FabSwingers.com
 

FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Understanding risk

Understanding risk

Jump to: Newest in thread

 

By *inky_couple2020 OP   Couple  over a year ago

North West

With all the media coverage of the risk of potential blood clots with some Covid vaccines, the risks from the disease itself and lots of other data and statistics being thrown around, it's clear that many people don't really grasp the maths and what the risks are, relative to everyday events/occurances.

There's a very good article on the BMJ Best Practice website, entitled "Understanding risk", which may be of interest.

Bear in mind that currently, the estimated risk of developing a clot after a Covid vaccine is between 1 and 4 in a million, with the risk of developing clots due to Covid itself being 100 times higher (see today's research from the University of Oxford, entitled "Risk of rare blood clotting higher for COVID-19 than for vaccines")

Happy reading.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago

i guess to make them fairly comparable you would have to multiply your chances of getting covid by the chance of then developing a clot from the covid and then you have 2 numbers that would be levels of risk to you now as an unvaccinated and uninfected person

i don’t think it makes much difference in terms of needing to be concerned about the vaccine but i imagine its not as dramatic a difference as 100 times more likely

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *naswingdressWoman  over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

Thank you

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *uliaChrisCouple  over a year ago

westerham


"i guess to make them fairly comparable you would have to multiply your chances of getting covid by the chance of then developing a clot from the covid and then you have 2 numbers that would be levels of risk to you now as an unvaccinated and uninfected person

i don’t think it makes much difference in terms of needing to be concerned about the vaccine but i imagine its not as dramatic a difference as 100 times more likely "

Fair enough, but intuitively “getting Covid” is not really a definable number, the chances vary enormously as a consequence of behaviour, lifestyle, housing density, age etc.

In other words your risk of getting Covid could be very high, therefore the blood clot comparison could be very relevant, or it could be negligible, in which case it’s not useful.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *ap d agde coupleCouple  over a year ago

Broadstairs

Last time I saw an article giving the risk of dying from Covid was from the MRC biostatistics unit of the university of Cambridge, our risk at our age was 0.29 chance of dying or 99.7 chance of survival of Covid if we caught it , now we have had both jabs our chances are now 90 per cent lower than those figures, think we’ll have to worry about crossing the road now

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *hrista BellendWoman  over a year ago

surrounded by twinkly lights

I think a lot of it is the misconception of the way some brains process it, they almost don't want to take responsibility for having a potential blood clot from a vaccine they chose to put in their body, but are happy to not have responsibility and see what happens when they catch covid-19 which has a huge risk of potential blood clots

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *naswingdressWoman  over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)


"I think a lot of it is the misconception of the way some brains process it, they almost don't want to take responsibility for having a potential blood clot from a vaccine they chose to put in their body, but are happy to not have responsibility and see what happens when they catch covid-19 which has a huge risk of potential blood clots"

Yes, it's cognitive deficits that are normal in humans

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By (user no longer on site)  over a year ago


"i guess to make them fairly comparable you would have to multiply your chances of getting covid by the chance of then developing a clot from the covid and then you have 2 numbers that would be levels of risk to you now as an unvaccinated and uninfected person

i don’t think it makes much difference in terms of needing to be concerned about the vaccine but i imagine its not as dramatic a difference as 100 times more likely

Fair enough, but intuitively “getting Covid” is not really a definable number, the chances vary enormously as a consequence of behaviour, lifestyle, housing density, age etc.

In other words your risk of getting Covid could be very high, therefore the blood clot comparison could be very relevant, or it could be negligible, in which case it’s not useful. "

you can also increase your risk of clots by being overweight, a smoker, taking the pill , it turning in the family

point being if a statistical average with no lifestyle factors is suitable for one side of the comparison then its suitable for the other - you just have to start the playing field level which is average joe public not vaccinated, not infected - and let them compare their risks of clots either way. people then know themselves best if they have lifestyle factors that would inflate risk on either side

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *inky_couple2020 OP   Couple  over a year ago

North West

My post wasn't just specifically about the risk of clots, but more about UNDERSTANDING risk in general. Such as, what does 4 in a million compare to? How risky are the things we do daily? Etc.

People in general seem not to be able to assess these risks rationally, hence the articles I suggested.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *naswingdressWoman  over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)


"My post wasn't just specifically about the risk of clots, but more about UNDERSTANDING risk in general. Such as, what does 4 in a million compare to? How risky are the things we do daily? Etc.

People in general seem not to be able to assess these risks rationally, hence the articles I suggested."

I read an article by an oncological surgeon ages ago which reflected on the very real patient differences when he framed exactly the same risk profile in different ways. (Of cancer surgery - this was long before Covid)

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *hatawasteMan  over a year ago

stafford


"With all the media coverage of the risk of potential blood clots with some Covid vaccines, the risks from the disease itself and lots of other data and statistics being thrown around, it's clear that many people don't really grasp the maths and what the risks are, relative to everyday events/occurances.

There's a very good article on the BMJ Best Practice website, entitled "Understanding risk", which may be of interest.

Bear in mind that currently, the estimated risk of developing a clot after a Covid vaccine is between 1 and 4 in a million, with the risk of developing clots due to Covid itself being 100 times higher (see today's research from the University of Oxford, entitled "Risk of rare blood clotting higher for COVID-19 than for vaccines")

Happy reading."

Risk is an accepted part of life.. Everyone does it in one way or another..without doing the math we will run a cross the road in front of traffic.. Dash towards a lift door as its about to close, balance something on a ladder precariously hoping it won't fall.. Squeeze past a car on the road because they may just be enough time to pass.. Or simply swallow something someone offers us to eat because they said it 'tastes nice'

We risk everyday in life.. I know I do.. And accept it.

What is different I guess is some people are born risk takers and gamblers and others safe and saccharine..

The latter do the math and panic even if there is a tiny chance something can go wrong.. Case in point Clotting with Covid etc.. Sure it may happen but the ends justify the means.. Just because something may have a side effect it means we all should not take it and we cancel tears if money and research? I say no.. We nerd to balance pros and cons and if on balance taking the risk is good for most of us I say we should still do it regardless.. Otherwise we go no further adventure stops, exploration stops.. Nothing gets better, easier, faster smoother etc

There is an old phrase I use quite often in these situations.

.

Feel the fear and do it anyway

And

Who really wants to live forever?.

If it's relatively safe we press on I say not stop..

But that is just how I think about such things of course..

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *ap d agde coupleCouple  over a year ago

Broadstairs

Diabetes 24000 deaths most preventable per year a risk

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *inky_couple2020 OP   Couple  over a year ago

North West


"Diabetes 24000 deaths most preventable per year a risk "

Okay, but how is this risk relative to, say, the risk of being hit by lightning or something else we might be able to rationalise it to? That's exactly the issue - quoting numbers without context or comparison doesn't help people weigh up the risk of doing A or B.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

 

By *AABMan  over a year ago

Not far

We do have a problem in understanding statistics as a nation or at least comprehending what the numbers really mean. I guess the thinking goes ‘if 1-4 in a million develop a clot, someone will develop a clot and I don’t want that to be me’. We can all say ‘just get the jab the risk is tiny’ yet how many of us play the Euro millions when the chance of winning is 1 in 250million. We all attach irrational emotional bias to statistics dependent upon the outcome we want/don’t want.

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

  

By *naswingdressWoman  over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)


"We do have a problem in understanding statistics as a nation or at least comprehending what the numbers really mean. I guess the thinking goes ‘if 1-4 in a million develop a clot, someone will develop a clot and I don’t want that to be me’. We can all say ‘just get the jab the risk is tiny’ yet how many of us play the Euro millions when the chance of winning is 1 in 250million. We all attach irrational emotional bias to statistics dependent upon the outcome we want/don’t want."

Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote or View forums list

» Add a new message to this topic

0.0312

0