Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
D&D and the rising pandemic
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 8273967" data-attributes="member: 177"><p>Insofar as published, peer reviewed studies, yes, we are still waiting. However, the CDC can, will, and does work off preliminary data as well.</p><p></p><p>The basic question at hand is this: in creation of the vaccines, the basic test of effectiveness was "prevent you from becoming ill", meaning, showing symptoms. It left open the question of whether a vaccinated person could be infected, but not be ill, and thus possibly spread the virus.</p><p></p><p>In early April, the <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7013e3.htm?s_cid=mm7013e3_w" target="_blank">CDC published a preliminary report</a>, tracking health care workers, first responders, and other front line personnel. </p><p></p><p><em>"Among unvaccinated participants, 1.38 SARS-CoV-2 infections were confirmed by reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) per 1,000 person-days. In contrast, among fully immunized (≥14 days after second dose) persons, 0.04 infections per 1,000 person-days were reported, and among partially immunized (≥14 days after first dose and before second dose) persons, 0.19 infections per 1,000 person-days were reported. Estimated mRNA vaccine effectiveness for prevention of infection, adjusted for study site, was 90% for full immunization and 80% for partial immunization. These findings indicate that authorized mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are effective for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection, regardless of symptom status, among working-age adults in real-world conditions."</em></p><p></p><p>The results were simple - the vaccines are not just 90%+ effective at keeping you from getting ill, they are 90%+ effective at keeping you from getting infected at all. And if you are not infected at all, you cannot spread the virus.</p><p></p><p>It is now a month later, and as far as I can find, subsequent data has only supported this result. The data is still preliminary, because the rate of infection is terribly low, and in very technical statistics, that leads to a broad confidence interval around that 90%.</p><p></p><p>And, now here's a place where human understanding of risk typically fails us. Once you have a method that is highly effective as preventing infection/transmission, layering on more methods only adds marginal benefit. </p><p></p><p>If you have two, independent methods of prevention, that are each 50% effective, if you use them both, the result is about 75% effective, which seems like a good deal.</p><p></p><p>If you have two independent methods of prevention, one is 90% effective, and the other is 50% effective, the result is about 95% effective.</p><p></p><p>Now, let us apply what that effectiveness really means. A 90% effective vaccine does not mean it leaves you with a 10% chance of getting covid. It means your chance of getting covid is 90% less than if you were not vaccinated.</p><p></p><p>Broadly speaking, the chance of catching covid is on the order of 1% per exposure. A 90% effective prevention reduces that to 0.1% chance. A 95% effective prevention reduces that to 0.05% chance per exposure.</p><p></p><p>So, basically, adding the mask only drops the chance of transmission by <em>five hundredths of a percent</em>.</p><p></p><p>That's a small change in probability, down in the level of experimental error where it is apt to be wiped out by other factors, such as to be meaningless.</p><p></p><p>That is not to say you should not wear a mask. I support anyone who wants to wear a mask. I will be happy if my state retains its "masks must be worn indoors in public places" mandate. I'm going to continue avoiding certain venues, and wearing masks myself.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Umbran, post: 8273967, member: 177"] Insofar as published, peer reviewed studies, yes, we are still waiting. However, the CDC can, will, and does work off preliminary data as well. The basic question at hand is this: in creation of the vaccines, the basic test of effectiveness was "prevent you from becoming ill", meaning, showing symptoms. It left open the question of whether a vaccinated person could be infected, but not be ill, and thus possibly spread the virus. In early April, the [URL='https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7013e3.htm?s_cid=mm7013e3_w']CDC published a preliminary report[/URL], tracking health care workers, first responders, and other front line personnel. [I]"Among unvaccinated participants, 1.38 SARS-CoV-2 infections were confirmed by reverse transcription–polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) per 1,000 person-days. In contrast, among fully immunized (≥14 days after second dose) persons, 0.04 infections per 1,000 person-days were reported, and among partially immunized (≥14 days after first dose and before second dose) persons, 0.19 infections per 1,000 person-days were reported. Estimated mRNA vaccine effectiveness for prevention of infection, adjusted for study site, was 90% for full immunization and 80% for partial immunization. These findings indicate that authorized mRNA COVID-19 vaccines are effective for preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection, regardless of symptom status, among working-age adults in real-world conditions."[/I] The results were simple - the vaccines are not just 90%+ effective at keeping you from getting ill, they are 90%+ effective at keeping you from getting infected at all. And if you are not infected at all, you cannot spread the virus. It is now a month later, and as far as I can find, subsequent data has only supported this result. The data is still preliminary, because the rate of infection is terribly low, and in very technical statistics, that leads to a broad confidence interval around that 90%. And, now here's a place where human understanding of risk typically fails us. Once you have a method that is highly effective as preventing infection/transmission, layering on more methods only adds marginal benefit. If you have two, independent methods of prevention, that are each 50% effective, if you use them both, the result is about 75% effective, which seems like a good deal. If you have two independent methods of prevention, one is 90% effective, and the other is 50% effective, the result is about 95% effective. Now, let us apply what that effectiveness really means. A 90% effective vaccine does not mean it leaves you with a 10% chance of getting covid. It means your chance of getting covid is 90% less than if you were not vaccinated. Broadly speaking, the chance of catching covid is on the order of 1% per exposure. A 90% effective prevention reduces that to 0.1% chance. A 95% effective prevention reduces that to 0.05% chance per exposure. So, basically, adding the mask only drops the chance of transmission by [I]five hundredths of a percent[/I]. That's a small change in probability, down in the level of experimental error where it is apt to be wiped out by other factors, such as to be meaningless. That is not to say you should not wear a mask. I support anyone who wants to wear a mask. I will be happy if my state retains its "masks must be worn indoors in public places" mandate. I'm going to continue avoiding certain venues, and wearing masks myself. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Geek Talk & Media
D&D and the rising pandemic
Top