4 ms·

> Plus we know nothing about the long term health consequences. I'm not anti-vax, but anti-vaxers use this same tactic; they use ambiguity to breed fear agains

by brink 6y ago

> Plus we know nothing about the long term health consequences. I'm not anti-vax, but anti-vaxers use this same tactic; they use ambiguity to breed fear against vaccines. I get that some unknowns are dangerous, but there has to be a limit, right? We can't be afraid of everything we don't know.

triceratops 6y ago
Most vaccines have been in use for years, sometimes decades. They're given nearly universally. We've had ample time and sample size to uncover their dangers (if any). Covid hasn't even been around for a year. The two situations are nothing alike.
dfxm12 6y ago
The difference is that anti-vaxers make this point against vaccines that have been used for a long time about which we do understand the long term health consequences. This is contrasted to the long term health consequences of COVID-19, which appears could be significant, but we just aren't certain yet only because there just aren't any long term survivors yet and thus studies [0] related to it haven't been completed. I don't think this is past the limit. 0 - https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/news/2020/looking-forward-understanding-long-term-effects-covid-19 https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/news/2020/looking-forward-understa...
gibrown 6y ago
I’m basing my risk assessment on evidence of likely long term damage to adults. Combined with very little data there is a huge amount of unknown risk still to children. https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/07/08/from-lung-scarring-to-heart-damage-covid-19-may-leave-lingering-marks/ https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/07/08/from-lung-scarring-to-h... I hope I’m wrong. In six months or a year maybe I’ll feel more comfortable with the risk to my kids (and myself with a damaged spinal cord), but right now I don’t and to equate it to anti-vaxxers is fairly insulting.

4 ms·

> Plus we know nothing about the long term health consequences. I'm not anti-vax, but anti-vaxers use this same tactic; they use ambiguity to breed fear agains

by brink 6y ago

triceratops 6y ago
Most vaccines have been in use for years, sometimes decades. They're given nearly universally. We've had ample time and sample size to uncover their dangers (if any). Covid hasn't even been around for a year. The two situations are nothing alike.
dfxm12 6y ago
The difference is that anti-vaxers make this point against vaccines that have been used for a long time about which we do understand the long term health consequences. This is contrasted to the long term health consequences of COVID-19, which appears could be significant, but we just aren't certain yet only because there just aren't any long term survivors yet and thus studies [0] related to it haven't been completed. I don't think this is past the limit. 0 - https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/news/2020/looking-forward-understanding-long-term-effects-covid-19 https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/news/2020/looking-forward-understa...
gibrown 6y ago
I’m basing my risk assessment on evidence of likely long term damage to adults. Combined with very little data there is a huge amount of unknown risk still to children. https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/07/08/from-lung-scarring-to-heart-damage-covid-19-may-leave-lingering-marks/ https://news.berkeley.edu/2020/07/08/from-lung-scarring-to-h... I hope I’m wrong. In six months or a year maybe I’ll feel more comfortable with the risk to my kids (and myself with a damaged spinal cord), but right now I don’t and to equate it to anti-vaxxers is fairly insulting.