Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

I'm in an elevated risk group, and I'd like the right to decide for myself if taking the vaccine is worth the risk.


sort by: page size:

While I'd rather see people with higher risk than me get the vaccine first, I would absolutely take it if I was able to.

That's true. A higher risk vaccine may be worth it for folks at high risk or with high exposure.

Risk tolerance should be seen as a sliding scale, not as a binary.


As someone who doesn't want to take the vaccine: I would prefer this. Let us make the decision and deal with the consequences.

What would be your risk threshold (hypothetically speaking, if we could know it) that would make it for you a no-brainer to just take the vaccine assuming that you taking it would encourage other people who do fall in a higher risk bracket to also take it?

Would 0.0001% risk be acceptable for you, hypothetically, as a civic duty?


Risk of getting the vaccine has to be measured against risk of not getting the vaccine, which obviously seems much higher to me. You can’t just talk about risk in a vacuum.

If the authorities in my state encourage my population (20s, male, low BMI) to take the vaccine, I’ll take the vaccine.

It’s a risk, sure. But the older people have borne the risk so far. I can’t speak for other young people but I feel personal responsibility to take it ASAP.


I'm pro vax. I think this vaccine is worth the risk but this is the highest risk vaccine we've had in a long time and that part of the equation is getting swept under the rug.

Why would you take the vaccine at the first chance you get ? what's the risk-benefit calculation you see in front of your eyes ?

There is an argument to be made about which odds are better though. Take the risks with a vaccine or don’t and suffer the disease?

It’s just that using the vaccine is an active choice so you run into trouble with ethics.


If you're in a high risk group surely you want the more effective vaccine?

I doubt you can have both (even if safe, it's not tested at all).


As others have said, there is more risk than just death. I don't really want more of a chance to have a poor quality of life for the rest of my life.

The vaccine greatly reduces the chances that I have any of these things. Or heck, it even greatly reduces the chance that I'll have a week or two of misery.


> So healthy people should partake in the vaccination as for them, the risk-reward ratio is definitely worth it.

How can you make this decision for someone else?


Perhaps individuals should have a say as to which risk is preferable to them. As it is, the antivaxxer gets to choose not get vaccinated, but the provaxxer must wait for someone elses approval.

It is possible to both want vaccines to be available, and for it to be a free decision whether to take them or not.

I agree.

There is risk in both the virus and the vaccine. And the vaccine is a statistically safer bet, although I’m sure specific biological/genetic factors can alter this calculation.


So after initially saying there's no way I'd take a vaccine that has been rushed to market I'm now thinking that, as a middle aged male with no kids, I sort of have a duty to take the risk. I suppose the vaccines will go to higher risk groups and front line medical staff first, but once they're available I'm signing up.

is the vaccine even worth getting or only for high risk groups?

There is a small chance of death or severe illness from taking vaccines. So, no...I don't support you making that decision for me.

That's the difference between taking a vaccine and paying your taxes or buying car insurance.


Honestly I don't trust the vaccine, but I got it anyway because I see the virus as a bigger danger to me
next

Legal | privacy