更新，要求chatGPT-4o 提供数据来源：CDC， WHO, 同行评议医学杂志包括The New England Journal of Medicine， The Lancet and JAMA Here’s a more detailed breakdown of COVID-19 mortality rates by 10-year age groups for a naive population: Estimated Mortality Rates by 10-Year Age Group (Naive Population) 0-9 years: <0.01% Very low mortality, with most cases being mild or asymptomatic in this age group. 10-19 years: <0.01% Slightly higher than the youngest age group, but still very low overall. 20-29 years: 0.01% - 0.1% Young adults generally have a low risk of severe outcomes. 30-39 years: 0.1% - 0.3% Mortality starts to increase slightly, particularly for those with underlying health conditions. 40-49 years: 0.3% - 0.5% The risk continues to rise, with more severe cases reported in this age group. 50-59 years: 0.5% - 1.0% Significant increase in mortality rates, especially for individuals with comorbidities. 60-69 years: 1.0% - 3.0% The mortality rate escalates in this age group, with higher risks for those with pre-existing conditions. 70-79 years: 3.0% - 10% Older adults face a much higher risk, with mortality rates becoming substantial. 80-89 years: 10% - 20% The mortality rate is very high in this age group, particularly in populations with poor access to healthcare. 90+ years: 20% - 30% The oldest individuals have the highest mortality rates, often exceeding 20%. References Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Provides detailed age-specific mortality data based on U.S. cases. World Health Organization (WHO): Offers comprehensive global data on COVID-19 mortality. Studies and Reports:Peer-reviewed articles in journals like The Lancet and JAMA offer detailed analyses of mortality rates across various demographics. These estimates are based on early data and studies conducted before widespread vaccination and other public health interventions were in place. If you need real-time data or more recent analyses, I can search for updated sources.
The mortality rate of COVID-19 among vaccinated populations is significantly lower than among unvaccinated or naive populations, thanks to the protection provided by vaccines. The effectiveness of vaccines in preventing severe illness and death, however, can vary depending on factors such as the specific vaccine used, the variant of the virus, and the age and health status of the individual. Estimated Mortality Rates by 10-Year Age Group (Vaccinated Population) 0-9 years: Extremely low (<0.001%) COVID-19 mortality in vaccinated children is very low, with vaccines offering strong protection. 10-19 years: Extremely low (<0.001%) Similar to the youngest age group, mortality is extremely rare in vaccinated adolescents. 20-29 years: Very low (<0.01%) Mortality remains very low in young adults who are vaccinated, with vaccines reducing the risk of severe outcomes. 30-39 years: Very low (<0.01%) The mortality rate remains low, with vaccines significantly reducing the likelihood of death. 40-49 years: Low (<0.05%) The risk of death remains low, although it increases slightly with age, even among vaccinated individuals. 50-59 years: Low to moderate (0.05% - 0.1%) Vaccinated individuals in this age group have a reduced but still present risk, particularly if they have underlying health conditions. 60-69 years: Moderate (0.1% - 0.3%) The mortality rate is higher but still substantially lower than in unvaccinated populations. 70-79 years: Higher (0.3% - 1.0%) Mortality rates increase with age, but vaccines still offer significant protection against severe outcomes. 80-89 years: Elevated (1.0% - 3.0%) The risk of mortality is higher in older adults, even with vaccination, but vaccines still reduce the rate significantly compared to unvaccinated peers. 90+ years: Elevated (3.0% - 6.0%) The oldest individuals remain at higher risk, though vaccination continues to offer life-saving protection. Important Considerations Booster Doses: Additional booster doses further reduce the risk of severe outcomes and death, especially in older and vulnerable populations. Variants: Some variants, particularly those with immune escape potential (e.g., Delta, Omicron), may affect vaccine efficacy, though vaccines still generally prevent severe disease and death. Underlying Health Conditions: Even among vaccinated individuals, those with significant comorbidities may face higher mortality risks. Long-Term Immunity: Over time, immunity may wane, and booster doses can be essential for maintaining protection. References Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Provides ongoing updates on vaccine effectiveness and COVID-19 mortality among different age groups. World Health Organization (WHO): Offers global data on vaccine efficacy and mortality rates across different demographics. Peer-Reviewed Studies: Research published in journals such as The New England Journal of Medicine and The Lancet provides detailed analyses of mortality rates among vaccinated populations. These figures are estimates based on available data and may vary based on the specific population, healthcare quality, and timing of vaccination.
what''''''''''''''''s the covid mortality rate among people without vaccination by age groups ChatGPT said: ChatGPT The COVID-19 mortality rate among unvaccinated individuals varies significantly by age group. Older individuals generally face a much higher mortality risk, while younger people have a lower risk. Here''''''''''''''''s a general breakdown of the mortality rates by age group for unvaccinated people, based on data from earlier in the pandemic before widespread vaccination: Under 18 years: Extremely low mortality rate, less than 0.01%. 18-29 years: Low mortality rate, around 0.03% to 0.1%. 30-39 years: Slightly higher, around 0.1% to 0.3%. 40-49 years: Around 0.4% to 1%. 50-59 years: Around 1% to 3%. 60-69 years: Around 3% to 8%. 70-79 years: Around 8% to 15%. 80+ years: Extremely high, ranging from 15% to 30% or even higher. These rates can vary depending on several factors, including underlying health conditions, healthcare quality, and geographical location. What''''''''''''''''s the covid mortality rate with vaccination by age groups? The COVID-19 mortality rate among vaccinated individuals is significantly lower than that of unvaccinated individuals across all age groups. Vaccines, especially the mRNA vaccines (like Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna), have been shown to be highly effective in reducing severe outcomes, including death. Here''''''''''''''''s a general breakdown based on data from periods when vaccines were widely available: Estimated Mortality Rates with Vaccination by Age Group: Under 18 years: Mortality rate: Extremely low, approaching 0%. 18-29 years: Mortality rate: Less than 0.01%. 30-39 years: Mortality rate: Less than 0.01% to 0.02%. 40-49 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.02% to 0.05%. 50-59 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.05% to 0.1%. 60-69 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.1% to 0.3%. 70-79 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.3% to 1%. 80+ years: Mortality rate: Around 1% to 4%. Key Points: These rates are approximate and vary based on the specific vaccine, variants of the virus, and other factors like health conditions and the time since the last dose. Booster shots have been shown to further reduce mortality rates, particularly among older adults and those with pre-existing conditions. Even in older age groups, where the mortality rate is higher, vaccination dramatically reduces the risk of death compared to being unvaccinated. These figures reflect the situation during various stages of the pandemic when vaccines were available, and should be considered in the context of evolving virus variants and updated vaccine formulations. 临床试验结果，新冠疫苗注射不增加人群的死亡率 Vaccine Volume 42, Issue 7, 7 March 2024, Pages 1731-1737 Mortality risk after COVID-19 vaccination: A self-controlled case series study Author links open overlay panel Stanley Xu a b , et al
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.02.032 Highlights •We assessed mortality risk after COVID-19 vaccination using a self-controlled case series study. •Relative incidences of 6 death outcomes with risk intervals of 14 and 28 days were obtained. •Relative incidences of non-COVID-19 and all-cause deaths for vaccinated individuals were below 1. •Relative incidences of four cardiac-related death outcomes for vaccinated individuals were below 1. Abstract Background Although previous studies found no-increased mortality risk after COVID-19 vaccination, residual confounding bias might have impacted the findings. Using a modified self-controlled case series (SCCS) design, we assessed the risk of non-COVID-19 mortality, all-cause mortality, and four cardiac-related death outcomes after primary series COVID-19 vaccination. Methods We analyzed all deaths between December 14, 2020, and August 11, 2021, among individuals from eight Vaccine Safety Datalink sites. Demographic characteristics of deaths in recipients of COVID-19 vaccines and unvaccinated individuals were reported. We conducted SCCS analyses by vaccine type and death outcomes and reported relative incidences (RI). The observation period for death spanned from the dates of emergency use authorization to the end of the study period (August 11, 2021) without censoring the observation period upon death. We pre-specified a primary risk interval of 28-day and a secondary risk interval of 14-day after each vaccination dose. Adjusting for seasonality in mortality analyses is crucial because death rates vary over time. Deaths among unvaccinated individuals were included in SCCS analyses to account for seasonality by incorporating calendar month in the models. Results For Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), RIs of non-COVID-19 mortality, all-cause mortality, and four cardiac-related death outcomes were below 1 and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) excluded 1 across both doses and both risk intervals. For Moderna (mRNA-1273), RI point estimates of all outcomes were below 1, although the 95 % CIs of two RI estimates included 1: cardiac-related (RI = 0.78, 95 % CI, 0.58–1.04) and non-COVID-19 cardiac-related mortality (RI = 0.80, 95 % CI, 0.60–1.08) 14 days after the second dose in individuals without pre-existing cancer and heart disease. For Janssen (Ad26.COV2.S), RIs of four cardiac-related death outcomes ranged from 0.94 to 0.98 for the 14-day risk interval, and 0.68 to 0.72 for the 28-day risk interval and 95 % CIs included 1. Conclusion Using a modified SCCS design and adjusting for temporal trends, no-increased risk was found for non-COVID-19 mortality, all-cause mortality, and four cardiac-related death outcomes among recipients of the three COVID-19 vaccines used in the US.
新冠疫苗在欧洲减少了一百四十万死亡 Covid-19: Vaccines have saved at least 1.4 million lives in Europe, WHO reports BMJ 2024; 384 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q125 (Published 17 January 2024) Cite this as: BMJ 2024;384:q125 Article Related content Metrics Responses Gareth Iacobucci Author affiliations Vaccination against covid-19 has reduced deaths in Europe by at least 57% and saved at least 1.4 million lives, the World Health Organization has estimated. A preprint study by researchers from WHO/Europe reports that the known death toll from covid of 2.5 million in the WHO European Region could have been as high as four million without vaccines.1 The analysis of data from 34 countries also found that over 90% of lives saved were in people over 60. Discussing the findings at a press briefing on 16 January, Hans Kluge, WHO regional director for Europe, said, “Today there are 1.4 million people in our region, most of them elderly, who are around to enjoy life with their loved ones because they took the vital decision to be vaccinated against covid-19. This is the power of vaccines. The evidence is irrefutable.” The researchers used covid mortality and vaccine uptake data reported by 34 countries and vaccine effectiveness data from literature to calculate the percentage reduction in expected and reported deaths. They calculated that, from December 2020 to March 2023, vaccines reduced deaths by 57% in 70-79-year olds and by 54% in 60-69 year olds. Mortality was reduced by 52% in the 50-59 age group. The age group that benefited the most from vaccination was the over 80s, whose expected covid mortality reduced by 62% overall. 注：欧洲新冠超额死亡两百一十万人
新冠疫苗注射第一年，减少两千万全球死亡人数 J Paediatr Child Health. 2022 Sep 20 : 10.1111/jpc.16213. doi: 10.1111/jpc.16213 [Epub ahead of print] PMCID: PMC9537923 Lives saved by COVID‐19 vaccines Article notes Copyright and License information PMC Disclaimer Outside clinical trials, the first COVID‐19 vaccine was administered on 8 December 2020. Researchers aimed to quantify the global impact of the first year of COVID‐19 vaccination programmes using mathematical modelling to fit COVID‐19 transmission and vaccination to reported COVID‐19 mortality and all‐cause excess mortality in 185 countries and territories. 1 They determined the number of lives lost if there had been no vaccines. Based on reported COVID‐19 deaths, vaccinations prevented an estimated 14.4 million deaths (95% credible interval [Crl] 13.7–15.9) from COVID‐19 in a year. However, if excess deaths were used, this estimate rose to 19.8 million (95% Crl 19.1–20.4) deaths prevented (Fig. 1), equating to a global reduction of 63% in total deaths (19.8 million of 31.4 million) during the first year of COVID‐19 vaccination. Delivery of vaccines to low‐income countries has been far lower than promised. 2 In COVID‐19 Vaccines Global Access (COVAX) Advance Market Commitment countries, an estimated 7.4 million [95% Crl 6.8–7.7] of 17.9 million excess deaths were prevented, but millions more lives could have been saved with better coverage. COVID‐19 vaccination altered the pandemic course, saving tens of millions of lives globally. However, vaccines had less effect in low‐income countries due to inadequate access, emphasising the importance of global vaccine equity.
华人读者年龄大概分布在30至60 这个年龄段无疫苗新冠死亡率 30-39 years: Slightly higher, around 0.1% to 0.3%. 40-49 years: Around 0.4% to 1%. 50-59 years: Around 1% to 3%. 60-69 years: Around 3% to 8%. 如果年龄在40岁以上，死亡率至少在0.4%。 注射疫苗之后： 30-39 years: Mortality rate: Less than 0.01% to 0.02%. 40-49 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.02% to 0.05%. 50-59 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.05% to 0.1%. 60-69 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.1% to 0.3%. 疫苗降低了死亡率至少一个数量级 为什么会有疫苗无用的错觉？因为本来大多数人这个年龄段感染新冠都不会死亡。但是你怎么知道你不会落在0.4%-3%的区间里呢？ 有没有可能，没有注射疫苗，可能本来是这个区间的不幸者呢？是疫苗救了命而不自知。 因为一个个体没有办法做对照试验。
新冠有多危险，可以比较一下各年龄段all-cause mortality rate: All-Cause Mortality Rates by Age Group (Percentage of Population per Year): 1-9 years: Mortality rate: 0.01% to 0.02% (or 0.01 to 0.02 per 100). 10-19 years: Mortality rate: 0.02% to 0.03% (or 0.02 to 0.03 per 100). 20-29 years: Mortality rate: 0.04% to 0.07% (or 0.04 to 0.07 per 100). 30-39 years: Mortality rate: 0.07% to 0.13% (or 0.07 to 0.13 per 100). 40-49 years: Mortality rate: 0.13% to 0.20% (or 0.13 to 0.20 per 100). 50-59 years: Mortality rate: 0.30% to 0.50% (or 0.30 to 0.50 per 100). 60-69 years: Mortality rate: 0.70% to 1.00% (or 0.70 to 1.00 per 100).
平明寻白羽 发表于 2024-08-15 16:44 what's the covid mortality rate among people without vaccination by age groups ChatGPT said: ChatGPT The COVID-19 mortality rate among unvaccinated individuals varies significantly by age group. Older individuals generally face a much higher mortality risk, while younger people have a lower risk. Here's a general breakdown of the mortality rates by age group for unvaccinated people, based on data from earlier in the pandemic before widespread vaccination: Under 18 years: Extremely low mortality rate, less than 0.01%. 18-29 years: Low mortality rate, around 0.03% to 0.1%. 30-39 years: Slightly higher, around 0.1% to 0.3%. 40-49 years: Around 0.4% to 1%. 50-59 years: Around 1% to 3%. 60-69 years: Around 3% to 8%. 70-79 years: Around 8% to 15%. 80+ years: Extremely high, ranging from 15% to 30% or even higher. These rates can vary depending on several factors, including underlying health conditions, healthcare quality, and geographical location. What's the covid mortality rate with vaccination by age groups? The COVID-19 mortality rate among vaccinated individuals is significantly lower than that of unvaccinated individuals across all age groups. Vaccines, especially the mRNA vaccines (like Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna), have been shown to be highly effective in reducing severe outcomes, including death. Here's a general breakdown based on data from periods when vaccines were widely available: Estimated Mortality Rates with Vaccination by Age Group: Under 18 years: Mortality rate: Extremely low, approaching 0%. 18-29 years: Mortality rate: Less than 0.01%. 30-39 years: Mortality rate: Less than 0.01% to 0.02%. 40-49 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.02% to 0.05%. 50-59 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.05% to 0.1%. 60-69 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.1% to 0.3%. 70-79 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.3% to 1%. 80+ years: Mortality rate: Around 1% to 4%. Key Points: These rates are approximate and vary based on the specific vaccine, variants of the virus, and other factors like health conditions and the time since the last dose. Booster shots have been shown to further reduce mortality rates, particularly among older adults and those with pre-existing conditions. Even in older age groups, where the mortality rate is higher, vaccination dramatically reduces the risk of death compared to being unvaccinated. These figures reflect the situation during various stages of the pandemic when vaccines were available, and should be considered in the context of evolving virus variants and updated vaccine formulations.
WHO过去半个世纪，疫苗拯救了1.54亿生命 最大受益群体是婴儿，疫苗拯救了一亿婴儿生命 疫苗是过去半个世纪，效益最高的医疗措施。 https://www.who.int/news/item/24-04-2024-global-immunization-efforts-have-saved-at-least-154-million-lives-over-the-past-50-years Global immunization efforts have saved at least 154 million lives over the past 50 years 24 April 2024Joint News Release Geneva / New York / Seattle Reading time: 7 min (1985 words) العربية 中文 Français Русский Español A major landmark study to be published by The Lancet reveals that global immunization efforts have saved an estimated 154 million lives – or the equivalent of 6 lives every minute of every year – over the past 50 years. The vast majority of lives saved – 101 million – were those of infants. The study, led by the World Health Organization (WHO), shows that immunization is the single greatest contribution of any health intervention to ensuring babies not only see their first birthdays but continue leading healthy lives into adulthood. Of the vaccines included in the study, the measles vaccination had the most significant impact on reducing infant mortality, accounting for 60% of the lives saved due to immunization. This vaccine will likely remain the top contributor to preventing deaths in the future. Over the past 50 years, vaccination against 14 diseases (diphtheria, Haemophilus influenzae type B, hepatitis B, Japanese encephalitis, measles, meningitis A, pertussis, invasive pneumococcal disease, polio, rotavirus, rubella, tetanus, tuberculosis, and yellow fever) has directly contributed to reducing infant deaths by 40% globally, and by more than 50% in the African Region. "Vaccines are among the most powerful inventions in history, making once-feared diseases preventable,” said WHO Director-General, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. “Thanks to vaccines, smallpox has been eradicated, polio is on the brink, and with the more recent development of vaccines against diseases like malaria and cervical cancer, we are pushing back the frontiers of disease. With continued research, investment and collaboration, we can save millions more lives today and in the next 50 years.” The study found that for each life saved through immunization, an average of 66 years of full health were gained – with a total of 10.2 billion full health years gained over the five decades. As the result of vaccination against polio more than 20 million people are able to walk today who would otherwise have been paralysed, and the world is on the verge of eradicating polio, once and for all. These gains in childhood survival highlight the importance of protecting immunization progress in every country of the world and accelerating efforts to reach the 67 million children who missed out on one or more vaccines during the pandemic years. Monumental efforts to increase access to vaccination over five decades Released ahead of the 50th anniversary of the Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) to take place in May 2024, the study is the most comprehensive analysis of the programme’s global and regional health impact over the past five decades. Founded in 1974 by the World Health Assembly, EPI''''s original goal was to vaccinate all children against diphtheria, measles, pertussis, polio, tetanus, tuberculosis, as well as smallpox, the only human disease ever eradicated. Today, the programme, now referred to as the Essential Programme on Immunization, includes universal recommendations to vaccinate against 13 diseases, and context-specific recommendations for another 17 diseases, extending the reach of immunization beyond children, to adolescent and adults. The study highlights that fewer than 5% of infants globally had access to routine immunization when EPI was launched. Today, 84% of infants are protected with 3 doses of the vaccine against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (DTP) – the global marker for immunization coverage. Nearly 94 million of the estimated 154 million lives saved since 1974, were a result of protection by measles vaccines. Yet, there were still 33 million children who missed a measles vaccine dose in 2022: nearly 22 million missed their first dose and an additional 11 million missed their second dose. Coverage of 95% or greater with 2 doses of measles-containing vaccine is needed to protect communities from outbreaks. Currently, the global coverage rate of the first dose of measles vaccine is 83% and the second dose is 74%, contributing to a very high number of outbreaks across the world. To increase immunization coverage, UNICEF, as one of the largest buyers of vaccines in the world, procures more than 2 billion doses every year on behalf of countries and partners for reaching almost half of the world’s children. It also works to distribute vaccines to the last mile, ensuring that even remote and underserved communities have access to immunization services. “Thanks to vaccinations, more children now survive and thrive past their fifth birthday than at any other point in history,” said UNICEF Executive Director Catherine Russell. “This massive achievement is a credit to the collective efforts of governments, partners, scientists, healthcare workers, civil society, volunteers and parents themselves, all pulling in the same direction of keeping children safe from deadly diseases. We must build on the momentum and ensure that every child, everywhere, has access to life-saving immunizations.” In 2000, Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, which includes WHO, UNICEF and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) as core founding members, was created to expand the impact of EPI and help the poorest countries in the world increase coverage, benefit from new, life-saving vaccines and expand the breadth of protection against an increasing number of vaccine-preventable diseases. This intensified effort in the most vulnerable parts of the world has helped to save more lives and further promote vaccine equity. Today, Gavi has helped protect a whole generation of children and now provides vaccines against 20 infectious diseases, including the HPV vaccine and vaccines for outbreaks of measles, cholera, yellow fever, Ebola and meningitis. “Gavi was established to build on the partnership and progress made possible by EPI, intensifying focus on protecting the most vulnerable around the world,” said Dr Sania Nishtar, CEO of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. “In a little over two decades we have seen incredible progress – protecting more than a billion children, helping halve childhood mortality in these countries, and providing billions in economic benefits. Vaccines are truly the best investment we can make in ensuring everyone, no matter where they are born, has an equal right to a healthy future: we must ensure these efforts are fully funded to protect the progress made and help countries address current challenges of their immunization programmes.” Immunization programmes have become the bedrock of primary health services in communities and countries due to their far reach and wide coverage. They provide not only an opportunity for vaccination but also enable other life-saving care to be provided, including nutritional support, maternal tetanus prevention, illness screenings and bed net distribution to protect families from diseases like malaria. Since the study only covers the health impact of vaccination against 14 diseases, the number of lives saved due to vaccination is a conservative estimate and not a full account of the life-saving impact of vaccines. Societal, economic or educational impacts to health and well-being over the 50 years have also contributed to further reductions in mortality. Today, there are vaccines to protect against more than 30 life-threatening diseases. While the HPV vaccine, which protects against cervical cancer in adults, was not included in the study, it is expected to prevent a high number of future deaths as countries work towards increasing immunization targets aimed at eliminating cervical cancer by 2030. New vaccine introductions, such as those for malaria, COVID-19, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and meningitis, as well as cholera and Ebola vaccines used during outbreaks, will further save lives in the next 50 years. Saving millions more is “Humanly Possible” Global immunization programmes have shown what is humanly possible when many stakeholders, including heads of state, regional and global health agencies, scientists, charities, aid agencies, businesses, and communities work together. Today, WHO, UNICEF, Gavi, and BMGF are unveiling “Humanly Possible”, a joint campaign, marking the annual World Immunization Week, 24-30 April 2024. The worldwide communication campaign calls on world leaders to advocate, support and fund vaccines and the immunization programmes that deliver these lifesaving products – reaffirming their commitment to public health, while celebrating one of humanity’s greatest achievements. The next 50 years of EPI will require not only reaching the children missing out on vaccines, but protecting grandparents from influenza, mothers from tetanus, adolescents from HPV and everyone from TB, and many other infectious diseases. “It''''s inspiring to see what vaccines have made possible over the last fifty years, thanks to the tireless efforts of governments, global partners and health workers to make them more accessible to more people,” said Dr Chris Elias, president of Global Development at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. “We cannot let this incredible progress falter. By continuing to invest in immunization, we can ensure that every child – and every person – has the chance to live a healthy and productive life.” **** Notes to editors For more information on WHO World Immunization Week 2024 campaign, visit World Immunization Week 2024 (who.int) and Humanly Possible campaign, http://itshumanlypossible.org. Access photos and broll on immunization here. About the data WHO led the analysis of the impact of the Expanded Programme on Immunization from 1974 to 2024 with input from researchers from University of Basel, Safinea Ltd., University of Washington, KidRisk Inc., Penn State University, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, University of Cape Town, Imperial College London, the Vaccine Impact Modelling Consortium, and Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. The analysis covers the global and regional health impact of vaccination against 14 diseases: diphtheria, Haemophilus influenzae type B, hepatitis B, Japanese encephalitis, measles, meningitis A, pertussis, invasive pneumococcal disease, polio, rotavirus, rubella, tetanus, tuberculosis, and yellow fever.
平明寻白羽 发表于 2024-08-15 16:44 what''''s the covid mortality rate among people without vaccination by age groups ChatGPT said: ChatGPT The COVID-19 mortality rate among unvaccinated individuals varies significantly by age group. Older individuals generally face a much higher mortality risk, while younger people have a lower risk. Here''''s a general breakdown of the mortality rates by age group for unvaccinated people, based on data from earlier in the pandemic before widespread vaccination: Under 18 years: Extremely low mortality rate, less than 0.01%. 18-29 years: Low mortality rate, around 0.03% to 0.1%. 30-39 years: Slightly higher, around 0.1% to 0.3%. 40-49 years: Around 0.4% to 1%. 50-59 years: Around 1% to 3%. 60-69 years: Around 3% to 8%. 70-79 years: Around 8% to 15%. 80+ years: Extremely high, ranging from 15% to 30% or even higher. These rates can vary depending on several factors, including underlying health conditions, healthcare quality, and geographical location. What''''s the covid mortality rate with vaccination by age groups? The COVID-19 mortality rate among vaccinated individuals is significantly lower than that of unvaccinated individuals across all age groups. Vaccines, especially the mRNA vaccines (like Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna), have been shown to be highly effective in reducing severe outcomes, including death. Here''''s a general breakdown based on data from periods when vaccines were widely available: Estimated Mortality Rates with Vaccination by Age Group: Under 18 years: Mortality rate: Extremely low, approaching 0%. 18-29 years: Mortality rate: Less than 0.01%. 30-39 years: Mortality rate: Less than 0.01% to 0.02%. 40-49 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.02% to 0.05%. 50-59 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.05% to 0.1%. 60-69 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.1% to 0.3%. 70-79 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.3% to 1%. 80+ years: Mortality rate: Around 1% to 4%. Key Points: These rates are approximate and vary based on the specific vaccine, variants of the virus, and other factors like health conditions and the time since the last dose. Booster shots have been shown to further reduce mortality rates, particularly among older adults and those with pre-existing conditions. Even in older age groups, where the mortality rate is higher, vaccination dramatically reduces the risk of death compared to being unvaccinated. These figures reflect the situation during various stages of the pandemic when vaccines were available, and should be considered in the context of evolving virus variants and updated vaccine formulations.
平明寻白羽 发表于 2024-08-15 16:44 what''''s the covid mortality rate among people without vaccination by age groups ChatGPT said: ChatGPT The COVID-19 mortality rate among unvaccinated individuals varies significantly by age group. Older individuals generally face a much higher mortality risk, while younger people have a lower risk. Here''''s a general breakdown of the mortality rates by age group for unvaccinated people, based on data from earlier in the pandemic before widespread vaccination: Under 18 years: Extremely low mortality rate, less than 0.01%. 18-29 years: Low mortality rate, around 0.03% to 0.1%. 30-39 years: Slightly higher, around 0.1% to 0.3%. 40-49 years: Around 0.4% to 1%. 50-59 years: Around 1% to 3%. 60-69 years: Around 3% to 8%. 70-79 years: Around 8% to 15%. 80+ years: Extremely high, ranging from 15% to 30% or even higher. These rates can vary depending on several factors, including underlying health conditions, healthcare quality, and geographical location. What''''s the covid mortality rate with vaccination by age groups? The COVID-19 mortality rate among vaccinated individuals is significantly lower than that of unvaccinated individuals across all age groups. Vaccines, especially the mRNA vaccines (like Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna), have been shown to be highly effective in reducing severe outcomes, including death. Here''''s a general breakdown based on data from periods when vaccines were widely available: Estimated Mortality Rates with Vaccination by Age Group: Under 18 years: Mortality rate: Extremely low, approaching 0%. 18-29 years: Mortality rate: Less than 0.01%. 30-39 years: Mortality rate: Less than 0.01% to 0.02%. 40-49 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.02% to 0.05%. 50-59 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.05% to 0.1%. 60-69 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.1% to 0.3%. 70-79 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.3% to 1%. 80+ years: Mortality rate: Around 1% to 4%. Key Points: These rates are approximate and vary based on the specific vaccine, variants of the virus, and other factors like health conditions and the time since the last dose. Booster shots have been shown to further reduce mortality rates, particularly among older adults and those with pre-existing conditions. Even in older age groups, where the mortality rate is higher, vaccination dramatically reduces the risk of death compared to being unvaccinated. These figures reflect the situation during various stages of the pandemic when vaccines were available, and should be considered in the context of evolving virus variants and updated vaccine formulations.
alpha, beta and delta变种的内在致死性都是高于原始株的 到omicron的时候，人群已经或者注射了疫苗或者已经感染过，很大一部分人都获得了免疫力，所以感染以后症状相对减轻，但是依然具有致死性。 is there any difference in intrinsic lethality among COVID variants? ChatGPT said: Yes, there are differences in intrinsic lethality among various COVID-19 variants. "Intrinsic lethality" refers to the inherent ability of a virus variant to cause severe disease or death, independent of other factors like healthcare quality or population immunity. Key COVID-19 Variants and Their Intrinsic Lethality: Original Wuhan Strain (Wild Type): The original strain of SARS-CoV-2 that emerged in late 2019 was the baseline for comparisons. It caused severe disease, particularly in older adults and those with underlying health conditions, but had a relatively lower transmission rate compared to later variants. Alpha (B.1.1.7) Variant: Detected in the UK in late 2020, the Alpha variant was associated with higher transmissibility and a modest increase in intrinsic lethality (around 30-50% more lethal) compared to the original strain. This variant led to more severe disease, particularly among unvaccinated individuals. Beta (B.1.351) and Gamma (P.1) Variants: The Beta variant (first identified in South Africa) and the Gamma variant (first identified in Brazil) were also more transmissible. There was some evidence of increased lethality, particularly in the Gamma variant, but the overall data was less clear than for Alpha. Delta (B.1.617.2) Variant:The Delta variant, first identified in India, was significantly more transmissible than previous variants and was associated with a higher intrinsic lethality, especially among unvaccinated populations. Some studies estimated the Delta variant was about twice as deadly as the original strain. Omicron (B.1.1.529) Variant and Its Subvariants: Omicron, which emerged in late 2021, had a dramatically higher transmission rate but was generally associated with lower intrinsic lethality compared to Delta. This variant and its subvariants tended to cause milder disease, particularly in vaccinated individuals, although it still caused severe outcomes in vulnerable populations, such as the elderly and those with significant comorbidities. Later Omicron Subvariants: Subsequent Omicron subvariants (e.g., BA.2, BA.5, XBB) have continued to show high transmissibility but generally maintain a lower intrinsic lethality compared to Delta. However, their impact varies depending on factors like immunity from vaccination or prior infection. Key Factors Influencing Perceived Lethality: Population Immunity:The overall lethality of a variant is often influenced by the level of immunity in the population, either from vaccination or previous infection.Healthcare System Capacity: The ability of healthcare systems to manage severe cases can affect outcomes, particularly during surges. Viral Load: Some variants, like Delta, were associated with higher viral loads, which could contribute to more severe disease. Summary: Variants like Alpha and Delta had higher intrinsic lethality compared to the original strain,while Omicron and its subvariants, although more transmissible, generally caused less severe disease. However, even less lethal variants can cause significant mortality if they spread widely, particularly among those who are unvaccinated or have underlying health conditions.
xil 发表于 2024-08-15 17:11 大多数人的记忆力就是这么短暂，不记得在没有免疫屏障下中国突然开放那几个月的惨状，基本在美华人每个人在国内的朋友亲人都有一两例受到严重影响的例子；跟美国的情况完全不一样。如果没有疫苗，美国还不知道要惨多少倍。我认识不少老人，在美国的，得了病都康复了都好好的。
根本就不是那样的。 2021年初我就关注当时打针的老年人群体。那个群体在开打疫苗以后，感染率和死亡率都开始飙升。 当时还有whisleblower出来讲，是老人院的护理，说他们老人院2020年一年也没有什么人得新冠，也没什么死亡。但是开始打疫苗以后，people drop like fly。本来能自主生活的只能躺床上了。 后来人寿保险公司的数据，疫苗开打以后，all cause mortality 40%飙升。 很多国家的数据都是这样，台湾，新加坡，这些疫苗率高的国家，都是本来没什么事，疫苗一开始，那个all cause mortality就开始jump up。 各种癌症的数据，自从开打疫苗，呼呼的往上涨。 你们整天瞎扯一些主媒的数据。忽悠人。都到现在了还在骗人。 鄙视你们。
我是没逻辑，文科生，现在又是反专家。 "拒绝专家意见，更相信自己的判断" Actually I am very proud of that。 在这个巨大的骗局下能够没有屈服于social pressure 没有屈服于邪恶的government mandate everyone doing that should be very proud of that.
maiqi 发表于 2024-08-16 00:47 我是没逻辑，文科生，现在又是反专家。 "拒绝专家意见，更相信自己的判断" Actually I am very proud of that。 在这个巨大的骗局下能够没有屈服于social pressure 没有屈服于邪恶的government mandate everyone doing that should be very proud of that.
Here’s a more detailed breakdown of COVID-19 mortality rates by 10-year age groups for a naive population: Estimated Mortality Rates by 10-Year Age Group (Naive Population) 0-9 years: <0.01% Very low mortality, with most cases being mild or asymptomatic in this age group. 10-19 years: <0.01% Slightly higher than the youngest age group, but still very low overall. 20-29 years: 0.01% - 0.1% Young adults generally have a low risk of severe outcomes. 30-39 years: 0.1% - 0.3% Mortality starts to increase slightly, particularly for those with underlying health conditions. 40-49 years: 0.3% - 0.5% The risk continues to rise, with more severe cases reported in this age group. 50-59 years: 0.5% - 1.0% Significant increase in mortality rates, especially for individuals with comorbidities. 60-69 years: 1.0% - 3.0% The mortality rate escalates in this age group, with higher risks for those with pre-existing conditions. 70-79 years: 3.0% - 10% Older adults face a much higher risk, with mortality rates becoming substantial. 80-89 years: 10% - 20% The mortality rate is very high in this age group, particularly in populations with poor access to healthcare. 90+ years: 20% - 30% The oldest individuals have the highest mortality rates, often exceeding 20%. References Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Provides detailed age-specific mortality data based on U.S. cases. World Health Organization (WHO): Offers comprehensive global data on COVID-19 mortality. Studies and Reports: Peer-reviewed articles in journals like The Lancet and JAMA offer detailed analyses of mortality rates across various demographics. These estimates are based on early data and studies conducted before widespread vaccination and other public health interventions were in place. If you need real-time data or more recent analyses, I can search for updated sources.
The mortality rate of COVID-19 among vaccinated populations is significantly lower than among unvaccinated or naive populations, thanks to the protection provided by vaccines. The effectiveness of vaccines in preventing severe illness and death, however, can vary depending on factors such as the specific vaccine used, the variant of the virus, and the age and health status of the individual. Estimated Mortality Rates by 10-Year Age Group (Vaccinated Population) 0-9 years: Extremely low (<0.001%) COVID-19 mortality in vaccinated children is very low, with vaccines offering strong protection. 10-19 years: Extremely low (<0.001%) Similar to the youngest age group, mortality is extremely rare in vaccinated adolescents. 20-29 years: Very low (<0.01%) Mortality remains very low in young adults who are vaccinated, with vaccines reducing the risk of severe outcomes. 30-39 years: Very low (<0.01%) The mortality rate remains low, with vaccines significantly reducing the likelihood of death. 40-49 years: Low (<0.05%) The risk of death remains low, although it increases slightly with age, even among vaccinated individuals. 50-59 years: Low to moderate (0.05% - 0.1%) Vaccinated individuals in this age group have a reduced but still present risk, particularly if they have underlying health conditions. 60-69 years: Moderate (0.1% - 0.3%) The mortality rate is higher but still substantially lower than in unvaccinated populations. 70-79 years: Higher (0.3% - 1.0%) Mortality rates increase with age, but vaccines still offer significant protection against severe outcomes. 80-89 years: Elevated (1.0% - 3.0%) The risk of mortality is higher in older adults, even with vaccination, but vaccines still reduce the rate significantly compared to unvaccinated peers. 90+ years: Elevated (3.0% - 6.0%) The oldest individuals remain at higher risk, though vaccination continues to offer life-saving protection. Important Considerations Booster Doses: Additional booster doses further reduce the risk of severe outcomes and death, especially in older and vulnerable populations. Variants: Some variants, particularly those with immune escape potential (e.g., Delta, Omicron), may affect vaccine efficacy, though vaccines still generally prevent severe disease and death. Underlying Health Conditions: Even among vaccinated individuals, those with significant comorbidities may face higher mortality risks. Long-Term Immunity: Over time, immunity may wane, and booster doses can be essential for maintaining protection. References Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Provides ongoing updates on vaccine effectiveness and COVID-19 mortality among different age groups. World Health Organization (WHO): Offers global data on vaccine efficacy and mortality rates across different demographics. Peer-Reviewed Studies: Research published in journals such as The New England Journal of Medicine and The Lancet provides detailed analyses of mortality rates among vaccinated populations. These figures are estimates based on available data and may vary based on the specific population, healthcare quality, and timing of vaccination.
what''''''''''''''''s the covid mortality rate among people without vaccination by age groups ChatGPT said:
ChatGPT
The COVID-19 mortality rate among unvaccinated individuals varies significantly by age group. Older individuals generally face a much higher mortality risk, while younger people have a lower risk. Here''''''''''''''''s a general breakdown of the mortality rates by age group for unvaccinated people, based on data from earlier in the pandemic before widespread vaccination: Under 18 years: Extremely low mortality rate, less than 0.01%. 18-29 years: Low mortality rate, around 0.03% to 0.1%. 30-39 years: Slightly higher, around 0.1% to 0.3%. 40-49 years: Around 0.4% to 1%. 50-59 years: Around 1% to 3%. 60-69 years: Around 3% to 8%. 70-79 years: Around 8% to 15%. 80+ years: Extremely high, ranging from 15% to 30% or even higher. These rates can vary depending on several factors, including underlying health conditions, healthcare quality, and geographical location.
What''''''''''''''''s the covid mortality rate with vaccination by age groups?
The COVID-19 mortality rate among vaccinated individuals is significantly lower than that of unvaccinated individuals across all age groups. Vaccines, especially the mRNA vaccines (like Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna), have been shown to be highly effective in reducing severe outcomes, including death. Here''''''''''''''''s a general breakdown based on data from periods when vaccines were widely available: Estimated Mortality Rates with Vaccination by Age Group: Under 18 years: Mortality rate: Extremely low, approaching 0%. 18-29 years: Mortality rate: Less than 0.01%. 30-39 years: Mortality rate: Less than 0.01% to 0.02%. 40-49 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.02% to 0.05%. 50-59 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.05% to 0.1%. 60-69 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.1% to 0.3%. 70-79 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.3% to 1%. 80+ years: Mortality rate: Around 1% to 4%. Key Points: These rates are approximate and vary based on the specific vaccine, variants of the virus, and other factors like health conditions and the time since the last dose. Booster shots have been shown to further reduce mortality rates, particularly among older adults and those with pre-existing conditions. Even in older age groups, where the mortality rate is higher, vaccination dramatically reduces the risk of death compared to being unvaccinated. These figures reflect the situation during various stages of the pandemic when vaccines were available, and should be considered in the context of evolving virus variants and updated vaccine formulations.
临床试验结果，新冠疫苗注射不增加人群的死亡率
Vaccine Volume 42, Issue 7, 7 March 2024, Pages 1731-1737
Mortality risk after COVID-19 vaccination: A self-controlled case series study Author links open overlay panel
Stanley Xu a b , et al
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2024.02.032
Highlights •We assessed mortality risk after COVID-19 vaccination using a self-controlled case series study. •Relative incidences of 6 death outcomes with risk intervals of 14 and 28 days were obtained. •Relative incidences of non-COVID-19 and all-cause deaths for vaccinated individuals were below 1. •Relative incidences of four cardiac-related death outcomes for vaccinated individuals were below 1. Abstract Background Although previous studies found no-increased mortality risk after COVID-19 vaccination, residual confounding bias might have impacted the findings. Using a modified self-controlled case series (SCCS) design, we assessed the risk of non-COVID-19 mortality, all-cause mortality, and four cardiac-related death outcomes after primary series COVID-19 vaccination. Methods We analyzed all deaths between December 14, 2020, and August 11, 2021, among individuals from eight Vaccine Safety Datalink sites. Demographic characteristics of deaths in recipients of COVID-19 vaccines and unvaccinated individuals were reported. We conducted SCCS analyses by vaccine type and death outcomes and reported relative incidences (RI). The observation period for death spanned from the dates of emergency use authorization to the end of the study period (August 11, 2021) without censoring the observation period upon death. We pre-specified a primary risk interval of 28-day and a secondary risk interval of 14-day after each vaccination dose. Adjusting for seasonality in mortality analyses is crucial because death rates vary over time. Deaths among unvaccinated individuals were included in SCCS analyses to account for seasonality by incorporating calendar month in the models. Results For Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2), RIs of non-COVID-19 mortality, all-cause mortality, and four cardiac-related death outcomes were below 1 and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) excluded 1 across both doses and both risk intervals. For Moderna (mRNA-1273), RI point estimates of all outcomes were below 1, although the 95 % CIs of two RI estimates included 1: cardiac-related (RI = 0.78, 95 % CI, 0.58–1.04) and non-COVID-19 cardiac-related mortality (RI = 0.80, 95 % CI, 0.60–1.08) 14 days after the second dose in individuals without pre-existing cancer and heart disease. For Janssen (Ad26.COV2.S), RIs of four cardiac-related death outcomes ranged from 0.94 to 0.98 for the 14-day risk interval, and 0.68 to 0.72 for the 28-day risk interval and 95 % CIs included 1. Conclusion Using a modified SCCS design and adjusting for temporal trends, no-increased risk was found for non-COVID-19 mortality, all-cause mortality, and four cardiac-related death outcomes among recipients of the three COVID-19 vaccines used in the US.
🔥 最新回帖
无知者无畏 不可怕，可怕的是睁眼说瞎话。
前段时间路透社报道美军方秘密操作抹黑中国疫苗
🛋️ 沙发板凳
Covid-19: Vaccines have saved at least 1.4 million lives in Europe, WHO reports BMJ 2024; 384 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q125 (Published 17 January 2024) Cite this as: BMJ 2024;384:q125 Article Related content Metrics Responses Gareth Iacobucci Author affiliations Vaccination against covid-19 has reduced deaths in Europe by at least 57% and saved at least 1.4 million lives, the World Health Organization has estimated. A preprint study by researchers from WHO/Europe reports that the known death toll from covid of 2.5 million in the WHO European Region could have been as high as four million without vaccines.1 The analysis of data from 34 countries also found that over 90% of lives saved were in people over 60. Discussing the findings at a press briefing on 16 January, Hans Kluge, WHO regional director for Europe, said, “Today there are 1.4 million people in our region, most of them elderly, who are around to enjoy life with their loved ones because they took the vital decision to be vaccinated against covid-19. This is the power of vaccines. The evidence is irrefutable.” The researchers used covid mortality and vaccine uptake data reported by 34 countries and vaccine effectiveness data from literature to calculate the percentage reduction in expected and reported deaths. They calculated that, from December 2020 to March 2023, vaccines reduced deaths by 57% in 70-79-year olds and by 54% in 60-69 year olds. Mortality was reduced by 52% in the 50-59 age group. The age group that benefited the most from vaccination was the over 80s, whose expected covid mortality reduced by 62% overall.
注：欧洲新冠超额死亡两百一十万人
J Paediatr Child Health. 2022 Sep 20 : 10.1111/jpc.16213. doi: 10.1111/jpc.16213 [Epub ahead of print] PMCID: PMC9537923 Lives saved by COVID‐19 vaccines Article notes Copyright and License information PMC Disclaimer Outside clinical trials, the first COVID‐19 vaccine was administered on 8 December 2020. Researchers aimed to quantify the global impact of the first year of COVID‐19 vaccination programmes using mathematical modelling to fit COVID‐19 transmission and vaccination to reported COVID‐19 mortality and all‐cause excess mortality in 185 countries and territories. 1 They determined the number of lives lost if there had been no vaccines. Based on reported COVID‐19 deaths, vaccinations prevented an estimated 14.4 million deaths (95% credible interval [Crl] 13.7–15.9) from COVID‐19 in a year. However, if excess deaths were used, this estimate rose to 19.8 million (95% Crl 19.1–20.4) deaths prevented (Fig. 1), equating to a global reduction of 63% in total deaths (19.8 million of 31.4 million) during the first year of COVID‐19 vaccination. Delivery of vaccines to low‐income countries has been far lower than promised. 2 In COVID‐19 Vaccines Global Access (COVAX) Advance Market Commitment countries, an estimated 7.4 million [95% Crl 6.8–7.7] of 17.9 million excess deaths were prevented, but millions more lives could have been saved with better coverage. COVID‐19 vaccination altered the pandemic course, saving tens of millions of lives globally. However, vaccines had less effect in low‐income countries due to inadequate access, emphasising the importance of global vaccine equity.
这个年龄段无疫苗新冠死亡率
30-39 years: Slightly higher, around 0.1% to 0.3%. 40-49 years: Around 0.4% to 1%. 50-59 years: Around 1% to 3%. 60-69 years: Around 3% to 8%.
如果年龄在40岁以上，死亡率至少在0.4%。
注射疫苗之后： 30-39 years: Mortality rate: Less than 0.01% to 0.02%. 40-49 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.02% to 0.05%. 50-59 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.05% to 0.1%. 60-69 years: Mortality rate: Around 0.1% to 0.3%.
疫苗降低了死亡率至少一个数量级
为什么会有疫苗无用的错觉？因为本来大多数人这个年龄段感染新冠都不会死亡。但是你怎么知道你不会落在0.4%-3%的区间里呢？
有没有可能，没有注射疫苗，可能本来是这个区间的不幸者呢？是疫苗救了命而不自知。
因为一个个体没有办法做对照试验。
All-Cause Mortality Rates by Age Group (Percentage of Population per Year): 1-9 years: Mortality rate: 0.01% to 0.02% (or 0.01 to 0.02 per 100). 10-19 years: Mortality rate: 0.02% to 0.03% (or 0.02 to 0.03 per 100). 20-29 years: Mortality rate: 0.04% to 0.07% (or 0.04 to 0.07 per 100). 30-39 years: Mortality rate: 0.07% to 0.13% (or 0.07 to 0.13 per 100). 40-49 years: Mortality rate: 0.13% to 0.20% (or 0.13 to 0.20 per 100). 50-59 years: Mortality rate: 0.30% to 0.50% (or 0.30 to 0.50 per 100). 60-69 years: Mortality rate: 0.70% to 1.00% (or 0.70 to 1.00 per 100).
赞科学态度 用数据说话 理性批判性分析
这个应该是常识吧？
特别是在原始毒株和Delta毒王的时候，杀伤力那么强，没疫苗很危险
很显然很多人没有啊
好比出车祸被安全带救了命不知道，却认为安全带没用
更可恨的是那些自己打了疫苗，却到处宣传疫苗坏处的人，真的是居心叵测。
最大受益群体是婴儿，疫苗拯救了一亿婴儿生命
疫苗是过去半个世纪，效益最高的医疗措施。
https://www.who.int/news/item/24-04-2024-global-immunization-efforts-have-saved-at-least-154-million-lives-over-the-past-50-years Global immunization efforts have saved at least 154 million lives over the past 50 years 24 April 2024Joint News Release Geneva / New York / Seattle Reading time: 7 min (1985 words)
العربية 中文 Français Русский Español A major landmark study to be published by The Lancet reveals that global immunization efforts have saved an estimated 154 million lives – or the equivalent of 6 lives every minute of every year – over the past 50 years. The vast majority of lives saved – 101 million – were those of infants. The study, led by the World Health Organization (WHO), shows that immunization is the single greatest contribution of any health intervention to ensuring babies not only see their first birthdays but continue leading healthy lives into adulthood. Of the vaccines included in the study, the measles vaccination had the most significant impact on reducing infant mortality, accounting for 60% of the lives saved due to immunization. This vaccine will likely remain the top contributor to preventing deaths in the future. Over the past 50 years, vaccination against 14 diseases (diphtheria, Haemophilus influenzae type B, hepatitis B, Japanese encephalitis, measles, meningitis A, pertussis, invasive pneumococcal disease, polio, rotavirus, rubella, tetanus, tuberculosis, and yellow fever) has directly contributed to reducing infant deaths by 40% globally, and by more than 50% in the African Region. "Vaccines are among the most powerful inventions in history, making once-feared diseases preventable,” said WHO Director-General, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. “Thanks to vaccines, smallpox has been eradicated, polio is on the brink, and with the more recent development of vaccines against diseases like malaria and cervical cancer, we are pushing back the frontiers of disease. With continued research, investment and collaboration, we can save millions more lives today and in the next 50 years.” The study found that for each life saved through immunization, an average of 66 years of full health were gained – with a total of 10.2 billion full health years gained over the five decades. As the result of vaccination against polio more than 20 million people are able to walk today who would otherwise have been paralysed, and the world is on the verge of eradicating polio, once and for all. These gains in childhood survival highlight the importance of protecting immunization progress in every country of the world and accelerating efforts to reach the 67 million children who missed out on one or more vaccines during the pandemic years. Monumental efforts to increase access to vaccination over five decades Released ahead of the 50th anniversary of the Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) to take place in May 2024, the study is the most comprehensive analysis of the programme’s global and regional health impact over the past five decades. Founded in 1974 by the World Health Assembly, EPI''''s original goal was to vaccinate all children against diphtheria, measles, pertussis, polio, tetanus, tuberculosis, as well as smallpox, the only human disease ever eradicated. Today, the programme, now referred to as the Essential Programme on Immunization, includes universal recommendations to vaccinate against 13 diseases, and context-specific recommendations for another 17 diseases, extending the reach of immunization beyond children, to adolescent and adults. The study highlights that fewer than 5% of infants globally had access to routine immunization when EPI was launched. Today, 84% of infants are protected with 3 doses of the vaccine against diphtheria, tetanus and pertussis (DTP) – the global marker for immunization coverage. Nearly 94 million of the estimated 154 million lives saved since 1974, were a result of protection by measles vaccines. Yet, there were still 33 million children who missed a measles vaccine dose in 2022: nearly 22 million missed their first dose and an additional 11 million missed their second dose. Coverage of 95% or greater with 2 doses of measles-containing vaccine is needed to protect communities from outbreaks. Currently, the global coverage rate of the first dose of measles vaccine is 83% and the second dose is 74%, contributing to a very high number of outbreaks across the world. To increase immunization coverage, UNICEF, as one of the largest buyers of vaccines in the world, procures more than 2 billion doses every year on behalf of countries and partners for reaching almost half of the world’s children. It also works to distribute vaccines to the last mile, ensuring that even remote and underserved communities have access to immunization services. “Thanks to vaccinations, more children now survive and thrive past their fifth birthday than at any other point in history,” said UNICEF Executive Director Catherine Russell. “This massive achievement is a credit to the collective efforts of governments, partners, scientists, healthcare workers, civil society, volunteers and parents themselves, all pulling in the same direction of keeping children safe from deadly diseases. We must build on the momentum and ensure that every child, everywhere, has access to life-saving immunizations.” In 2000, Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance, which includes WHO, UNICEF and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation (BMGF) as core founding members, was created to expand the impact of EPI and help the poorest countries in the world increase coverage, benefit from new, life-saving vaccines and expand the breadth of protection against an increasing number of vaccine-preventable diseases. This intensified effort in the most vulnerable parts of the world has helped to save more lives and further promote vaccine equity. Today, Gavi has helped protect a whole generation of children and now provides vaccines against 20 infectious diseases, including the HPV vaccine and vaccines for outbreaks of measles, cholera, yellow fever, Ebola and meningitis. “Gavi was established to build on the partnership and progress made possible by EPI, intensifying focus on protecting the most vulnerable around the world,” said Dr Sania Nishtar, CEO of Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. “In a little over two decades we have seen incredible progress – protecting more than a billion children, helping halve childhood mortality in these countries, and providing billions in economic benefits. Vaccines are truly the best investment we can make in ensuring everyone, no matter where they are born, has an equal right to a healthy future: we must ensure these efforts are fully funded to protect the progress made and help countries address current challenges of their immunization programmes.” Immunization programmes have become the bedrock of primary health services in communities and countries due to their far reach and wide coverage. They provide not only an opportunity for vaccination but also enable other life-saving care to be provided, including nutritional support, maternal tetanus prevention, illness screenings and bed net distribution to protect families from diseases like malaria. Since the study only covers the health impact of vaccination against 14 diseases, the number of lives saved due to vaccination is a conservative estimate and not a full account of the life-saving impact of vaccines. Societal, economic or educational impacts to health and well-being over the 50 years have also contributed to further reductions in mortality. Today, there are vaccines to protect against more than 30 life-threatening diseases. While the HPV vaccine, which protects against cervical cancer in adults, was not included in the study, it is expected to prevent a high number of future deaths as countries work towards increasing immunization targets aimed at eliminating cervical cancer by 2030. New vaccine introductions, such as those for malaria, COVID-19, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and meningitis, as well as cholera and Ebola vaccines used during outbreaks, will further save lives in the next 50 years. Saving millions more is “Humanly Possible” Global immunization programmes have shown what is humanly possible when many stakeholders, including heads of state, regional and global health agencies, scientists, charities, aid agencies, businesses, and communities work together. Today, WHO, UNICEF, Gavi, and BMGF are unveiling “Humanly Possible”, a joint campaign, marking the annual World Immunization Week, 24-30 April 2024. The worldwide communication campaign calls on world leaders to advocate, support and fund vaccines and the immunization programmes that deliver these lifesaving products – reaffirming their commitment to public health, while celebrating one of humanity’s greatest achievements. The next 50 years of EPI will require not only reaching the children missing out on vaccines, but protecting grandparents from influenza, mothers from tetanus, adolescents from HPV and everyone from TB, and many other infectious diseases. “It''''s inspiring to see what vaccines have made possible over the last fifty years, thanks to the tireless efforts of governments, global partners and health workers to make them more accessible to more people,” said Dr Chris Elias, president of Global Development at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. “We cannot let this incredible progress falter. By continuing to invest in immunization, we can ensure that every child – and every person – has the chance to live a healthy and productive life.” **** Notes to editors For more information on WHO World Immunization Week 2024 campaign, visit World Immunization Week 2024 (who.int) and Humanly Possible campaign, http://itshumanlypossible.org. Access photos and broll on immunization here. About the data WHO led the analysis of the impact of the Expanded Programme on Immunization from 1974 to 2024 with input from researchers from University of Basel, Safinea Ltd., University of Washington, KidRisk Inc., Penn State University, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, University of Cape Town, Imperial College London, the Vaccine Impact Modelling Consortium, and Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation. The analysis covers the global and regional health impact of vaccination against 14 diseases: diphtheria, Haemophilus influenzae type B, hepatitis B, Japanese encephalitis, measles, meningitis A, pertussis, invasive pneumococcal disease, polio, rotavirus, rubella, tetanus, tuberculosis, and yellow fever.
还要说我守交规系了安全带，结果你看，车祸发生的时候我肩膀上被勒出一条淤青，手臂抬不起来了，被它坑了。
贴切
也有很多不爱带安全带或头盔的，也是认为不担心小概率事件，何须这些累赘，愿意赌命。
反疫苗的也许同样心理
特别是还认为疫苗有副作用潜在安全问题，宁愿去感染新冠
对风险收益评估有严重认知偏差
要冒百分之0.4的死亡风险去避免百万分之一的疫苗副作用风险
这个计算就有点理解不了了
我靠，会不会读英文？
这里面的数据对比甚至不是打过疫苗的和没有打过疫苗的做对照，而是疫苗还不流行的时间段和疫苗已经流行的时间段对照。这有个屁意义，新流行性病毒全部都是初期致死率高，随着时间流逝致死率降低，没有疫苗很可能也是这个趋势。
疫苗副作用大也是客观事实 身边就有好几个年长的亲戚打了疫苗后有副作用，死了1个，急性心梗动手术2个。。
所以初期病毒杀伤力大，要打疫苗 奥秘出来后，病毒杀伤力减小，就不需要打
不知道为啥那么多人一定要搞二极管思维。。。
疫苗肯定有效。但是数据太整齐了，怀疑ChatGPT made it up.
alpha, beta and delta变种的内在致死性都是高于原始株的
到omicron的时候，人群已经或者注射了疫苗或者已经感染过，很大一部分人都获得了免疫力，所以感染以后症状相对减轻，但是依然具有致死性。
is there any difference in intrinsic lethality among COVID variants? ChatGPT said:
Yes, there are differences in intrinsic lethality among various COVID-19 variants. "Intrinsic lethality" refers to the inherent ability of a virus variant to cause severe disease or death, independent of other factors like healthcare quality or population immunity. Key COVID-19 Variants and Their Intrinsic Lethality: Original Wuhan Strain (Wild Type): The original strain of SARS-CoV-2 that emerged in late 2019 was the baseline for comparisons. It caused severe disease, particularly in older adults and those with underlying health conditions, but had a relatively lower transmission rate compared to later variants. Alpha (B.1.1.7) Variant: Detected in the UK in late 2020, the Alpha variant was associated with higher transmissibility and a modest increase in intrinsic lethality (around 30-50% more lethal) compared to the original strain. This variant led to more severe disease, particularly among unvaccinated individuals. Beta (B.1.351) and Gamma (P.1) Variants: The Beta variant (first identified in South Africa) and the Gamma variant (first identified in Brazil) were also more transmissible. There was some evidence of increased lethality, particularly in the Gamma variant, but the overall data was less clear than for Alpha. Delta (B.1.617.2) Variant: The Delta variant, first identified in India, was significantly more transmissible than previous variants and was associated with a higher intrinsic lethality, especially among unvaccinated populations. Some studies estimated the Delta variant was about twice as deadly as the original strain. Omicron (B.1.1.529) Variant and Its Subvariants: Omicron, which emerged in late 2021, had a dramatically higher transmission rate but was generally associated with lower intrinsic lethality compared to Delta. This variant and its subvariants tended to cause milder disease, particularly in vaccinated individuals, although it still caused severe outcomes in vulnerable populations, such as the elderly and those with significant comorbidities. Later Omicron Subvariants: Subsequent Omicron subvariants (e.g., BA.2, BA.5, XBB) have continued to show high transmissibility but generally maintain a lower intrinsic lethality compared to Delta. However, their impact varies depending on factors like immunity from vaccination or prior infection. Key Factors Influencing Perceived Lethality: Population Immunity: The overall lethality of a variant is often influenced by the level of immunity in the population, either from vaccination or previous infection. Healthcare System Capacity: The ability of healthcare systems to manage severe cases can affect outcomes, particularly during surges. Viral Load: Some variants, like Delta, were associated with higher viral loads, which could contribute to more severe disease. Summary: Variants like Alpha and Delta had higher intrinsic lethality compared to the original strain, while Omicron and its subvariants, although more transmissible, generally caused less severe disease. However, even less lethal variants can cause significant mortality if they spread widely, particularly among those who are unvaccinated or have underlying health conditions.
不过说实话我觉得现在新冠病毒传染力上升但杀伤性下降，是可以留给大家自己evaluate risk benefit了，就跟现在的流感疫苗一样。
我不能接受反疫苗派的几点是 1）造谣制造恐慌。尤其对risk的夸大，比如前两天有人贴的发表在野鸡期刊的linguistic教授的“论文”。 2）否认在疫情中期疫苗在降低死亡率上的功劳，拿现在病毒evolve多少代以后的疫苗的efficacy去judge当年的强制疫苗policy 3）政治化。 说这是川总砸钱搞出来的（其实至少bioNtech没有用project warp speed的钱，靠的是Pfizer），完全选择性忘记了当年川总和川粉们对疫苗百般嘲笑否认。
我说的风险评估认知偏差特指新冠流行初期，人们大部分都还没有感染新冠的时候，都是covid naive population易感人群的时候
现在已经好几年了，
人群已经普遍具有免疫力了，来自疫苗注射或者感染
所以，就不会那么严重了，新冠成为流感大军病原体中的普通一员
我也不在意了，后面的加强疫苗都没有再打，因为细胞免疫adaptive immunity记忆已经建立了
还算年富力强，没必要打加强针
但是如果是六十岁以上的，还是要打加强针，因为抗体滴度会衰减
高龄体弱人群还是建议坚持打季节流感和新冠疫苗
关键是疫苗是安全带还只是一根绳，这个要搞清楚先。
疫苗出现的时候，病毒已经比较弱了。
疫苗会建立免疫记忆，免疫记忆T细胞和B细胞会长期存在甚至life long memory。再次感染时候会迅速扩增抗体和cytotoxic T cells， 清除病毒和被感染细胞。
这是疫苗的原理。
看21楼，
三个变种alpha, beta, delta都比原始株传染性更强，致死力更高
一楼没有看懂？
就算是一根绳儿，只要保住你在大部分事故里不飞到窗外去，就比没有绳子强。 当然你说百分之九十九的事故都是小事故，人都没有飞出去。你就是赌你会不会遇到1%会飞出去的呗。
这个比方我讲过几遍了，生病就是一个量变到质变的过程，免疫系统拦不住病毒兴风作浪了，症状就出来了。打了疫苗就看你的免疫系统记性有多好。四年前打的可能要多琢磨会儿才认出来，或者根本就忘了。半年打一次就相当于半年给一次training，希望免疫系统能够早点认出来，减轻症状缩短病程，或者根本就在有症状之前就拦住了。
那打了疫苗的不也是在赌嘛，赌疫苗安全有效，没有长期的副作用。每个人做的决定都是基于当初自己的认知，别后悔就行。我当时就想这新技术的疫苗这么短时间推出，不信任，纵贯疫苗历史没有这样的都是要验证好多年才大规模推广，还有政府威逼利诱的让人去打，不打就要把人给开除了。如果是个好东西，比如街上发新款的iPhone，还用的着威逼利诱人们去拿吗。
赞一个人间清醒！
我同意你说的现在这个疫苗是personal decision。因为在群体免疫上的benefit已经开始降低（大部分能打疫苗的高危人群已经打过疫苗，不能打的特别小心），risk就看个人的接受程度。
但你拿“现在”的标准去evaluate“当时”的policy，我觉得不合适。
还有一点，就算不信任mRNA技术，也有传统技术的疫苗。就不要拿“新技术“这件事拿来做挡箭牌了
嗯，清醒清醒。世人皆醉。
2023年底又重感冒一次，症状差不多，但是查了不是新冠，但咳嗽多痰。大概两周好了。
今年暑假旅游第二次中招，只有一边扁桃体巨疼，然后是喉咙痒不断咳嗽，但是没有发烧和其它症状。大概一周后转阴。感觉又再次增强免疫力。不计划打加强疫苗。
不知道你在说什么，我说的就是我自己当时的心境和选择，没什么复杂的，反正我选择没打，也从来没后悔过。
那些病毒流行的时候，不是大多数人没打疫苗的时候。
等到O'micron 的时候，大多数疫苗打过的人，感染的是这个病毒。
希望不要有人误解你说的 naive，来攻击你
没错，就算最后还是飞出去了，被扯一下后速度降低了也许就能救命
哈哈，如果汽车安全带换成绳子，人飞出去之前不是被勒死就是重伤，并且安全带要系规范了才能保命。
面对恶性传染病的时候，个人决定影响的不仅仅是个人健康，也对周围人会产生影响
当初美国年轻人不听政府劝，不愿意自我隔离，而是选择到处浪。影响的不仅仅是他们自己，还害死了大量的美国老人
这逻辑，我不敢苟同。疫苗还不止是根人畜无害的绳子，它是个扎到你身体里面就拔不出来的副作用未知的绳子。这么根绳子，带来哪怕1%的保护率? 自求多福吧。
安全带这个比喻十分不当，安全带有那么多副作用吗？会猝死，中风，心脏病，turbo cancer吗？多少人打了针躺床上好几天起不来，比得一次还厉害--这种都还不计入副作用呢。 如果用安全带做比喻，那是勒着脖子的安全带，一下子就勒死了，根本不需要accident。
疫苗有副作用，和疫苗没有保护性，完全是两个不同的话题 现在病毒杀伤力减小后不需要打疫苗，和当初不该打，也是完全两个不同的话题
你们这种人都是怎么学基本逻辑的？
是的，拿着chatGPT 说事的，说明完全不懂AI。 这些LLM都是用propaganda作训练，garbage in, garbage out 没有自己的逻辑思考，只会重复主媒宣传和AI output 好boring
你去看看世界上任何一个国家都是一开始接触新冠死亡率很高，然后就开始下降，不管有没有疫苗。比如一开始就没有lockdown的印度，非洲国家。
欧洲的结论是疫苗有可能有一定作用，但是根本没有量化到底多少，也只是从前期后期死亡率做对比，这是最不可靠的数据了。
疫苗到底防不防重症也没有确切的数据。而且，什么时候疫苗的作用是防重症？以前的疫苗也是这样定义的？
这个版上就有好多人，打了疫苗后身体出了各种问题。 没有效果而副作用多多的”疫苗“，就是毒药。 这是非常简单的逻辑，你都搞不明白吗？
现在的结论是隔离没有显著的效果。自covid开始3年以后，各个国家对比，那些没有lockdown的国家的死亡率没有比lockdown国家的死亡率更高。至于你说，永远lockdown下去就不会死人。问题是，一个人为了不生病可以一辈子不吃饭吗？只要吃饭，就会生病。一个国家能永远lockdown吗？既然不能，为什么要lockdown？早开放国家，晚开放国家，死亡率对比没有明显差别。
疫苗的保护性没有严谨的科学根据。所谓结论都是用前期死亡率和后期死亡率对比的。根本不是打过疫苗和没有打过疫苗的人群对比的那种科学研究。
而现在打过疫苗和没打过疫苗对covid感染，康复有任何区别吗？问就是现在covid变异了，不如以前毒了。既然已经变异了，对人体的伤害就跟平时flu一样，为什么还要别人打不放传染，不防得病的疫苗？
唉。果然是文科生，从没学过基本逻辑吗？
哪怕时间线保持不动，疫情初期疫苗没有大规模普及前，打疫苗人群和未打疫苗人群的死亡率统计数据有的是。
这都要否认？
呵呵，恶性传染病，你和我说隔离没用？ 没必要这么反常识吧？
中国当初通过隔离，成功实现清零，20年底就歌舞升平了，21年经济增长高达8.4%，后来无非就是遇上了奥密克戎，实在防不住罢了。 但要说隔离没用，这也太扯了
根本就不是那样的。
2021年初我就关注当时打针的老年人群体。那个群体在开打疫苗以后，感染率和死亡率都开始飙升。 当时还有whisleblower出来讲，是老人院的护理，说他们老人院2020年一年也没有什么人得新冠，也没什么死亡。但是开始打疫苗以后，people drop like fly。本来能自主生活的只能躺床上了。
后来人寿保险公司的数据，疫苗开打以后，all cause mortality 40%飙升。 很多国家的数据都是这样，台湾，新加坡，这些疫苗率高的国家，都是本来没什么事，疫苗一开始，那个all cause mortality就开始jump up。 各种癌症的数据，自从开打疫苗，呼呼的往上涨。
你们整天瞎扯一些主媒的数据。忽悠人。都到现在了还在骗人。 鄙视你们。
这俩人群一样吗？打疫苗的人群和未打疫苗的人群？有没有选择bias？
真的，学点基本逻辑和统计常识
如果真是文科生，没这方面的训练，没能力分辨真假，就别瞎看民科小作文
这么多身边人打了疫苗出了问题，科学界媒体都不研究不报道，这正常吗？
很多人在过去这几年被骗了。因为铺天盖地的洗脑，从媒体到social media到各种论坛网站的封锁真相。 但凡发一个质疑疫苗的，就立刻被封。 真的，既然认为我没有逻辑，文科生，那么又害怕什么呢？
马上就要来monkey pox疫情了，疫苗都做好了。第二波“指日可待”。 又一次考试，一样的考题，这次要好好想想了。 希望这次更多的人能看明白这个大骗局。
最可怜的就是疫苗受害者。他们不但自己忍受身体的痛苦，还有不被理解的痛苦。很多医生不敢承认疫苗问题，只会baffled，surprised, shocked。以前都是发展很缓慢的癌症类型，为什么突然就一下子就是四期癌症，不知道啊，baffled。还有的gaslight受害者，打疫苗出了问题，医生查不出来，说你是有精神病吧。荒唐至极。
连那个chris cuomo，以前媒体上天天嘲笑诅咒不打疫苗的人的那个纽约前州长的弟弟，现在都转圜了，说他自己就是疫苗受害者，还吃伊维菌素。
以前油管推荐疫苗的网红医生，现在也意识到了疫苗的问题，但是还算有勇气的，出来给她的followers道歉。
然而还有人在重复三年前的复读机。这种人就是平时想象不到的人性之恶。
真是眼界大开了。
这也是为啥一旦疫苗screw up, 你的T细胞和B细胞就会把错误的免疫记忆长期记录下去，有些甚至导致autoimmune disease, 即免疫系统攻击自身细胞。这也是很多autoimmune disease 特别难治疗的地方。这种基本就和癌症差不多，唯一有效的办法是把自身的所有B细胞杀灭，希望重启长期记忆。不信的话，可以放狗搜一个药，rituximab。看看这个药是干嘛的。 我认为一大半的autoimmune disease 都是各种疫苗混打出来的，而且mRNA疫苗在这方面尤其可疑。但是迫于各大药厂的淫威，至今没有人敢真正的系统性的研究疫苗和autoimmune disease 之间的相关性。 有一点我同意的，现今上市的“经典”疫苗， mRNA除外，经过几十年的使用，证明对大部分人的副作用都很小甚至没有。但是这个不能作为强制疫苗的法理依据。因为这样就是典型的牺牲一小部分人的健康甚至生命来换取大众的健康和安全。谁有这个权力来决定这样的事情？想当上帝吗？尤其是当那一小部分人真的受到伤害的时候，都没地儿说理去，因为媒体的宣传，根本不会有人相信，也不会有医生敢冒天下之大不韪去帮病人追究。可是假如你确实是学医的，知道疫苗的工作原理，你摸着良心，用科学的态度，你能发誓疫苗百分之百不会有长期副作用？一个疫苗要是可以一生有效的话，那它的副作用，假如有的话，也是一生有效的。这个逻辑总想得通吧？所以，人类社会到了今天，仍然是大多数人对少数人的暴政，无论在哪里，在什么样的体制下。不要总是鄙视社会达尔文主义，现实就是如此。只不过相比几千年前，宣传做得更好了，掩饰的更出色了。新冠疫苗强制只是让这个伦理问题暴露得更彻底一些而已。
ai说啥就是根据被训练的数据来的啊，首帖居然用chatGPT来当什么独立思考的专家来说事，根本就不懂ai是什么东西，ai就是一个传声筒被教啥就说啥，跟疫苗教众不会思考迷信盲从，是传声筒是一个道理，lol
这里推疫苗的，先说自己打了几针，另一个贴我就说过，CDC和fauci都承认疫苗后抗体几个月就跌到平常水平，疫苗每年都要至少3针才能维持抗体，至今没打满十几针，都是不身体力行的骗子，lol
疫苗基本是病原体的全部或部分组成部分，注射入人体让免疫系统提取特征建立免疫记忆的。
既然你明白这个原理，还怀疑疫苗会引起自体免疫病，那么疫苗针对的病原体感染了人会怎样呢？
如果疫苗和病毒都能100%引起自身免疫疾病的话，你打疫苗是100%，病毒感染是小概率事件。我说的仅针对covid，别的疫苗经过长时间使用 证明其实副作用发生率很小。
今天还在讨论nature, science这些journal要不要向AI训练收费呢
反对我的数据的，那么也摆数据啊， 看不上AI总结的，就自己摆牛杂志peer reviewed journal 的文章数据啊
否则你凭啥说AI总结有问题？
首先，疫苗绝对不会100%引起自身免疫疾病。学界也不认为疫苗和自身免疫疾病发生有明确causality,
上面的回复只是把那个楼主的逻辑延申一下。
新馆病毒感染基本是100%几率，
而且活的可以快速复制的病毒
你认为新冠疫苗可能有的副作用，新馆病毒本身都有，而且是几个数量级别的严重
我解释了AI source是科研文章的总结， 我信任。
上面说了，你不服就摆反面数据啊。
认为AI不可靠就贴peer reviewed credible trusted research journal article来反驳啊 reference摆出来。
就说一句ＡＩ不可靠算啥，
有本事用数据和事实怼啊
单纯宣泄情绪多弱鸡啊
你要证明自己论点不摆论据怎么行
数据最有说服力
不给数据就是耍赖啊
No 我完全没有意愿说服你。 你最好赶紧听福奇的。 别听我的。
阳了怎么了
避免了更严重的症状和生命危险啊
加速了感染的清除啊
下面总结基本都涵盖到了。 ＬＯＬ
质疑科学权威并愿意相信错误信息、伪科学和阴谋论的现象受到多种心理、社会和文化因素的影响： 1. 对机构的不信任： 历史上的不信任：一些人对机构（包括科学机构）有根深蒂固的不信任感，可能源于过去对权威的误导或不可信的感知。 感知到的精英主义：科学和学术有时被认为是精英主义或与日常生活脱节的。这可能导致人们拒绝科学权威，转而接受那些感觉更易接近或更能引起共鸣的替代解释。 2. 认知偏差： 确认偏误：人们倾向于寻找和相信那些能够确认自己已有信念的信息。伪科学和阴谋论通常提供与这些信念一致的简单解释，而科学解释则可能更加复杂和具有挑战性。 达克效应：这种认知偏差发生在某些人在某一领域知识或能力有限时，却高估了自己的理解，从而导致他们拒绝专家意见，更相信自己的判断。 3. 心理上的安慰： 对确定性的需求：科学知识通常以不确定性和复杂性的形式呈现，这可能让那些渴望明确、确定答案的人感到不安。阴谋论和伪科学通常提供简单、绝对的解释，从而提供心理上的安慰。 恐惧与焦虑：在危机或不确定时期，人们可能转向阴谋论或伪科学，以此来理解混乱的事件，从而获得一种控制感或理解感。 4. 社会和文化影响： 群体认同：对阴谋论或伪科学的信仰可能与群体认同有关。如果某人的社会群体或社区认可某些信仰，他们可能会为了维持社会凝聚力而采纳这些信仰，即使它们与科学共识相矛盾。 回声室效应：社交媒体和在线社区可能创造出信息回声室，放大错误信息和伪科学。这些环境强化已有的信仰，使科学观点难以渗透。 5. 叙事的吸引力： 引人入胜的故事：阴谋论和伪科学通常伴随着引人入胜的故事情节，比科学提供的常常复杂且技术性的解释更具吸引力和记忆性。这些故事更容易让人信服。 对复杂性的怀疑：科学解释往往涉及复杂性、不确定性，并承认当前知识的局限性。有些人可能认为这些解释不如伪科学或阴谋论提供的直接、充满自信的主张令人满意。 6. 操纵与宣传： 故意传播错误信息：有些个人或群体出于政治、经济或意识形态的目的，故意传播错误信息或伪科学。这会削弱对科学的信任，导致人们接受错误的信仰。 情感诉求：错误信息和阴谋论通常利用情感，如恐惧、愤怒或希望，使其比干巴巴的事实性科学传播更具说服力。 7. 科学素养的缺乏： 对科学的理解：许多人可能并不完全理解科学的工作方式——其方法、自我纠正的本质，以及同行评审的重要性。这种理解的缺乏可能导致他们认为科学共识只是另一种观点，而非经过严格测试和证据支持的结果。 知识差距与错误信息：当人们缺乏科学的基础知识时，他们可能更容易受到似乎填补这些知识空白的错误信息的影响。 8. 反建制情绪： 对权威的反叛：对阴谋论或伪科学的信仰可以是一种对权威机构感知的控制进行反叛的形式。这可以成为独立性或对主流叙事怀疑的表达方式。 9. 媒体影响： 耸人听闻的报道：媒体往往会耸人听闻地报道阴谋论和伪科学主张，因为它们能够吸引关注并驱动互动。这可能使这些想法看起来更可信，并影响公众的看法。 错误的平衡：为了呈现“双方”观点，媒体可能会给予边缘观点不应有的关注，使其看起来比实际更有可信度。 这些因素创造了一个复杂的环境，在这个环境中，科学权威受到质疑，而替代的、往往是错误的解释得以传播。理解这些动态有助于应对错误信息的传播，并促进公众对科学的更大信任。
2. 认知偏差： 确认偏误：人们倾向于寻找和相信那些能够确认自己已有信念的信息。伪科学和阴谋论通常提供与这些信念一致的简单解释，而科学解释则可能更加复杂和具有挑战性。 达克效应：这种认知偏差发生在某些人在某一领域知识或能力有限时，却高估了自己的理解，从而导致他们拒绝专家意见，更相信自己的判断。
我当然用过，如果你直接问chatgpt要答案，它有时候会给你很离谱的结果，你必须要自己去验证和查datasource，然后一步步用你的data去feed它来得到你要的，最后结论需要你再crossreference 就你这种AI总结啥就信啥的态度，可能是第一批被AI取代的
那就劳烦你摆摆数据来反驳下首楼AI的数据吧
摆你的数据提供ｒｅｆｅｒｅｎｃｅ
"拒绝专家意见，更相信自己的判断"
Actually I am very proud of that。 在这个巨大的骗局下能够没有屈服于social pressure 没有屈服于邪恶的government mandate everyone doing that should be very proud of that.
你要说服别人凭啥要我给你找？你以为我是你gpt？
你看，来真的就要挂免战牌
切
切，
来真的就逃了。弱爆了
专业性数据的可靠性和一个非专业网站的点赞数有关系么？有逻辑么？
没人否认疫苗有副作用，而且还是很大的副作用。。 没人否认在病毒大幅弱化的今天，疫苗副作用有可能已经大过了其提供的保护性，所以现在不需要继续打疫苗
但这里说的是在原始毒株，在毒王Delta传播的年代，打疫苗提供的防护性大大高于其副作用，特别是对高风险人群来说。。
和没逻辑的文科生讲话真是太累了。。。
福奇第一次阳，都是奥密克戎出来以后的事情了。。 没有疫苗可以阻断奥密克戎的传播，但病毒杀伤力也小了，阳了没事
但在原始毒株, Delta毒王的年代，病毒杀伤力大，但传播力小，打疫苗可以极大程度上阻断传播
整天拿奥密克戎的杀伤力，去论证原始毒株和Delta毒王的时期不需要打疫苗，这思维也太混乱了。。
8. 反建制情绪： 对权威的反叛：对阴谋论或伪科学的信仰可以是一种对权威机构感知的控制进行反叛的形式。这可以成为独立性或对主流叙事怀疑的表达方式。
可惜在傲娇地坚持谬误并不自知
你说的也没什么逻辑。疫苗副作用太大的时候，选择打疫苗是100%受到伤害，不打疫苗受到伤害的几率是自然感染的几率，这个几率还是挺低的。
新冠疫苗副作用太大么？
摆数据让大家看看，你怎么得出这个结论的？
每次都是先给老人打，给癌症人群打，给那些免疫能力差的人打，美其名曰给他们保护。 其实这个是最毒的。这些人是最受害的。 因为这些人的心理最脆弱，最害怕，fear mongering对他们最有效，这些人最容易上当。 而且这些人出了疫苗伤害，往往不联系到疫苗，觉得是他们本来的疾病的问题。 这是对老弱病残的残忍的大屠杀。毫无人性。
记得一个医生，还是癌症医生，得了什么淋巴瘤，然后因为考虑到马上要化疗立刻去打了加强针，然后发现本来只在一边的localized的肿瘤，在另一侧（打了疫苗的那边），几天时间之内迅速蔓延，当时的形容词是整个片子都light up了。他还用自己的案例发了一篇文章。里面贴了两个CT片子，触目惊心。这个人好像很快就不行了。
他还要问疫苗副作用的数据，source婊又来乞讨了，滚，去问chatgpt。
别在这里转圈丢人。
1）自然感染的几率低？这种数据都哪来的？
奥密克戎2022年初开始蔓延，但美国2021年就基本已经解禁开放了。。 大多数美国人在2022年前要么打了疫苗，要么早就阳过一次了。。
2）伤害 = 感染几率 x 病毒杀伤力
自然感染几率起码起码70-80%以上， 杀伤力呢？原始病株和Delta是啥等级的杀伤力？不比疫苗的副作用高几个数量级？
要不要把美国一开始乌泱泱死人，印度满大街烧死人的影像再翻出来看看？
稍微算一下都能知道打疫苗的伤害小很多。。
非常好可以认识到原始毒株和后面的不一样， 强推针的时候早不是原始毒株， 人类量产毒针的能力远不如此类病毒的变异速度， 即使退一万步对原始毒株有效， 等生产出来广泛强制时基本就是废针，和所谓流感针一个道理。至于标榜的对重症有效， 更有可能没打这毒针还不会重症呢
你这个说法是把疫苗的机理过分简化了。疫苗对人体的作用不是像你的输入对于计算机程序那么精确的，你输入啥，按照设计，结果就应该是啥。因为人体内部的生物化学反应有许多不确定因素，加上各个人种各个个体的基因的细微差别，对同样的疫苗，同样的基因片段所产生的反应不会完全相同。可能90%的人的反应是原先预计的，符合疫苗的设计初衷，产生“正确的”免疫效应，但是有可能另外10%的人就有些细微的不同反应，甚至某些疫苗采用的基因片段很不幸地匹配了他自身细胞某个特殊基因片段，或者由于各种原因在进入B细胞或者T细胞的时候产生某些“误差”，导致错误匹配。这时，麻烦就来了。你要是不去清除这个错误匹配，自体免疫疾病就不可避免了。我的贴子说的就是这种极端情况。而疫苗强制完全无视这种情况的存在。
mRNA疫苗的效力太猛，副作用确实极大。。 所以在奥秘变种出来后，损益比逆转，打疫苗就划不来了。。还不如直接阳一次。。
但他们讲的那些强制疫苗政策，都发生在原始毒株和Delta毒王的阶段啊。。 那些毒株杀伤力太大了，所以即使疫苗副作用那么强，依然还是打了更安全
他们的问题是在疫情时间线上前后乱跳。。 整天用奥秘的低杀伤力+超高破防，去论证一开始原始毒株/Delta毒王阶段也不需要打疫苗，不需要隔离。。
整一个思维混乱。。
手动点赞， 一针见血