I think Sam Harris is implying something like this: There were 1.12M people in the US who have died of covid. Of these, X percent were antivaxxers. If these darned antivaxxers had gotten a vaccine, we would have saved 300,000 lives!
Your calculations take the number of lives saved, 300,000, and uses this to calculate the VE, which was found to be 80%.
What I don't get is how you are looking at deaths through time alongside vaccines through time. Your max possible vaxxed chart makes sense. It seems to me that the possible deaths that could have been avoided are those deaths after the hyphothetical 100% vaxxed date, or 3/9/2021. I see that the max vax rate actual asymptotically approaches 70% from 55% from 3/9/21 to 3/3/23.
Anyway, I don't see how you came up with the distribution of the number of deaths that could have been avoided based on when the vaccines could have been taken.
I was not very clear about the making of the sausage. The computations are on day-by-day basis, and then summed up. Let's take the 4th of July, 2021, as an example:
- 245 Covid deaths (D) were recorded on that day
- vaccination rate (V) was 50%
Assuming efficacy (E) of 80%, and plugging these values into the formula, gives 40 vaccinated deaths, and then 205 unvaccinated deaths
- In the hypothetical scenario, vaccination rate is 67% on that day
- That would have meant 40 * 67% / 50% = 54 vaccinated deaths, and 205 * 33 % / 50% = 134 unvaccinated deaths
- Total number of deaths in the hypothetical scenario, on that day, is therefore 188; 57 less than in reality
- The 57 contribute to the 300,000 lives hypothetically saved.
Of course, we wouldn't have to perform experiments like this if we had good data on the actual number of vaccinated deaths. But as the case of England (ONS) demonstrates, even in countries with reasonable data there are many issues.
I have come to realise that the pwoplw I used to think were smart, the smartest even, are actually a bunch of thick bellends; and those that I used to think were crazy, are actually smart as fuck. Sam Harris is an utter douchebag.
Well, I think Sam Harris is very smart, but he invests all his smartness into maintenance of his self-image as Rational Man. When the rationality markets are going south, he loses most of his investments.
Well, you put it so much nicer than me. Bellend is my favourite. It says all you need to say without using the unecessary c@nt, which is reserved for the like of Klaus and his friends.
I think Sam Harris is implying something like this: There were 1.12M people in the US who have died of covid. Of these, X percent were antivaxxers. If these darned antivaxxers had gotten a vaccine, we would have saved 300,000 lives!
Your calculations take the number of lives saved, 300,000, and uses this to calculate the VE, which was found to be 80%.
What I don't get is how you are looking at deaths through time alongside vaccines through time. Your max possible vaxxed chart makes sense. It seems to me that the possible deaths that could have been avoided are those deaths after the hyphothetical 100% vaxxed date, or 3/9/2021. I see that the max vax rate actual asymptotically approaches 70% from 55% from 3/9/21 to 3/3/23.
Anyway, I don't see how you came up with the distribution of the number of deaths that could have been avoided based on when the vaccines could have been taken.
I was not very clear about the making of the sausage. The computations are on day-by-day basis, and then summed up. Let's take the 4th of July, 2021, as an example:
- 245 Covid deaths (D) were recorded on that day
- vaccination rate (V) was 50%
Assuming efficacy (E) of 80%, and plugging these values into the formula, gives 40 vaccinated deaths, and then 205 unvaccinated deaths
- In the hypothetical scenario, vaccination rate is 67% on that day
- That would have meant 40 * 67% / 50% = 54 vaccinated deaths, and 205 * 33 % / 50% = 134 unvaccinated deaths
- Total number of deaths in the hypothetical scenario, on that day, is therefore 188; 57 less than in reality
- The 57 contribute to the 300,000 lives hypothetically saved.
Of course, we wouldn't have to perform experiments like this if we had good data on the actual number of vaccinated deaths. But as the case of England (ONS) demonstrates, even in countries with reasonable data there are many issues.
I have come to realise that the pwoplw I used to think were smart, the smartest even, are actually a bunch of thick bellends; and those that I used to think were crazy, are actually smart as fuck. Sam Harris is an utter douchebag.
Well, I think Sam Harris is very smart, but he invests all his smartness into maintenance of his self-image as Rational Man. When the rationality markets are going south, he loses most of his investments.
Well, you put it so much nicer than me. Bellend is my favourite. It says all you need to say without using the unecessary c@nt, which is reserved for the like of Klaus and his friends.
...and I just learned a new word (bellend).