5 ms·

I prefer to build natural immunity than inject with experimental genetic drug. I think is optimal.

by tu7001 5y ago

Closi 5y ago
Not an approach I would advise taking with polio.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
hedora 5y ago
The mRNA vaccine is just one of the pieces of genetic material coronavirus tricks your body into producing. The main difference is that the vaccine can’t reproduce itself, and therefore can’t lay waste to your body.
- loonster 5y ago
  It's also a single point of failure. If the spike mutates, the vaccines will be less than useless.
  - babblefrog 5y ago
    My understanding is the if the spike mutates, the virus can no longer get into your cells.
  - Tagbert 5y ago
    That is the concern about variants. When that happens, the vaccine will need to be adjusted. Fortunately for mRNA vaccines that is relatively easy.
thatsamonad 5y ago
> inject with experimental genetic drug By “genetic drug” I’m assuming you mean either the mRNA vaccines developed by Pfizer/Moderna or the viral vector vaccines developed by AstraZeneca/Johnson & Johnson. The claim that either technology is “experimental” is false. Both have undergone the same rigorous trials and testing as other vaccines before being rolled out to the public: https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-covid-vaccines-idUSL1N2M70MW https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-covid-vaccines-idU... Your “natural immunity” also doesn’t protect other people around you from contracting the disease and suffering from a very severe illness, whereas there is growing evidence that the vaccines available also cut transmission risk: https://khub.net/documents/135939561/390853656/Impact+of+vaccination+on+household+transmission+of+SARS-COV-2+in+England.pdf/35bf4bb1-6ade-d3eb-a39e-9c9b25a8122a?t=1619601878136 https://khub.net/documents/135939561/390853656/Impact+of+vac...
- loonster 5y ago
  It is not my responsibility to protect others. If they want protection they can take the vaccine themselves.
  - thatsamonad 5y ago
    At least in the United States, most children are currently unable to receive a vaccine so they cannot protect themselves. Would you feel the same way if you were to come across a child drowning in a shallow pond and had an opportunity to save them with the only “cost” to you being the inconvenience of being cold and wet?
    - salawat 5y ago
      They may not see the vaccine as an issue of 'cold and wet' as you deem getting the vaccine to be, keep that in mind. As misguided as it may be. There is also a gairly big difference between jumping in a pool of water to save a drowning child (something likely universally familiar, and processable by anyone), and trusting a bunch of other humans you don't know from Adam, who have God knows what incentives guiding them, while possibly being a member of a population the United States has shown a willingness to be less than straightforward with when it comes to injecting things into. Welcome to a low trust society. Where collective action is nigh impossible by virtue of the near constant degree to which people can be found to have ulterior motives.
lazyant 5y ago
http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/2106.1/04596.html http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/2106.1/04596.html
lm28469 5y ago
> I prefer to be a test subject to a virus rather than get a safe vaccine, even though the virus has been proven to be worse than the vaccine in 99.999% of cases. Big logic time. Between the people who question everything and the others who believe science is a religion I would hope most people find a middle ground
- salawat 5y ago
  Where do people access those numbers through most frequently? >The media. Who has been caught having issues with cherry-picking narratives and having issues with the truth lately? >The media. Who is generating those numbers? >Scientists and for profit businesses. Who has had a track record of poor reproducibility in research, publish or perish paper mills and citation rings, and pushing treatments that harm patients in the long run to fill the coffers (opioids)? >Scientists and for-profit businesses. Ya know, in a way, all the arguments I've had with people over radiocarbon dating has finally taught me something precious about science, and the cutting edge. It's too important to leave locked behind private entities. All the hyperadvamced analysis and techniques doesn't do squat to keep you credible with the masses. You have to make it something people can actually get close enough to see and absorb/experience for themselves. Without trust, not for all the good faith in Christendom will anyone get anything out of or over me. -apologies to J.P. Morgan I can't really argue over the conclusions common sense leads to. I don't personally buy it, but I can unfortunately understand it. A lot of uncommon sense, unfortunately, tends to find it's way to making people who rely on common sense miserable. This is why we can't have nice things.

I prefer to build natural immunity than inject with experimental genetic drug. I think is optimal.

by tu7001 5y ago

I prefer to build natural immunity than inject with experimental genetic drug. I think is optimal.

Closi 5y ago

Not an approach I would advise taking with polio.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

hedora 5y ago

The mRNA vaccine is just one of the pieces of genetic material coronavirus tricks your body into producing. The main difference is that the vaccine can’t reproduce itself, and therefore can’t lay waste to your body.

loonster 5y ago
It's also a single point of failure. If the spike mutates, the vaccines will be less than useless.
- babblefrog 5y ago
  My understanding is the if the spike mutates, the virus can no longer get into your cells.
- Tagbert 5y ago
  That is the concern about variants. When that happens, the vaccine will need to be adjusted. Fortunately for mRNA vaccines that is relatively easy.

thatsamonad 5y ago

> inject with experimental genetic drug By “genetic drug” I’m assuming you mean either the mRNA vaccines developed by Pfizer/Moderna or the viral vector vaccines developed by AstraZeneca/Johnson & Johnson. The claim that either technology is “experimental” is false. Both have undergone the same rigorous trials and testing as other vaccines before being rolled out to the public: https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-covid-vaccines-idUSL1N2M70MW https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-covid-vaccines-idU... Your “natural immunity” also doesn’t protect other people around you from contracting the disease and suffering from a very severe illness, whereas there is growing evidence that the vaccines available also cut transmission risk: https://khub.net/documents/135939561/390853656/Impact+of+vaccination+on+household+transmission+of+SARS-COV-2+in+England.pdf/35bf4bb1-6ade-d3eb-a39e-9c9b25a8122a?t=1619601878136 https://khub.net/documents/135939561/390853656/Impact+of+vac...

loonster 5y ago
It is not my responsibility to protect others. If they want protection they can take the vaccine themselves.
- thatsamonad 5y ago
  At least in the United States, most children are currently unable to receive a vaccine so they cannot protect themselves. Would you feel the same way if you were to come across a child drowning in a shallow pond and had an opportunity to save them with the only “cost” to you being the inconvenience of being cold and wet?
  - salawat 5y ago
    They may not see the vaccine as an issue of 'cold and wet' as you deem getting the vaccine to be, keep that in mind. As misguided as it may be. There is also a gairly big difference between jumping in a pool of water to save a drowning child (something likely universally familiar, and processable by anyone), and trusting a bunch of other humans you don't know from Adam, who have God knows what incentives guiding them, while possibly being a member of a population the United States has shown a willingness to be less than straightforward with when it comes to injecting things into. Welcome to a low trust society. Where collective action is nigh impossible by virtue of the near constant degree to which people can be found to have ulterior motives.

lazyant 5y ago

http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/2106.1/04596.html http://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/2106.1/04596.html

lm28469 5y ago

> I prefer to be a test subject to a virus rather than get a safe vaccine, even though the virus has been proven to be worse than the vaccine in 99.999% of cases. Big logic time. Between the people who question everything and the others who believe science is a religion I would hope most people find a middle ground

salawat 5y ago
Where do people access those numbers through most frequently? >The media. Who has been caught having issues with cherry-picking narratives and having issues with the truth lately? >The media. Who is generating those numbers? >Scientists and for profit businesses. Who has had a track record of poor reproducibility in research, publish or perish paper mills and citation rings, and pushing treatments that harm patients in the long run to fill the coffers (opioids)? >Scientists and for-profit businesses. Ya know, in a way, all the arguments I've had with people over radiocarbon dating has finally taught me something precious about science, and the cutting edge. It's too important to leave locked behind private entities. All the hyperadvamced analysis and techniques doesn't do squat to keep you credible with the masses. You have to make it something people can actually get close enough to see and absorb/experience for themselves. Without trust, not for all the good faith in Christendom will anyone get anything out of or over me. -apologies to J.P. Morgan I can't really argue over the conclusions common sense leads to. I don't personally buy it, but I can unfortunately understand it. A lot of uncommon sense, unfortunately, tends to find it's way to making people who rely on common sense miserable. This is why we can't have nice things.