Coronavirus (COVID-19 Outbreak) (148 Viewers)

[Post Ironic]

For the record, I'm not saying the vaxx is harmful, just saying it shouldn't be forced

Agree 100%. But then should businesses who require masks or vaccine proof be forced to let unvaccinated, maskless people in? Because that would require the government to step in and force them to… which would be government overreach, well, at least according to current conservative politics. I guess it’s only government overreach if it disagrees with your own perspective though lol

Anyways, vaccines shouldn’t be mandated obviously, people should not have their rights infringed upon by their own government even if unvaccinated, but I believe businesses should be able to require whatever they want… if they are willing to lose business, so be it, ya know.

Unvaccinated international travel is a trickier issue… travel isn’t some basic right… so saying foreign tourists have to be vaccinated to come into a country is a little different.

 

Buy on AliExpress.com

[Cronios]

Slow vaccination rates is the best way to select new strains with resistance to it.
Vaccination should be either be total and swift or never happen.
And yes there are side effects, i ve seen them and more is yet to come, but the choice is made, we cant stop now!

 

[IliveForJuve]

Agree 100%. But then should businesses who require masks or vaccine proof be forced to let unvaccinated, maskless people in? Because that would require the government to step in and force them to… which would be government overreach, well, at least according to current conservative politics. I guess it’s only government overreach if it disagrees with your own perspective though lol

Anyways, vaccines shouldn’t be mandated obviously, people should not have their rights infringed upon by their own government even if unvaccinated, but I believe businesses should be able to require whatever they want… if they are willing to lose business, so be it, ya know.

Unvaccinated international travel is a trickier issue… travel isn’t some basic right… so saying foreign tourists have to be vaccinated to come into a country is a little different.

That's already a requirement in many countries for diseases like yellow fever and malaria. It's just that people give a shit now because countries they want to visit will probably require covid vaccination for entry. It's a global issue, not just something that affects poor tropical countries.

 

[lgorTudor]

That's already a requirement in many countries for diseases like yellow fever and malaria. It's just that people give a shit now because countries they want to visit will probably require covid vaccination for entry. It's a global issue, not just something that affects poor tropical countries.

WTF yellow fever is an illness? I've had it forever and it only ever hurts the wallet

 

[GordoDeCentral]

That's already a requirement in many countries for diseases like yellow fever and malaria. It's just that people give a shit now because countries they want to visit will probably require covid vaccination for entry. It's a global issue, not just something that affects poor tropical countries.

Do you know when yellow fever vaccine was created? Also malaria doesn't have a vaccine.

 

[pavelnel]

One lady doctor said, it could take 3 to 6 months to start seeing the side effects!

Are you vaccinated, GPT-3?

Изпратено от моят XQ-AU52 с помощта на Tapatalk

 

[IliveForJuve]

Do you know when yellow fever vaccine was created? Also malaria doesn't have a vaccine.

Malaria does have a vaccine but it's not a requirement (my bad there) because of its low efficacy.

I know the yellow fever vaccine has been around since forever, I got it as a kid but the point still stands.

Let's not act like countries don't already restrict travel. It's not apparent to you because of your murican passport but pretty much everyone outside of Europe and the US has restricted travelling options and must get visas and gather lots of evidence that they won't overstay. Not to mention the stupidly high visa fees some countries impose.

And you know what? Even then I don't agree with the notion of forced vaccines but countries already do what's in their interest to protect their borders and citizens ("they're stealing our jobs!"), but now it's affecting you so of course you care more.

 

[Buck Fuddy]

Reading these last few pages, I see the amount of stupidity & nonsense in this thread is still through the roof. Beyond belief, really.

 

[Allegri_is_God]

Reading these last few pages, I see the amount of stupidity & nonsense in this thread is still through the roof. Beyond belief, really.

It is indicative of how people with a lack of arguments always label others as stupid.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

Malaria does have a vaccine but it's not a requirement (my bad there) because of its low efficacy.

I know the yellow fever vaccine has been around since forever, I got it as a kid but the point still stands.

Let's not act like countries don't already restrict travel. It's not apparent to you because of your murican passport but pretty much everyone outside of Europe and the US has restricted travelling options and must get visas and gather lots of evidence that they won't overstay. Not to mention the stupidly high visa fees some countries impose.

And you know what? Even then I don't agree with the notion of forced vaccines but countries already do what's in their interest to protect their borders and citizens ("they're stealing our jobs!"), but now it's affecting you so of course you care more.

No the point does not stand, comparing a new age vaccine that's been tested for 6 months to one that's been around for almost a 100 years is intellectually dishonest.

Once again just like the vaccine it's a matter of precendence, people restrict travel because of mountains of data over years that people from some countries are overall a net positive and others not, it's not arbitrary.

Reading these last few pages, I see the amount of stupidity & nonsense in this thread is still through the roof. Beyond belief, really.

And you didn't even post that much, would you look at that.

 

[suligodsilla]

So there are news that clubs will allow in 2 weeks only vaccinated people, fine for me. But have some friends who have recoverd and the doctor said they should wait 6 months before getting the vaccine. What a shame, would like to party with them also. They are evaluating to get the vaccine anyway to hang out in clubs hmmm difficult decision

 

[swag]

I wish there was more discussion about the under-reporting of vaccine injury.

People falling on needles and stabbing themselves?

Agree 100%. But then should businesses who require masks or vaccine proof be forced to let unvaccinated, maskless people in? Because that would require the government to step in and force them to… which would be government overreach, well, at least according to current conservative politics. I guess it’s only government overreach if it disagrees with your own perspective though lol

Anyways, vaccines shouldn’t be mandated obviously, people should not have their rights infringed upon by their own government even if unvaccinated, but I believe businesses should be able to require whatever they want… if they are willing to lose business, so be it, ya know.

Unvaccinated international travel is a trickier issue… travel isn’t some basic right… so saying foreign tourists have to be vaccinated to come into a country is a little different.

Vaccine requirements are a completely unfair, apartheid-like system. Especially since not everyone has access to vaccines.

But even more to the point I see, vaccines are designed to primarily protect you ... not to protect those around you. As such, they are tested for preventing symptoms ... not infection or transmission. The latter two are what we really need to focus on in social environments, hence things like PCR tests. And while vaccines do lower the incidents of both, they aren't a replacement for testing. It's merely cheap and lazy shorthand to substitute vaccines for infection testing.

Even more dangerous, relying on vaccines as your lazy, only strategy is like dead-bolting your front door while leaving your windows open. Vaccines will be breached more by variants over time, and if you have only one line of defense you're kinda screwed once that breaks down.

WTF yellow fever is an illness? I've had it forever and it only ever hurts the wallet

This isn't an Asian tranny hooker reference, or is it?

No the point does not stand, comparing a new age vaccine that's been tested for 6 months to one that's been around for almost a 100 years is intellectually dishonest.

Long-term, yes, we don't have the data for that. But a focus on that can dismiss how ridiculously rigorous it is to get something approved in the first place. The first clinical trials are all about safety. If they make it past that, there are trials for efficacy.

Point is that we have hundreds of millions of data points suggesting things have been quite thorough statistically. We do have historical examples like thalidomide, which took five years to detect what was wrong. But that's hardly a comparison because a) it had a mere fraction of the testing and distribution, b) it was applied for different conditions other than the original ones for which it was approved, and c) clinical trial testing became immensely more restrictive after that disaster.

 

[Buck Fuddy]

And you didn't even post that much, would you look at that.

Obviously.
I've been trying not to confuse the conspiracy theorists & anti-vaxxers too much. They've got way too many contradictions to think about already

 

[ALC]

People falling on needles and stabbing themselves?



Vaccine requirements are a completely unfair, apartheid-like system. Especially since not everyone has access to vaccines.

But even more to the point I see, vaccines are designed to primarily protect you ... not to protect those around you. As such, they are tested for preventing symptoms ... not infection or transmission. The latter two are what we really need to focus on in social environments, hence things like PCR tests. And while vaccines do lower the incidents of both, they aren't a replacement for testing. It's merely cheap and lazy shorthand to substitute vaccines for infection testing.

Even more dangerous, relying on vaccines as your lazy, only strategy is like dead-bolting your front door while leaving your windows open. Vaccines will be breached more by variants over time, and if you have only one line of defense you're kinda screwed once that breaks down.



This isn't an Asian tranny hooker reference, or is it?



Long-term, yes, we don't have the data for that. But a focus on that can dismiss how ridiculously rigorous it is to get something approved in the first place. The first clinical trials are all about safety. If they make it past that, there are trials for efficacy.

Point is that we have hundreds of millions of data points suggesting things have been quite thorough statistically. We do have historical examples like thalidomide, which took five years to detect what was wrong. But that's hardly a comparison because a) it had a mere fraction of the testing and distribution, b) it was applied for different conditions other than the original ones for which it was approved, and c) clinical trial testing became immensely more restrictive after that disaster.

but if this vaccine is anything like thalomid, the US will finally have a flipper baby that can take over from where Michael Phelps left off.

 

[swag]

but if this vaccine is anything like thalomid, the US will finally have a flipper baby that can take over from where Michael Phelps left off.

All for the Olympic Gold, baby.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

People falling on needles and stabbing themselves?



Vaccine requirements are a completely unfair, apartheid-like system. Especially since not everyone has access to vaccines.

But even more to the point I see, vaccines are designed to primarily protect you ... not to protect those around you. As such, they are tested for preventing symptoms ... not infection or transmission. The latter two are what we really need to focus on in social environments, hence things like PCR tests. And while vaccines do lower the incidents of both, they aren't a replacement for testing. It's merely cheap and lazy shorthand to substitute vaccines for infection testing.

Even more dangerous, relying on vaccines as your lazy, only strategy is like dead-bolting your front door while leaving your windows open. Vaccines will be breached more by variants over time, and if you have only one line of defense you're kinda screwed once that breaks down.



This isn't an Asian tranny hooker reference, or is it?



Long-term, yes, we don't have the data for that. But a focus on that can dismiss how ridiculously rigorous it is to get something approved in the first place. The first clinical trials are all about safety. If they make it past that, there are trials for efficacy.

Point is that we have hundreds of millions of data points suggesting things have been quite thorough statistically. We do have historical examples like thalidomide, which took five years to detect what was wrong. But that's hardly a comparison because a) it had a mere fraction of the testing and distribution, b) it was applied for different conditions other than the original ones for which it was approved, and c) clinical trial testing became immensely more restrictive after that disaster.

How many mrna vaccines have we made before for historical reference? You don't need to be an epidemiologist to assess risk/reward on a personal level.

 

[Bjerknes]

I still haven't heard any real argument against mRNA vaccines other than they cause some side effects. What's the science behind the long-term worry?

 

[swag]

How many mrna vaccines have we made before for historical reference? You don't need to be an epidemiologist to assess risk/reward on a personal level.

The point of the safety protocols of drug approvals as they are constructed is they shouldn't be dependent upon how they work, whether through mRNA or more traditional methods. There isn't a "mRNA approval pathway" versus a "live-attenuated vaccine pathway" or a "viral-vectored vaccine pathway". Statistics are agnostic.

So you're kind of left with some latent long-term scenario, where there isn't any evidence to suggest otherwise. mRNA has been an essential part of life on earth for billions of years now. Though I suppose we could still be waiting to safely use mobile phones over fears of brain cancer that were raised in 1993, though in the case of the vaccines we at least understand the risks of not using them.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

The point of the safety protocols of drug approvals as they are constructed is they shouldn't be dependent upon how they work, whether through mRNA or more traditional methods. There isn't a "mRNA approval pathway" versus a "live-attenuated vaccine pathway" or a "viral-vectored vaccine pathway". Statistics are agnostic.

So you're kind of left with some latent long-term scenario, where there isn't any evidence to suggest otherwise. mRNA has been an essential part of life on earth for billions of years now. Though I suppose we could still be waiting to safely use mobile phones over fears of brain cancer that were raised in 1993, though in the case of the vaccines we at least understand the risks of not using them.

What statistics? Do you have a time machine to gather enough data to compare across methods? The very people who make this shit are not made liable for any undesired effects for the next few years, you willing to stick your neck out and say there is enough evidence to sugget otherwise? While stats are agnostic, your position simply isn't.

No one is making you use a cellphone. You are welcome to jab yourself as much as you want, like i said you make your own risk/reward assessment, and one way or the other doesn't make you any wiser.

 

[GordoDeCentral]

I still haven't heard any real argument against mRNA vaccines other than they cause some side effects. What's the science behind the long-term worry?

Not enough data