4 ms·
Downvotes without replies again. It is definitely worth debate. What if J&J's second shot gets it up to the same 95%? (even if they are not advocating a second
by coding123 6y ago
Downvotes without replies again. It is definitely worth debate. What if J&J's second shot gets it up to the same 95%? (even if they are not advocating a second shot at this time)
After all, these vaccines do not prevent the virus directly, they're just there to coax the body to produce new things. Both teach the body about the spike protein. It does seem like the mRNA vaccines are given a not-yet-due congratulations on every medium I see yet mRNA vaccines have absolutely zero history of pandemic ending at this time. Yes that may change, but to call them a gold standard now that's just not accurate.
- jamesrcole 6y ago> Downvotes without replies again. Looking at that comment it might be because it just asserts “there are far more side-effects w/mRNA than traditional vaccines” without any explanation or sources.