I was with you for the most part until several insistences you made. First the insistence on getting the vaccine. Yes, the chances of a short term illness or death from them is very low, but the long term risks, especially of the mRNA vaccines are completely unknown. I am 32. I am relatively healthy. If we find out in 5-10 years or even …
I was with you for the most part until several insistences you made. First the insistence on getting the vaccine. Yes, the chances of a short term illness or death from them is very low, but the long term risks, especially of the mRNA vaccines are completely unknown. I am 32. I am relatively healthy. If we find out in 5-10 years or even a year that there are major consequences of injecting proprietary coated mRNA into out bloodstreams, and the youngest of us face consequences of poorer life quality for that, what then? The choice is up to the invidividual. And I say that having had all the vaccines required of my up to this point in my life. The science behind the new vaccines are even extremely fascinating to me. I am just not convinced that I need it. Just as much as it is an outlier for people to die from vaccine complications, it can be argued that it is just as rare for the youth and those my age to die from COVID. Take the risk of COVID, something we have learned a lot better about how to deal with, and which through modern medicine still has a very low chance of extreme complications, or take the chance of new vaccine technology who's long term affects aren't well known? It's a trade off, but we all should have the choice to make that trade off AND not have civil liberties "controlled" based on that choice.
I'm exactly where you are Joseph, though I'm 10 years older. I'm not anti-vax in any way, but the risk of being seriously impacted by infection is so low, I simply haven't been convinced I need to take it. With more data a year from now, I'm completely open to being convinced. Like you, I believe the decision is up to the individual (this is America after all), and I'm actually not required to put something in my body because it may save someone else. Yes that sounds harsh, but that's the truth. I'm so glad the older population and those with higher risk have access to it, and can make their own decision. As can I.
If I meet anyone who wants to proselytize/moralizing to me harshly I'll just use the "my body my choice" defense. Since the busy bodies tend to skew a specific ideological bent, force them to stand by their own principle when they are confrontational.
Perhaps, if I decide to get one that one will be it. It however does not contain inert coronavirus but an adenovirus (i believe that's what its called) which is not the same. It seems like an inoculation against something different and I haven't read enough on that one yet to make a personal determination yet.
Correct. So viewing them as no different than standard vaccines we are all familiar with: polio, flu, tb, pneumonia, ect isn't helpful and if anything, disingenuous when used to demand what others do.
I don't have a favored POV. The vaccine was documented as safe, there is no scientific reason to think it will have long-term ill-effects. I'm not interested in finding reasons not to take it because I don't begin with the assumption doing so to stave off a pandemic is a bad idea.
An emergency use authorization isn't hedging bets. If they thought there was any chance the benefits do not overwhelmingly outweigh the risks, they would not have authorized it.
Yes, I took the vaccine, first shot. Yes, I intend to take the second. At my age the untested possibilities do not, for the most part apply.
However... One word. Thalidomide. My mother lost 3 children, miscarried, due to the defects of that highly tested drug. Many women lost much more. For a person of child bearing age, who intends to have children, I would carefully consider whether to take this very lightly tested vaccine.
I like to point out that none of the vaccines is approved by the FDA. Reasonable caution is prudent because there is so much we don't know so doing a reasonable risk/benefit analysis based on age and co-morbidities is not easy. I personally won't take the mrna vaccines but am watching the J&J before deciding.
They are all approved for emergency use. That means something.
Look, I'm not trying to be a jerk about this, but we're in the midst of a serious global pandemic. Have you taken a look at what is happening in India right now? "Reasonable caution" has created a hellscape. We don't have the luxury of waiting years to look at hypothetical long-term effects.
When Bari says "trust in science" she's relying on the fact that Western medicine has an AMAZING track record at dealing with disease. We've virtually wiped out polio, rabies, tuberculosis, smallpox, and a host of other horrific diseases we all take for granted not having to care about - that is, until some small group of people gets convinced that "Big Pharma" is out to prey upon them and they pop up again.
We'd be in the midst of a horrible fourth wave right now if everyone was displaying this kind of hesitancy. As an individual, you have the opportunity to wait only because of the people who have put aside our kneejerk American paranoia and done the right thing - and the fact that people are still being cautious. What is happening in India could happen in America if everyone just decided, "Hey, we beat this thing!" and went back to their old lives before we reach immunity.
PLEASE do not wait much longer. There are people who actually can't take vaccines because of allergies and other problems - they rely on everyone else. And the longer people remain unvaccinated, the more opportunity dangerous mutations will have to develop. We are all depending on each other.
I was with you for the most part until several insistences you made. First the insistence on getting the vaccine. Yes, the chances of a short term illness or death from them is very low, but the long term risks, especially of the mRNA vaccines are completely unknown. I am 32. I am relatively healthy. If we find out in 5-10 years or even a year that there are major consequences of injecting proprietary coated mRNA into out bloodstreams, and the youngest of us face consequences of poorer life quality for that, what then? The choice is up to the invidividual. And I say that having had all the vaccines required of my up to this point in my life. The science behind the new vaccines are even extremely fascinating to me. I am just not convinced that I need it. Just as much as it is an outlier for people to die from vaccine complications, it can be argued that it is just as rare for the youth and those my age to die from COVID. Take the risk of COVID, something we have learned a lot better about how to deal with, and which through modern medicine still has a very low chance of extreme complications, or take the chance of new vaccine technology who's long term affects aren't well known? It's a trade off, but we all should have the choice to make that trade off AND not have civil liberties "controlled" based on that choice.
I'm exactly where you are Joseph, though I'm 10 years older. I'm not anti-vax in any way, but the risk of being seriously impacted by infection is so low, I simply haven't been convinced I need to take it. With more data a year from now, I'm completely open to being convinced. Like you, I believe the decision is up to the individual (this is America after all), and I'm actually not required to put something in my body because it may save someone else. Yes that sounds harsh, but that's the truth. I'm so glad the older population and those with higher risk have access to it, and can make their own decision. As can I.
If I meet anyone who wants to proselytize/moralizing to me harshly I'll just use the "my body my choice" defense. Since the busy bodies tend to skew a specific ideological bent, force them to stand by their own principle when they are confrontational.
If you're that worried about the MRNA vaccines, just take the J&J?
Perhaps, if I decide to get one that one will be it. It however does not contain inert coronavirus but an adenovirus (i believe that's what its called) which is not the same. It seems like an inoculation against something different and I haven't read enough on that one yet to make a personal determination yet.
mRNA vaccines do not contain inert coronavirus either
Correct. So viewing them as no different than standard vaccines we are all familiar with: polio, flu, tb, pneumonia, ect isn't helpful and if anything, disingenuous when used to demand what others do.
So you're just going to find any port in a storm here, pretty much.
And regarding your favored POV, you’re not?
I don't have a favored POV. The vaccine was documented as safe, there is no scientific reason to think it will have long-term ill-effects. I'm not interested in finding reasons not to take it because I don't begin with the assumption doing so to stave off a pandemic is a bad idea.
"Documented safe?" Gee then, I wonder why the FDA is still hedging their bet on it?
An emergency use authorization isn't hedging bets. If they thought there was any chance the benefits do not overwhelmingly outweigh the risks, they would not have authorized it.
Sure, baby. Sure.
Yes, I took the vaccine, first shot. Yes, I intend to take the second. At my age the untested possibilities do not, for the most part apply.
However... One word. Thalidomide. My mother lost 3 children, miscarried, due to the defects of that highly tested drug. Many women lost much more. For a person of child bearing age, who intends to have children, I would carefully consider whether to take this very lightly tested vaccine.
We have hundreds of millions of data points at this stage, but fine, if your pregnant and want to wait, go ahead.
I like to point out that none of the vaccines is approved by the FDA. Reasonable caution is prudent because there is so much we don't know so doing a reasonable risk/benefit analysis based on age and co-morbidities is not easy. I personally won't take the mrna vaccines but am watching the J&J before deciding.
They are all approved for emergency use. That means something.
Look, I'm not trying to be a jerk about this, but we're in the midst of a serious global pandemic. Have you taken a look at what is happening in India right now? "Reasonable caution" has created a hellscape. We don't have the luxury of waiting years to look at hypothetical long-term effects.
When Bari says "trust in science" she's relying on the fact that Western medicine has an AMAZING track record at dealing with disease. We've virtually wiped out polio, rabies, tuberculosis, smallpox, and a host of other horrific diseases we all take for granted not having to care about - that is, until some small group of people gets convinced that "Big Pharma" is out to prey upon them and they pop up again.
We'd be in the midst of a horrible fourth wave right now if everyone was displaying this kind of hesitancy. As an individual, you have the opportunity to wait only because of the people who have put aside our kneejerk American paranoia and done the right thing - and the fact that people are still being cautious. What is happening in India could happen in America if everyone just decided, "Hey, we beat this thing!" and went back to their old lives before we reach immunity.
PLEASE do not wait much longer. There are people who actually can't take vaccines because of allergies and other problems - they rely on everyone else. And the longer people remain unvaccinated, the more opportunity dangerous mutations will have to develop. We are all depending on each other.
🙄
Well said.
Thanks! :D