Comment by tempfortwitt90
2 years ago
Does it lower it compared to not getting the virus nor the vaccine?
Seat belts lower car accident deaths. But not lower than simply not driving. Isn't this a similar example?
2 years ago
Does it lower it compared to not getting the virus nor the vaccine?
Seat belts lower car accident deaths. But not lower than simply not driving. Isn't this a similar example?
Never getting the virus is always better. The chickenpox vaccine helps prevent chronic viral infection.
Assuming you're asking about whether shingles vaccination is comparable to re-exposure.
For the youth a vaccine should absolutely reduce the risk better than having a chronic infection to actively fight against when it flares up.
For non-chickenpox-vaccinated adults, I have no clue. I would expect shingles vaccination would be comparable as it effectively does the same thing. But there might be an added response from other parts of the adaptive immune response against a viral invader.
Regardless, with respect to the chickenpox vaccine, I think it's better to take a risk on the current middle-aged folks and elderly in favor of basically eliminating all of the risk for the young and future generations. Since this risk increase would be primarily for middle-aged folks and elderly who have children and grandchildren (as childless adults are already at increased risk from fewer re-exposure routes), I think it makes moral sense that they preference the health of their descendants over themselves.
Yes, not getting viruses at all is preferable to getting vaccines. If you figure out how to make that one work let me know.
Make 90%+ of your neighbors get vaccinated, then bask in your glorious herd immunity.
That's not enough, since people travel or occasionally go places where large groups are present (church, concerts etc.)