"At the beginning we were told that these jabs would take us on...

  1. 3,446 Posts.
    lightbulb Created with Sketch. 24
    "At the beginning we were told that these jabs would take us on a path to herd immunity and save people from catching the virus, isn’t that correct?"

    That was the hope. Unfortunately, the virus mutated too quickly before the vaccines could be produced and deployed. Instead of the vaccines being 90%+ effective against infection, they are now anywhere between 50% - 80% effective.

    "Do you still believe that these jabs are effective in providing herd immunity?"


    "Do these jabs stop people from catching the virus?"

    No. They do reduce the probability of becoming infected though. A vaccine with 50-80% effectiveness is better than no vaccine at all when discussing level of virus in the community.

    Going for a run and eating healthy doesn't guarantee you won't drop dead of a heart attack at aged 50, but it'll reduce the chances of that happening. Taking steps to reduce likelihood of a negative outcome is logical, something doesn't need to be 100% effective to be useful.

    "Can you explain how those who haven’t had a jab can make your jabs less effective?"

    Sure. So, the vaccines are not 100% effective at stopping infection, but they do reduce the probability of infection.

    The more vaccinated people in the community means less virus, as transmission chains reduce significantly. The less transmission chains in the community means less risk of contracting the virus, even for vaccinated people. The vaccine does not give 100% protection, so vaccinated people benefit from less contact with the virus also.

    If you have 100 people in a group and 50 are unvaccinated, the virus is going to be more prevalent and the probability of infection higher for vaccinated people than a group of 100 people and 5 unvaccinated.

    "If these jabs are effective you are safe, aren’t you?"

    No, read above.

arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch. arrow-down-2 Created with Sketch.