Will you take the Covid Vaccine?

[johntheplinker]

The concerns I have are this is one of the first vaccines of its kind to employ the mRNA, and it’s still very experimental. It is not proven to stop transmission which is a significant handicap, and simply put they/we do not know what the long term ramifications could be.
It may be fine, it may trigger increased auto immune disease, it may negatively effect reproductive organs. No one knows until they track and monitor their experiment, Aka the people lining up to take it. There are legitimate concerns as to what the long term impacts of this could be. For that I would caution anyone not in the “high risk” category to ask yourself 99+% recovery if you get it, is it worth the risk?
To the story of the drowning man.. I say stand up we are in ankle deep water, your only being told that your drowning.

No, it has been under development for a long time, IIRC something along the lines of 30 years. A big reason we got one as fast as we did is that this type of vaccine was in late stages of development during the SARS (also a coronavirus) deal a few years ago before that virus just fizzled out. First large scale use? Yes. Basically untested? A big NO. Latest studies are showing it does stop transmission but those are early results and it hasn't been fully studied on whether it will or won't stop transmission. Even if it doesn't, it is keeping people alive and out of the hospital. Not to mention if it prevents long term issues that seem to happen even in people who have mild cases, that is a win in my book.
I could see the possibility of causing problems with auto immune disease, but reproductive issues? Come on. Hell, if you read the warnings on about any chemical there is a risk to reproductive health so this would be no different from a lot of other stuff we use every day. In addition, Covid itself can cause reproductive problems in men especially by reducing motility of the swimmers, and last I saw it is not known if that is temporary or permanent. Quite honesty it doesn't matter to me (snipped) so I haven't really paid attention.
Ankle deep water, huh? Considering the death rate last year was from 10 to 15% higher than the the previous 5 year average and life expectancy has fallen over a year in less than a year, maybe we need to jump in the back of the truck before we're in it up to our neck. You do understand how viral mutations work? Virii change rapidly. IIRC there are something along the lines of 25 or 30 distinct variations of the Covid-19 virus. That's in less than a year and a half. So how many are going to have in 5 years? 10 years? Sometimes those new variations aren't any worse than the original, sometimes they're less transmissible and mild. And other times they are much worse. What happens then? What happens the next time? Hell, no worse than what the Covid is now, we've got the perfect opportunity to get in a little practice if the next go-round is something really bad. And you damn well know there will be a next time.

 

[johntheplinker]

1- mRNA has been around for over a decade, used safely in other forms, no evidence it will cause harm in a vaccine. As there is an alternative to the mRNA vaccines this concern is even lower because people can choose that alternative if they want a vaccine.

2- "not proven to stop transmission" while this statement is true, it is only because we don't have the data YET. This statement was also true when the Polio, Chicken Pox, Mumps, Measels, SmallPox, etc vaccines were each released. Using evidence from other vaccines it is logical to conclude that this will also BE PROVEN in the future as the timeline extends.

3- "long term ramifications" this is true, we don't know. But we do know that vaccines are generally safe for 99.5+% of the population

4- I would agree with you that those people who are NOT in a high risk category there is zero urgency to get this vaccine. This is exactly why it should be prioritized for high risk individuals who willingly choose to take the vaccine. Taking away available vaccines from older/higher risk individuals and giving those doses to younger low risk individuals who are in proven low risk professions (TEACHERS) is not following "the science" of any acceptable medical/scientific protocol and is simply political.

Dang it, you beat me! I should learn to type faster!

 

[JettaKnight]

Given limited supplies, every low risk teacher who gets it takes a shot away from an older high risk individual.

So thanks to Biden we are putting our vulnerable population at risk. SMH

Almost 80% of the hospitalizations and 98% of deaths occur in the age categories 55 and older ... but sure, let’s take some of the vaccines that can save those people and give them to younger people who’s bodies can fight this disease

Teacher unions have a lot of influence in the DNC.

 

[mg_srt]

1- mRNA has been around for over a decade, used safely in other forms, no evidence it will cause harm in a vaccine. As there is an alternative to the mRNA vaccines this concern is even lower because people can choose that alternative if they want a vaccine.

2- "not proven to stop transmission" while this statement is true, it is only because we don't have the data YET. This statement was also true when the Polio, Chicken Pox, Mumps, Measels, SmallPox, etc vaccines were each released. Using evidence from other vaccines it is logical to conclude that this will also BE PROVEN in the future as the timeline extends.

3- "long term ramifications" this is true, we don't know. But we do know that vaccines are generally safe for 99.5+% of the population

4- I would agree with you that those people who are NOT in a high risk category there is zero urgency to get this vaccine. This is exactly why it should be prioritized for high risk individuals who willingly choose to take the vaccine. Taking away available vaccines from older/higher risk individuals and giving those doses to younger low risk individuals who are in proven low risk professions (TEACHERS) is not following "the science" of any acceptable medical/scientific protocol and is simply political.

I strongly agree with you on 4.

I’m just not comfortable with how aggressively medical/government/media push for everyone to take it, when they simply don’t know. And the risk for not taking it is so low for the vast majority of people. Daily tasks for most people come with a similar fatality risk, yet it’s positioned as if your a goner with out it.

Perhaps the motive is financially driven, my thought is it’s more sinister than that.

I appreciate the diligent response.

 

[HoughMade]

Perhaps the financial motive is ending the pandemic.

 

[melensdad]

Teacher unions have a lot of influence in the DNC.

Yup. The teachers unions have no problem with killing vulnerable people, ignoring the science and taking special privileges.

 

[JettaKnight]

Perhaps the financial motive is ending the pandemic.

I strongly agree with you on 4.

I’m just not comfortable with how aggressively medical/government/media push for everyone to take it, when they simply don’t know. And the risk for not taking it is so low for the vast majority of people. Daily tasks for most people come with a similar fatality risk, yet it’s positioned as if your a goner with out it.

Perhaps the motive is financially driven, my thought is it’s more sinister than that.

I appreciate the diligent response.

To say "they simply don't know" is a stretch; there's a lot of data from large trials.

If you're high risk, yeah maybe it's positioned as "you're a goner", but the for that vast majority, it's being presented as, "here's a vaccine; let's end this pandemic quickly."

 

[Jaybird1980]

Yup. The teachers unions have no problem with killing vulnerable people, ignoring the science and taking special privileges.

I personally would like to see them add in other high risk people before the teachers, even before lowering the age again.

Cancer patients, transplant patients (like myself) I think are at a greater risk than most 45+ people.

 

[melensdad]

I personally would like to see them add in other high risk people before the teachers, even before lowering the age again.

Cancer patients, transplant patients (like myself) I think are at a greater risk than most 45+ people.

I believe that cancer patients and transplant patients have both been added. Also Downs Syndrome and some other things.

Diabetics are NOT yet added, but probably will be soon.

Per the CDC and experience in many other nations, teachers are not considered to be in a high risk profession, the only reason they are getting special treatment is because the Democrats, the self proclaimed party of science, is ignoring the science and caving into a powerful political lobby. As I said, teachers have no problem killing off the folks who are truly at risk so they get their special privilege.

One more time, for the teachers in the back, nearly 80% of the hospitalizations and 98% of the deaths are in people aged 55 and older. Given the limited number of vaccinations currently available, giving a teacher a shot is literally taking the shot away from someone who actually needs it.

 

[Jaybird1980]

I believe that cancer patients and transplant patients have both been added. Also Downs Syndrome and some other things.

Diabetics are NOT yet added, but probably will be soon.

Per the CDC and experience in many other nations, teachers are not considered to be in a high risk profession, the only reason they are getting special treatment is because the Democrats, the self proclaimed party of science, is ignoring the science and caving into a powerful political lobby. As I said, teachers have no problem killing off the folks who are truly at risk so they get their special privilege.

One more time, for the teachers in the back, nearly 80% of the hospitalizations and 98% of the deaths are in people aged 55 and older. Given the limited number of vaccinations currently available, giving a teacher a shot is literally taking the shot away from someone who actually needs it.

I was unaware they did this. It does appear it's for solid organ transplant, it's to bad for bone marrow recipients. Better than nothing though

 

[SheepDog4Life]

One more time, for the teachers in the back, nearly 80% of the hospitalizations and 98% of the deaths are in people aged 55 and older. Given the limited number of vaccinations currently available, giving a teacher a shot is literally taking the shot away from someone who actually needs it.

QFT

 

[HoughMade]

Can we finally agree that those cutting in line are not "heroes"? You can't be both.

That being said, I imagine it's a vocal relative few led by their union.

 

[melensdad]

Can we finally agree that those cutting in line are not "heroes"? You can't be both.

That being said, I imagine is a vocal relative few led by their union.

I'm a volunteer high school coach.

Many of my friends are teachers.

I cannot tell you how many civil discussions I've had with my teacher friends over this very topic.

I have helped some of them get on vaccination waiting lists, which I believe is a totally legit way to get the shot because they otherwise would go to waste. But for the teachers who never tried to get on the waiting list and then bitched and moaned about not being considered front line, or somehow "special" enough to jump the line, in front of ACTUAL HIGH RISK people, I have nothing but disdain and harsh words. I've not backed down once and made my voice heard frequently, even when students started to advocate for teachers (because those kids are just as brainwashed as some of the teachers). When confronted with facts many just keep using emotion and evading any logical or factual discussion.

For the self proclaimed PARTY OF SCIENCE to push teachers to the front of the line should e considered criminal.

Almost 80% of hospitalizations and 98% of deaths occur in the over 55 year old age group. They are the real AT RISK people. If a 1000 vaccinations are given to teachers younger than 55 years old then 1000 vaccinations were taken away from people who actually needed that vaccine. PERIOD.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Not interested in taking a rushed experimental vaccine for something with a survival rate of 99+%.

With the 40,000 person (20k vaccine, 20k control) phase 3 trials and the reports of the Israeli results on over 600,000 people receiving the vaccine, I believe this vaccine has been studied as much as most vaccines, likely more closely followed than most, when made available for the general population.

The FDA approval might be an emergency authorization, but I don't think the experimental tag fits any longer. And "rushed" implies skipping steps... only thing I see skipped was bureaucratic red tape.

 

[mg_srt]

No, it has been under development for a long time, IIRC something along the lines of 30 years. A big reason we got one as fast as we did is that this type of vaccine was in late stages of development during the SARS (also a coronavirus) deal a few years ago before that virus just fizzled out. First large scale use? Yes. Basically untested? A big NO. Latest studies are showing it does stop transmission but those are early results and it hasn't been fully studied on whether it will or won't stop transmission. Even if it doesn't, it is keeping people alive and out of the hospital. Not to mention if it prevents long term issues that seem to happen even in people who have mild cases, that is a win in my book.
I could see the possibility of causing problems with auto immune disease, but reproductive issues? Come on. Hell, if you read the warnings on about any chemical there is a risk to reproductive health so this would be no different from a lot of other stuff we use every day. In addition, Covid itself can cause reproductive problems in men especially by reducing motility of the swimmers, and last I saw it is not known if that is temporary or permanent. Quite honesty it doesn't matter to me (snipped) so I haven't really paid attention.
Ankle deep water, huh? Considering the death rate last year was from 10 to 15% higher than the the previous 5 year average and life expectancy has fallen over a year in less than a year, maybe we need to jump in the back of the truck before we're in it up to our neck. You do understand how viral mutations work? Virii change rapidly. IIRC there are something along the lines of 25 or 30 distinct variations of the Covid-19 virus. That's in less than a year and a half. So how many are going to have in 5 years? 10 years? Sometimes those new variations aren't any worse than the original, sometimes they're less transmissible and mild. And other times they are much worse. What happens then? What happens the next time? Hell, no worse than what the Covid is now, we've got the perfect opportunity to get in a little practice if the next go-round is something really bad. And you damn well know there will be a next time.

You have a lot here, looking at your first point you reference that this has been tried for roughly 30 years, and we have not seen success. Do you think they were successful, or perhaps they turned a blind eye to questionable side effects? In one of the recent failed attempts the vaccine killed the subject once it was re-exposed to the virus again. I believe that was a mRNA issue(not certain), creating an adverse auto immune response.
The testing I was referring to is long term which they would not have until time passes. CDC has been questioned for lack of safety studies on childhood vaccines going back to 1986.
My point in all of this is risk vs benefit. Taking a vaccine in a 99+% recovery rate group is NOT worth it in my eyes.

There is a lot of conflicting information out there like below which references total deaths for 2020 on par for avg over last 10 years. Another valid question, where did all the flu deaths go?? I think something everyone could agree on is, conflicting information is at an all time high.

We could go back and forth with information like this, and lose people in the weeds. I have gone out and found enough information on my own to be comfortable in my stance. I understand that I may not change your mind, as you probably wont change mine based on what I have learned to this point. However, I like to have these types of conversations in hopes that it inspires others to go find their own knowledge rather than being fed from what could be a one sided source.

Touching your last point I am aware of how mutations work, I took micro once.. By all means I want them to continue to try and combat all diseases as effectively as possible. If something is good, it will speak for itself in results. When something comes from more of a "mandate" position I start to ask questions.

 

[lovemachine]

Before, the CDC and WHO said that even if you received the vaccine, you can still get the virus.

Are they still saying the same thing? I’m reading different statements now.

 

[melensdad]

Before, the CDC and WHO said that even if you received the vaccine, you can still get the virus.

Are they still saying the same thing? I’m reading different statements now.

Yes, the Pfizer and Moderna have roughly a 95% efficacy rate against the virus. So it is still possible to get it.

HOWEVER the results are showing that in the unlikely event that you get Covid after the vaccine you will not get complications that send you to the hospital. In fact the data, from real life follow ups after 2 weeks after the 1st dose is that nobody who contracted Covid after that point has gone to the hospital or died from Covid/Covid related complications. Literally nobody in any developed western nation that reports this type of data, from Israel to the EU nations to UK to the US/Canada or South Africa. So for the over 55 year old age group this is an actual life saving vaccine.

 

[HoughMade]

Before, the CDC and WHO said that even if you received the vaccine, you can still get the virus.

Are they still saying the same thing? I’m reading different statements now.

I don't think they ever said quite that other than the fact that no vaccine was 100% effective in preventing the disease. What they said is that they did not yet have enough information to know whether a person who was vaccinated and did not have symptoms could pass the disease. Until they have specific results, they will not publish a conclusion. However, common sense tells us that it will be like every other vaccine that prevents a disease in this regard...but the organizations will not take a stand based on that.

Also, they want cover to keep restrictions in place until herd immunity has been reached because, IMO, it is just too difficult to allow some people to do something while denying others based upon vaccine status...and the ease of claiming vaccination or forging papers.

 

[jamil]

I think it was the Criminal podcast that did an episode with an insurance investigator - there was a Southern town that had a cottage industry of getting policies, then quickly having "accidents".

If it's the town I'm thinking of, I may have lived near there.

When I moved there insurance was like extremely high. I asked why and a coworker told me about an insurance fraud ring that was busted before I moved there. Involved a lot of people in that town. I mean. We're talking staging accidents just to collect on the insurance. Doctors, lawyers, city employees in on it.

 

[jamil]

There is 30 years of mRNA testing and studies used in various contexts. There is no reason to believe that a vaccine will be any different than any other application.

In humans? Can you link some of those?