happen since Joe Biden has been in office. I give him near to ten out of ten for what he has done, and yes, the buck stops at the top. This is not a decision based on science. Most epidemiologists do not agree with this ruling. People will die because of the relaxation in masking recommendations. Obviously most of the unvaccinated are taking off their masks. Numbers will go up. Less people will be vaccinated because the anti-maskers, or can't be bothered, won't see the upside in getting shots. This is a reckless decision.

[Shermann]

1. Just grabbed some groceries at HT in SC

Mask mandate still posted and in effect, 100% compliance inside

[lark]

3. In Jacksonville FL the mask signs were all gone at the 3 stores I stopped at this morning.

Most were not wearing masks and my area is only 35% vaccinnated so there are tons of fucking cheaters. I debated, but ending up wearing my mask anyway even though I got my 2nd vaccination over a month ago. I just don't trust the rw assholes here not to cause another spike and then claim vaccinnations are a hoax.

[Doodley]

5. I will continue to wear my mask and continue to wear gloves, even though fully vaccinated.

[Calculating]

2. As long as people who want the vaccine can get one...

I'm done caring if stupid antivax maga types get covid. Let it be natural selection for all I care.

[TxGuitar]

7. Exactly. NT

[beaglelover]

20. YES!!!!

[Ms. Toad]

35. Then at least try to care about the 0-12 year olds,

who are not eligible to be vaccinated who might end up with permanent heart damage due to COVID. And those who can't be vaccinated or who can be, but who cannot develop immunity.

They need us to continue to take mitigating measures because they have no way to protect themselves.

[LAS14]

36. I'm with you. I bet some on the CDC panel, in their heart of hearts, agree. nt

[madaboutharry]

4. I am personally very troubled by this.

I just don't know what to think. On one hand, people who are fully vaccinated are in the "safe" category and should be able to go out into the world as a reward for their taking responsibility for their health and the health of those around them. It is unfair that selfish, ignorant, or brainwashed people should control the narrative. On the other hand, I can't help feel that it is going to be harmful for the country and for individual communities if/when, most probably when, another wave of an even more virulent form of the virus takes hold.

My family is now fully vaccinated and the opinions are split between people who are concerned about whether this decision is premature and those who say "Fuck them if they don't get vaccinated. They will bring it on themselves." I think it is more than that, another serious spike in cases and deaths will be terrible in a lot of different ways.

[Doodley]

6. Agreed MAH. We should look at nations that have handled the coronavirus best and learn from them.

Mask adherence has been the common factor. I agree that if the numbers go up it will be terrible in a lot of different ways. It will hurt all of us all. It will hurt access to hospitals. It will hurt the economy. We should be working together as a nation, not hoping Republicans will die.

[cinematicdiversions]

10. Unfortunately we are one of the countries doing better. Nt

[Doodley]

11. More deaths than any other nation. That is doing better?

[cinematicdiversions]

12. We actually count them. Nt

I doubt our death rate is all that different than others (outside of some island nations like New Zealand)

But yes we did well when all is said and done compared overall to our peers (cough EU cough)

[Doodley]

16. Yes Trump did a great job! (sarcasm)

Sort the Worldometer chart by deaths per million. We are 18th worst. Now take out tiny nations with populations under six million, where an initial outbreak can distort figures, and we are top ten. I wouldn't say that is anything to be pleased with.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/

[LAS14]

38. We should never look at absolute numbers, only rates per amount of population. nt

[Yavin4]

8. Schools and businesses will pressure people to get the vaccine.

I see that as a requirement to get hired or attend a school which it already is in most cases.

[Ms. Toad]

37. People are safe, under the conditions that were measured by the data -

In other words, measured during community mitigation of the risk.

95% safe when you encounter 10 exposures capable of causing COVID because everyone is currently masked, socially distancing, etc. is one thing (.5 breakthrough infections)

95% safe is a whole lot less safe when, in the same community, you encounter 1000 exposures capable of causing COVID because no one is wearing masks anymore, we're gathering indoors in large crowds, and no more social distancing. (50 breakthrough infections)

As to the J&J vaccine - 2.5 and 250 breakthrough infections, respectively.

[LAS14]

40. People are 100% safe from hospitilaztion and death. Think about...

... all the other risks we are willing to take. One out of every 100,000 users of birth control pills gets a stroke. Way more people die of influenza than vaccinated people from COVID. Then there's driving. We shouldn't treat COVID as a magic thing that stands outside the normal rules of risk taking.

[Ms. Toad]

41. That is not correct.

There have been hospitalizations and deaths in breakthrough cases - just as there are in cases and unvaccinated people.

Why we should treat it differently is that each of the items you identified are personal risks and choices. COVID is a community problem. Individuals cannot lower the likelihood that they will be one of the breakthrough cases alone..

Your likelihood of acquiring a stroke from birth control does not change, based on the number of others around you engaging in birth control (or any other activity). In sharp contrast, your likelihood of becoming infected DOES increase when those around you are unmasked or unvaccinated. When the community mitigation measures are lifted - your actual likelihood of acquiring COVID (% of protection x exposures capable of causing COVID) is higher because you experience more exposures capable of causing COVID.

And, we're not talking about a 1/100,000 risk. We're talking about a 1/4 or a 1/20 risk (depending on which vaccine). ALL COVID infections, even asymptomatic ones, carry a significant risk of heart damage. Death and hospitalization at the time of the infection are not the only risks.

I don't know abut you, but I take steps to mitigate the likelihood of being injured or dying in a car accident. I wear my seatbelt, always. I drive within the speed limit. I have my car serviced regularly. People who take birth control pills often mitigate their risk by choosing not to smoke, by having clotting studies done, etc.

Taking steps to mitigate the likeliood of COVID is similar. It would be a very different matter if either vaccination records were being checked at the door to the stores - or we could trust those not vaccinated to wear masks without being checked. We all know that is not reality - so we need to maintain the universal requirement for the protection of the most vulnerable in our community. The most effective technique available to mitigate risk for ourselves and our communities, is wearing masks - until the risk of infection falls below a threshhold likely to spiral out of control, and until the rate of immunization approaches herd immunity.

YOu are correct that COVID isn't a magic thing that stands outside of the normal rules of risk taking - BUT people who insist we should throw the masks in the trash are the ones insisting that it is (by denying the need take mitigation steps that we all take as to other risks).

[LAS14]

44. The percentage is so miniscule that it works out to 100%

[Ms. Toad]

47. First, you are wrong.

Out of 9,245 breakthrough cases reported by May 4, there were 112 deaths and 835 hospitalizations. That's a rate of 1.2% deaths and 9% hospitalization as of May 13. 98.8% is not 100%, nor is 91%.

I find dismissal of risks because the percentage impacted by those risks are small offensive. It diminishes the real losses of those who have died and have been hospitalized from breakthrough cases of COVID. Both my daughter and I have rare diseases that occur with a frequency far lower than the death rate for COVID. I'm really not impressed with the reasoning that something is insignificant (or that it doesn't happen) because the "percentage is so miniscule." When those risks materialize, they impact real people.

Not to mention that as the exposures capable of causing COVID increase(because all mitigating efforts are being dropped), there will be increasing numbers of of breakthrough cases who are hospitalized or die. A death rate of around 1% for COVID still works out to almost 600,000 people in the US dead. And a 1.2% death rate among breakthough cases still works out to 112 dead, already. And focusing on the death rate ignores the significant number of people who are not hospitalized with COVID who develop heart conditions, or other long-term disabilities.

[NickB79]

49. 9245 breakthrough cases out of over 100 million vaccinated Americans

So the odds of getting a breakthrough case to start are around 0.00925%

Then factor in the 1.2% death rate in the breakthrough cases, and the risk of death for a fully vaccinated individual as of right now appears to be 0.0001%.

Now this percentage will likely rise with time, but that's pretty dang close to the 100% protection from death the other poster stated.

[Ms. Toad]

50. And the 112 who have already died (more by now, I'm sure) and their families,

thank you for dismissing their lives.

As well as the families of the increased numbers of vaccinated individuals - and those who cannot get vaccinated (everyone age 0-12, immunocompromixed, etc.) - who will be infected and die, be hospitalized, or be permanently disabled, because of the increased exposure this premature lifting of the mask mandates will generate.

[NickB79]

52. I'm not dismissing their lives. I'm celebrating the efficacy of the vaccine

The fact that the vaccine can reduce the risk of death to 0.0001% is an amazing feat of science.

[Ms. Toad]

55. That does make the vaccine 100% effective.

If it were, those 112 would be alive.

[LAS14]

57. Have you done the math and accounted for rounding? nt

[Ms. Toad]

58. You do understand that if any rounding occurs, the number becomes an approximation, right?

112 people is the ACTUAL number of deaths in breakthrough cases. No math or rounding involved.

But anytime you divide those countable individuals by another countable number of individuals, and you lop off digits, you turn it into an approximation (regardless of which place you round it to), unless the calculation naturally ends at some point without a remainder.

100% is an approximation, which is accurate only to the nearest 10. To the nearest 1, it would be 99%. To the nearest .1 it would be 98.8%. Those calculations are based on actual numbers of breakthrough cases and actual numbers of deaths.

To say it works out to 100% is misleading, because people ordinarily round to the nearest 1 - which would be 99% - and even 99%, and 98.9% are inaccurage because they are approximations.

Approximations are particularly troublesome here, because you are talking about 5 million people who are vaccinated

Assuming 5% of vaccinated individuals have breakthrough infections, that means 250,000 breakthrough cases. If 100% of those are protected from death, that would mean no deaths at all. If only 99% are prevented from death, that means 2500 deaths. Certainly a different number than 0.

When the potential numbers you are working with are large, minimizing the rounding is critical to even get close to a realistic number of actual, real person, deaths.

[LAS14]

59. The approximation is within .0001 (see elsewhere in thread). Normally,

when the "approximation" is that close, we talk in whole numbers.

[Ms. Toad]

60. Your contention is that the vaccine is 100% effective against deaths.

There were 112 actual counted deaths, amounting to 1.2% (accurate to .1) of actual, counted breakthough cases. Do the math yourself.

I don't recall the number of hospitalizations, but my recollection from the calculation I did yesterday, was around 9%, accurate to the nearest 1. So, as to what you are claiming, you are not even correct as to the approximation.

EVEN if we take your inaccurate number, that range of error still results in 500 real live people, who will no longer be alive. (And around 4500 hospitalized.) (Those 112 deaths have occurred, in the very short time the vaccination has been around. Because those vaccinated will continue to be exposed, the real number over a year or so (the period we anticipate the vaccine to be effective for). Especially as people remove community mitigation, vaccinated individuals will be exposed to far more COVID-causing exposures - and the deaths/hospitalizations will be some factor larger than currently calculated (since the exposures are increased).

[LAS14]

61. You count the percent of vaccinated people, not breakthrough cases. nt

[Ms. Toad]

62. The calculations I just did in the last post used your error (from 100%)

against all vaccinated people (not all breakthrough cases).

Since you changed your target, I changed my calculations to match your current claims.

[LAS14]

63. Sorry, I don't understand you here. nt

[Ms. Toad]

64. There are 5 million people vaccinated, roughly.

You are claiming that 100% is accurate to the nearest .0001.

.0001 x 5 million = 500 dead people.

Because we already have 112 dead people (as of May 3, when many have only been vaccinated for a few weeks), the ultimate number of dead vaccinated people, over a year's time, will likely be far higher than 500.

Let's say the duration of vaccination is 3 months (1/4 of a year - likely a significant over-estimate) for all of the 5 million people. The vaccination is supposed to be good for about a year, so 4 x actual dead = 448 dead over the year effective .

Now - factor in the fact that this data was gathered primarily when community mitigation has been in effect. That means that most of those vaccinated people have only minimally encountered the kind of exposure that would cause COVID because we are wearing masks, because we are avoiding indoor gatherings, because we are social distancing.

Since we've effectively been given permission to hang out together indoors without masks or social distancing (and the reality is that everyone, not just the vaccinated, will take this as permission), the number of COVID-causing exposures is about to dramatically increase. On the other hand, the weather is warmer so people will be outside. But, on average, most of us will be in more situations that could give us COVID. The 95% is tied to exposures that could cause COVID. So let's conservatively say the exposures that could cause covid double. That will also double the breakthrough rates (5% x double # of exposures = double the number of cases), and double the deaths. So 224 for a quarter. That makes 896 cases (as opposed to the 448 at the current exposure rate).

Those non-zero extra deaths that arise because of our failure to mitigate are on the CDC, and on us, if we don't continue to mitigate until the community transmission rate (combination of vaccinated individuals and community infection rate) is low enough to safely remove our masks.

[kentuck]

9. Almost 600,000 have died...

If the rate of death was about 2% of all those that got the virus, then that would mean another 50 million or so caught the virus and are naturally immune.

That would mean that nearly 200 million of our citizens have got the vaccine or caught the virus. That is nearing 2/3rd of the population. Still not enough for herd immunity but not too far behind.

[dalton99a]

13. +1

[Doodley]

14. There haven't been studies to see how many have already had the virus.

[kentuck]

19. True.

There were estimates early on that the death rate was somewhere between 1 and 2% of all those that had gotten ill with the virus.

I have seen no recent stats.

This would be just an estimate.

[beaglelover]

21. Exactly! You can't just count vaccinations when determining herd immunity.

Must also include natural immunity due to having caught COVID and survived which the vast majority did!

[Johonny]

42. There is no understanding of how well a past Covid illness vaccinated a person from future illness.

It's also impossible to know what percentage of the group overlap

Until covid rates drop off a cliff, you can assume we've not hit herd immunity. By the fall younger kids will be vaccinated and herd immunity is likely for some regions and another painful winter is likely for others.

I imagine Covid out breaks will soon become more regional as some areas have vastly higher percentage than others.

[beaglelover]

43. LA county is expected to reach herd immunity by late July.

[boston bean]

31. I had covid and the vaccine. Be careful not to double count.

[kentuck]

32. That is true.

Probably a fair percentage have taken the shot after they caught the virus.

[BannonsLiver]

15. What are you on about?

[sarcasmo]

17. Starting this week I'm back to ordering grocery delivery.

[Kahuna]

18. I agree. What about the front line workers who may not be vaccinated? Do they matter?

They will not be able to avoid unvaccinated customers/clients. Error on the side of protecting the unvaccinated vs. the vaccinated.

[beaglelover]

22. Of course they matter, but they should be vaccinated by now.

[luv2fly]

23. Some choose not to be

My spouse works with many front line workers, most chose to get jabbed though many opted out. Go figure.

[beaglelover]

24. Well I'm not going to continue to wear a mask to protect people who are choosing not to be

vaccinated. That is just crazy talk.

[progree]

26. Minneapolis: have received at least one dose: whites: 71%, Hispanics: 35%, Blacks: 28%,

71% of white people living in Minneapolis have received at least one dose. It falls to 35% for Hispanic people, and 28% of Black and African-Americans,

5/14/21

https://minnesota.cbslocal.com/2021/05/14/despite-end-of-mandate-many-minnesotans-not-ready-to-drop-the-masks/

Something is not quite right in my mind with the common DU narrative that people who are not vaccinated by now deserve their fate.

I don't know how to explain this. I don't have a car, but vaccination openings are widely available (practically every hour of the day everywhere) at numerous pharmacies and community vaccination sites within walking distance or one bus / rail trip (not this take one bus and then wait 35 minutes to take another and then another crap). The community sites are walk-in.

The city and county are doing some things like mobile clinics, but not enough. Seems like there ought to be a squad of volunteers with tablets or something that help people set up appointments and get to them.

Edited to add another statistic that comes to mind: a guest on the PBS Newshour last night (5/14/21) said only 36% of the American population is fully vaccinated (yes, this includes children). The percentage for African Americans is 28%.

[cinematicdiversions]

29. Because it clashes with the narrative that it is only

Trump idiots not getting vaccinated.

Kind of like the recent racist attacks on Asians are strainfully blamed on Trump.

Life is more complicated than the simple narrative we often spin for ourselves.

[Kahuna]

30. My point is they didn't have to do this now. It could wait another month or two before...

saying if they don't get vaccinated, let them take their chances.

[DangerousRhythm]

34. That's exactly how I feel about it.

Houston is around a 10% positivity rate currently. Why not wait a month for more to get vaccinated first? This is just stupid.

The honor system does not work in a country full of people with no sense of honor. Some people are paying actual money for fake vax cards. FFS.

[appalachiablue]

54. +1

[Mr.Bill]

56. It shocked me,

but 30% of the employees at our hospital have refused to be vaccinated. Now keep in mind there are employees who have little to no public contact and are not medical professionals. Every year there are some who refuse the flu shot. They have to wear masks at all times while on the premises during flu season. I would imagine the same policy will be used for those refusing the vaccine.

I also think some of those 30% will accept the vaccine when it gets full FDA approval.

[TreasonousBastard]

25. It is at the least a little odd. The CDC has admitted that we are on an "honor system"...

to ensure that only the vaxxed go without masks.

Well, fat chance of that!

I can't help thinking that the CDC is under enormous pressure to loosen things up by Memorial Day. with more and more states saying "We haven't really listened to them in the past, so now let's make it official", they took the easy way out.

Imagine large stores dealing with fights over masks and Pokemon cards.

[GulfCoast66]

27. My county never had a mask mandate although my grocery store requested you wear one

I went today. Most people still had masks.

[rownesheck]

28. One word:

'Murica.

[arkielib]

33. I'm afraid you are probably right.

Most shoppers in my local Walmart stopped wearing masks even before the CDC said they are no longer necessary for the fully vaccinated. My state has less than a 30% vaccination rate (the last time I checked).

[tritsofme]

39. I think I'll go with the judgment of the CDC over Random Internet Guy

But that’s just me!

[Initech]

45. Why open the expressway when the bridge is only 1/2 way... ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!

[ProfessorGAC]

46. You Do Know This Is A Recommendation, But...

...leaves the decisions to states & private enterprise. The CDC isn't mandating anything.
Illinois has said they won't lift mask mandates, but only may modify condition requiring them.
So, here at the grocery store, 95+% were masked, which is the same as it was last week, last month, and last year.
IOW, nothing has changed here.

[cinematicdiversions]

51. States are going to have a hard time keeping mask mandates

Going into summer. Esp with the rates of infected dropping.

[lame54]

48. Store I have been in all day...

90's + mask wearers

[TheFarseer]

66. I'm relatively proud of my fellow Nebraskans

We are at about 60%, which is the original target. Lots of hardline GOPers are getting vaccinated no matter what Fox Noise says.