You'll be praying to sky fairies next :ohmy:
Printable View
So what?
Nobody ever said the vaccine would be 100% effective, and infection has been shown to be more likely with higher viral load. Unfortunate, but a nurse is almost certainly in the highest risk group for infection.
This is non-news, it is an inevitability.
The good news is that the infection is now far less likely to kill her because she HAS had the vaccination.
The constant sharing of 'uh-oh' stories really is quite tiresome.
You seem to have missed the point.
What my post serves to illustrate is that the vaccine is not - repeat, NOT - the "get out of jail free" card people think it is. Nor does it appear to reduce transmission of the virus - a key point most people are ignoring.
Two of my relatives work in the NHS "front-line" and yet haven't caught it, despite living in one of the purple areas on the Government map.
This looks good, the gutter press will be so upset.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/pfizer-...ovid-variants/
And here too regarding reinfection, more bad news for the doom merchants.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3kQoyCCLmY
Reduction in transmission isn’t anywhere near as important as symptomatic disease prevention, though.
It’s estimated that the mortality rate of this virus is around 1%. If 95% of folk who get the virus develop no symptoms, that takes out the virus in two ways. 1, with no symptoms a person is far less likely to transmit the virus in the first place. 2, if only 5% of people who get the virus develop symptoms, that’s going to mean only 1% of those will succumb to the disease.
I don’t want to be that guy who says that any death is acceptable, it isn’t, but there does come a point when the word “negligible” has to be used. One would have to say that a vaccine that prevents symptomatic disease in 95% of those who get it will surely, given time, render the resulting mortality rate as negligible.