7 ms·

I'm really struggling to understand all of this. I caught covid last year during the first wave. It wasn't pleasant experience but I survived. I'm still relativ

by lprd 6y ago

I'm really struggling to understand all of this. I caught covid last year during the first wave. It wasn't pleasant experience but I survived. I'm still relatively young, the chances of covid severely affecting me (and those in my age group) are very minute. At this moment, I have no desire to take the vaccine. I'd consider taking one with more time/data, but that's just my personal opinion. To be clear, I am not an anti-vaxxer (a shame I even have to state that). The principle of this is what bothers me the most. Now, I understand the need for elderly people and other certain groups to take this vaccine, but to simply force it amongst all age groups is beyond me. This seems very dangerous, and I don't why democracies are even flirting with the idea. EDIT: For all those down voting, perhaps you can enlighten me?

__jem 6y ago
Mandatory school vaccination is pretty common in most liberal democracies, no? Is this really a new idea?
- BlargMcLarg 6y ago
  The idea itself isn't new, though it does open two big questions in the context of the EU. For individual countries and citizens, do we really want the EU making these kind of decisions as what appears almost out of the blue? The EU isn't exactly lacking in criticism. Can we truly accept "higher forces" making this decision without running it through the people? A vaccine may be a minor thing, and obligatory vaccination was likely to be accepted anyway. But what if something much bigger and much more intrusive is going to be decided that the public just "has to deal with"? As someone from the EU, I can't with full confidence say the EU has been transparent in their actions or reasoning. These are people with immense powers deciding the outcomes of lives. I do need transparency that in whatever period of time, with all the rather intrusive technology coming out, they won't pull any weird stunts. This doesn't help making their case.
- cxbates 6y ago
  When the vaccines had been tested properly over a long period of time, like the polio one.
  - yokaze 6y ago
    Or the Smallpox in 1905? https://www.history.com/news/smallpox-vaccine-supreme-court https://www.history.com/news/smallpox-vaccine-supreme-court
- slumdev 6y ago
  It is not. Almost all of them allow religious, conscience, and medical exemptions. Only the most totalitarian regimes don't allow exemptions.
Tomte 6y ago
> It wasn't pleasant experience but I survived. In that age bracket the main fear isn't outright dying, but "Long COVID", all kinds of problems affecting you for the rest of your life, or manifesting only later. Fatigue, lung problems etc.
- lprd 6y ago
  I've heard of this, but I am curious if: A) Is there any substantial evidence that supports it B) If A, then how many individuals are affected? If you have any material on this, I would gladly read it. Personally, my mental health is horrible. Being in isolation away from friends/family (among all the other measures we have taken during this pandemic) have slowly deteriorated my mental & physical health.
  - kurthr 6y ago
    A) Yes, lots. B) 10%. https://evidence.nihr.ac.uk/themedreview/living-with-covid19 https://evidence.nihr.ac.uk/themedreview/living-with-covid19 https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n132.long https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n132.long Get the population vaccinated so things can go back to normal and people can go back to work and play without fear of long term illness or death. "Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration." - Bene Gesserit saying
    - _dps 6y ago
      As far as I know there is no good data on "long covid" that substantially controls for confounders like obesity and age. Obese people are likely to have seemingly "long-term" effects from any respiratory problems that actually disappear if they lose weight (see for example obese asthma sufferers who often have what appears like chronic bronchitis). If you are aware of anything that provides evidence that accounts for confounders I'd be very happy to change my mind.
simion314 6y ago
If you live isolated on an island I could understand, but if you want to use the public spaces like school, hospitals etc then we need to calculate the risks. If technically we could prove who spread a virus then we could give you the option to not vaccinate but if you cause someone else to get infected you pay , then you will actually have to calculate the external risks as it should, people would use the masks if they knew there is a small chance they could be accused and proven guilty of murder.
sputr 6y ago
> but to simply force it amongst all age groups is beyond me. That's how vaccines work. > This seems very dangerous, and I don't why democracies are even flirting with the idea. You say you're not an anti-vaxxer, which I believe, but you ARE using their utterly wrong but elegantly misleading talking point. A society being "democratic" does not equal "every member of society can do what ever the hell they want". And democracies have not been flirting with this idea, they have been implementing it, successfully, for over a century. > I'd consider taking one with more time/data And just to drive the point home, no you would not. Neither of us is able to rationally assess the safety or effectiveness of these vaccines (I'm assuming you are not a professional in the field from the arguments that you are using) so more data/time is useless to people like us. Either we trust the professional and institutions, or we don't. Not having faith in institutions/professionals isn't a problem - hell I even understand it and feel a non-trivial amount of it. But let's not pretend this has anything to do with vaccines themselves.
- giantg2 6y ago
  "That's how vaccines work." Um, not really. Not all vaccines are given to all groups. For example, covid vaccines are not approved for those under 16, and Shingrix is only for people over 55. "Neither of us is able to rationally assess the safety or effectiveness of these vaccines (I'm assuming you are not a professional in the field from the arguments that you are using) so more data/time is useless to people like us." But more time and data can benefit the researchers. There are plenty of examples of authorities changing their recommendations based on more data.
  - yokaze 6y ago
    > Not all vaccines are given to all groups. "Not all" does not counter the general case made. The whole point of vaccination campaigns is to get the whole population vaccinated to eradicate the breeding ground of the disease. That's how we managed to eradicate Smallpox, and in a lot of countries Polio, Measles, Rubella,... Guess, why we managed only to eradicate the first, and what stops us from doing so with the others. > But more time and data can benefit the researchers. More time can benefit the virus to try more different mutations. I don't think you are speaking for the benefit of the researchers here.
kstenerud 6y ago
Mass-vaccination is about reaching herd immunity, at which point even people who are unable to take a particular vaccine are effectively safe from the disease. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity#Protection_of_those_without_immunity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity#Protection_of_th...
- dapf 6y ago
  The point of freedom is to be free to take decisions about your life, including injecting substances in your veins. Would you agree with that?
  - kstenerud 6y ago
    What exactly is the point you're trying to make? Living in a community is about collectively accepting trade-offs on what you can, cannot, and must do. We then codify them into laws and constitutions.
  - adamcstephens 6y ago
    Except you’re not just making decisions about your own life. If you are a carrier, and give a disease to another person when you could have been vaccinated, how are you not culpable?
  - lamontcg 6y ago
    Nope. I believe in outcomes not freedoms. Wage a war on drugs and you get violence and overdoses. Ban abortions and you get them done in back alleys. Enforce vaccinations and you save thousands of lives. One of these things is not like the others.
kurthr 6y ago
Because you can still catch COVID and give it to someone else. This is especially true of variants such as the SA B1.351, which appear to escape previous "natural" immunity even in recently recovered patients (3 months). You would be knowingly exposing other people to possibly deadly harm for personal uncertainty in now a fairly well demonstrated (multi-million person trial) safe procedure. The stabilized spike protein vaccines (not AZ or the original Sputnik) have shown significantly better effectiveness against those variants. It's not different from polio or measles as a school child. So long as you're not a licensed professional or someone (in school) who is required to interact with the public, then I'd agree if you're willing to self-quarantine and mask and social distance whenever you go out, when you're free (morally) not to be vaccinated. If you want the privileges of regularly interacting in a society, however, you have to respect the rights of others in that society as well.
- dapf 6y ago
  So, other people has the right to demand what you inject in your veins.
  - ghaff 6y ago
    In the case of vaccines, yes, this is widely true.
  - kurthr 6y ago
    If you are injecting a vaccine into the vein, you are purposely doing it wrong, with well known risks and health effects. That does not meet any standard of care. They are IM injections. As long as you personally stay in your home and do not interact with anyone else non-socially distanced or without a mask on, and you're not a licensed to provide a service to the public, or attending a public institution, then I would say you should have the moral right not to be vaccinated for a highly contagious and moderately deadly virus. BTW, if you catch Tuberculosis you will be forced into house arrest and the health agency will force you to zoom call for every pill you take once you are released after 3 months.
  - 6t6t6t6 6y ago
    As far as you want to interact with them, yes.
Shadonototro 6y ago
you don't vaccinate for yourself, nobody gives a shit about reckless people the reason we vaccinate people like you is because you are reckless and can potentially infect thousands people
DanBC 6y ago
> For all those down voting, perhaps you can enlighten me? It's not about covid. It's about for example measles, which is for children a very serious illness.
lamontcg 6y ago
If you survived the virus, you should easily survive the vaccine, particularly the mRNA ones. You already know that you tolerate virus mRNA and the S-protein being in your body just fine. The lipid nanoparticle poses incredibly little risk to you unless you happen to be allergic to PEG. You also have no idea of how well you're maintaining antibodies to the virus, or if you can contract and transmit a current or future variant.
corny 6y ago
Just an added perspective from Canada. Right now the covid variants are causing more and more of the new cases and, in BC, the average age of someone testing positive for the variant is 30. To make matters worse, the variants could be more deadly. https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/coronavirus-variants-canada-covid-19-vaccine-third-wave-1.5978394 https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/coronavirus-variants-canada-c... Our vaccination progress is frustratingly slow and only the most elderly population (80+) have had their first shot in significant numbers. Even if you are only thinking about yourself, you should not be dismissing the risk from these new variants. If the pandemic continues and voluntary uptake is not high enough, you better believe that vaccines will become mandatory. Being responsible sometimes means doing what we don't want to do.

by lprd 6y ago

__jem 6y ago

Mandatory school vaccination is pretty common in most liberal democracies, no? Is this really a new idea?

BlargMcLarg 6y ago
The idea itself isn't new, though it does open two big questions in the context of the EU. For individual countries and citizens, do we really want the EU making these kind of decisions as what appears almost out of the blue? The EU isn't exactly lacking in criticism. Can we truly accept "higher forces" making this decision without running it through the people? A vaccine may be a minor thing, and obligatory vaccination was likely to be accepted anyway. But what if something much bigger and much more intrusive is going to be decided that the public just "has to deal with"? As someone from the EU, I can't with full confidence say the EU has been transparent in their actions or reasoning. These are people with immense powers deciding the outcomes of lives. I do need transparency that in whatever period of time, with all the rather intrusive technology coming out, they won't pull any weird stunts. This doesn't help making their case.
cxbates 6y ago
When the vaccines had been tested properly over a long period of time, like the polio one.
- yokaze 6y ago
  Or the Smallpox in 1905? https://www.history.com/news/smallpox-vaccine-supreme-court https://www.history.com/news/smallpox-vaccine-supreme-court
slumdev 6y ago
It is not. Almost all of them allow religious, conscience, and medical exemptions. Only the most totalitarian regimes don't allow exemptions.

Tomte 6y ago

> It wasn't pleasant experience but I survived. In that age bracket the main fear isn't outright dying, but "Long COVID", all kinds of problems affecting you for the rest of your life, or manifesting only later. Fatigue, lung problems etc.

lprd 6y ago
I've heard of this, but I am curious if: A) Is there any substantial evidence that supports it B) If A, then how many individuals are affected? If you have any material on this, I would gladly read it. Personally, my mental health is horrible. Being in isolation away from friends/family (among all the other measures we have taken during this pandemic) have slowly deteriorated my mental & physical health.
- kurthr 6y ago
  A) Yes, lots. B) 10%. https://evidence.nihr.ac.uk/themedreview/living-with-covid19 https://evidence.nihr.ac.uk/themedreview/living-with-covid19 https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n132.long https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n132.long Get the population vaccinated so things can go back to normal and people can go back to work and play without fear of long term illness or death. "Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration." - Bene Gesserit saying
  - _dps 6y ago
    As far as I know there is no good data on "long covid" that substantially controls for confounders like obesity and age. Obese people are likely to have seemingly "long-term" effects from any respiratory problems that actually disappear if they lose weight (see for example obese asthma sufferers who often have what appears like chronic bronchitis). If you are aware of anything that provides evidence that accounts for confounders I'd be very happy to change my mind.

simion314 6y ago

If you live isolated on an island I could understand, but if you want to use the public spaces like school, hospitals etc then we need to calculate the risks. If technically we could prove who spread a virus then we could give you the option to not vaccinate but if you cause someone else to get infected you pay , then you will actually have to calculate the external risks as it should, people would use the masks if they knew there is a small chance they could be accused and proven guilty of murder.

sputr 6y ago

> but to simply force it amongst all age groups is beyond me. That's how vaccines work. > This seems very dangerous, and I don't why democracies are even flirting with the idea. You say you're not an anti-vaxxer, which I believe, but you ARE using their utterly wrong but elegantly misleading talking point. A society being "democratic" does not equal "every member of society can do what ever the hell they want". And democracies have not been flirting with this idea, they have been implementing it, successfully, for over a century. > I'd consider taking one with more time/data And just to drive the point home, no you would not. Neither of us is able to rationally assess the safety or effectiveness of these vaccines (I'm assuming you are not a professional in the field from the arguments that you are using) so more data/time is useless to people like us. Either we trust the professional and institutions, or we don't. Not having faith in institutions/professionals isn't a problem - hell I even understand it and feel a non-trivial amount of it. But let's not pretend this has anything to do with vaccines themselves.

giantg2 6y ago
"That's how vaccines work." Um, not really. Not all vaccines are given to all groups. For example, covid vaccines are not approved for those under 16, and Shingrix is only for people over 55. "Neither of us is able to rationally assess the safety or effectiveness of these vaccines (I'm assuming you are not a professional in the field from the arguments that you are using) so more data/time is useless to people like us." But more time and data can benefit the researchers. There are plenty of examples of authorities changing their recommendations based on more data.
- yokaze 6y ago
  > Not all vaccines are given to all groups. "Not all" does not counter the general case made. The whole point of vaccination campaigns is to get the whole population vaccinated to eradicate the breeding ground of the disease. That's how we managed to eradicate Smallpox, and in a lot of countries Polio, Measles, Rubella,... Guess, why we managed only to eradicate the first, and what stops us from doing so with the others. > But more time and data can benefit the researchers. More time can benefit the virus to try more different mutations. I don't think you are speaking for the benefit of the researchers here.

kstenerud 6y ago

Mass-vaccination is about reaching herd immunity, at which point even people who are unable to take a particular vaccine are effectively safe from the disease. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity#Protection_of_those_without_immunity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herd_immunity#Protection_of_th...

dapf 6y ago
The point of freedom is to be free to take decisions about your life, including injecting substances in your veins. Would you agree with that?
- kstenerud 6y ago
  What exactly is the point you're trying to make? Living in a community is about collectively accepting trade-offs on what you can, cannot, and must do. We then codify them into laws and constitutions.
- adamcstephens 6y ago
  Except you’re not just making decisions about your own life. If you are a carrier, and give a disease to another person when you could have been vaccinated, how are you not culpable?
- lamontcg 6y ago
  Nope. I believe in outcomes not freedoms. Wage a war on drugs and you get violence and overdoses. Ban abortions and you get them done in back alleys. Enforce vaccinations and you save thousands of lives. One of these things is not like the others.

kurthr 6y ago

Because you can still catch COVID and give it to someone else. This is especially true of variants such as the SA B1.351, which appear to escape previous "natural" immunity even in recently recovered patients (3 months). You would be knowingly exposing other people to possibly deadly harm for personal uncertainty in now a fairly well demonstrated (multi-million person trial) safe procedure. The stabilized spike protein vaccines (not AZ or the original Sputnik) have shown significantly better effectiveness against those variants. It's not different from polio or measles as a school child. So long as you're not a licensed professional or someone (in school) who is required to interact with the public, then I'd agree if you're willing to self-quarantine and mask and social distance whenever you go out, when you're free (morally) not to be vaccinated. If you want the privileges of regularly interacting in a society, however, you have to respect the rights of others in that society as well.

dapf 6y ago
So, other people has the right to demand what you inject in your veins.
- ghaff 6y ago
  In the case of vaccines, yes, this is widely true.
- kurthr 6y ago
  If you are injecting a vaccine into the vein, you are purposely doing it wrong, with well known risks and health effects. That does not meet any standard of care. They are IM injections. As long as you personally stay in your home and do not interact with anyone else non-socially distanced or without a mask on, and you're not a licensed to provide a service to the public, or attending a public institution, then I would say you should have the moral right not to be vaccinated for a highly contagious and moderately deadly virus. BTW, if you catch Tuberculosis you will be forced into house arrest and the health agency will force you to zoom call for every pill you take once you are released after 3 months.
- 6t6t6t6 6y ago
  As far as you want to interact with them, yes.

Shadonototro 6y ago

you don't vaccinate for yourself, nobody gives a shit about reckless people the reason we vaccinate people like you is because you are reckless and can potentially infect thousands people

DanBC 6y ago

> For all those down voting, perhaps you can enlighten me? It's not about covid. It's about for example measles, which is for children a very serious illness.

lamontcg 6y ago

If you survived the virus, you should easily survive the vaccine, particularly the mRNA ones. You already know that you tolerate virus mRNA and the S-protein being in your body just fine. The lipid nanoparticle poses incredibly little risk to you unless you happen to be allergic to PEG. You also have no idea of how well you're maintaining antibodies to the virus, or if you can contract and transmit a current or future variant.

corny 6y ago

Just an added perspective from Canada. Right now the covid variants are causing more and more of the new cases and, in BC, the average age of someone testing positive for the variant is 30. To make matters worse, the variants could be more deadly. https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/coronavirus-variants-canada-covid-19-vaccine-third-wave-1.5978394 https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/coronavirus-variants-canada-c... Our vaccination progress is frustratingly slow and only the most elderly population (80+) have had their first shot in significant numbers. Even if you are only thinking about yourself, you should not be dismissing the risk from these new variants. If the pandemic continues and voluntary uptake is not high enough, you better believe that vaccines will become mandatory. Being responsible sometimes means doing what we don't want to do.