4 ms·

The amount of unsubstantiated and scientifically unproven or even completely unstudied claims in this thread is truly staggering. These mRNA vaccines are safe

The amount of unsubstantiated and scientifically unproven or even completely unstudied claims in this thread is truly staggering. These mRNA vaccines are safe for children? How on earth would you know that if the vaccines have only been studied on a handful of healthy kids for a couple of months. Does nobody understand the amount of time needed to do this kind of study properly and thoroughly? I'd also love some scientific studies that prove that the following claims are true, because as far as I know they aren't: "No chance of wiping it out without everyone vaccinated." "It's like wearing seatbelts, but for other people." "Variants develop primarily in unvaccinated people" "The main goal of all these actions is to end the pandemic in just a few years." "In the UK, most people getting into hospitals now with severe Covid are young and unvaccinated" Oh and I expect to be thoroughly downvoted for this because, you know, group think and all.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
oshkarr 5y ago
"Truly staggering" is 4 million dead people and maybe 61 million more who are dealing with "long-Covid" symptoms. The quotes you cited are just people being considerate of others. Sometimes doing the right thing doesn't need—or hasn't time—to be scientifically proven.
- johnisgood 5y ago
  There is no right thing. I can fight rhetoric with rhetoric, too. Say: "Those who are afraid can stay home, mandating a new vaccine with no long-term track record is pure evil.". I am saying this because of such statements: > From a societal standpoint, he said people who skip the vaccine could compromise the safety of others. > I hear everyone saying deciding to get vaccinated is an individual choice, but the calculus in that choice is twofold — one is to vaccinate yourself and the other is protect others. I think we have a responsibility to protect our communities. It is absolutely disgusting to appeal to emotions and shame to make me have something injected into me that has not been extensively studied and of what we have literally no clue with regarding to its long-term effects[1] especially given that I have an immunologic autoimmune disorder. In any case, what happens to those who cannot get the vaccine passport due to not being able to get the vaccine due to health reasons? Nobody seems to talk about this, or at least I am not informed on this. [1] On top of that, recent evidence seems to be piling up about their serious adverse effects that are coming to light now. I am expecting more to come.
  - Nursie 5y ago
    > From a societal standpoint, he said people who skip the vaccine could compromise the safety of others. But this is a discussion of fact, not an appeal to emotions. > we have literally no clue with regarding to its long-term effects Except we have a great deal of information on the long term effects of vaccination, from studying many vaccines. It's quite wrong to say we have no idea.
    - johnisgood 5y ago
      > Except we have a great deal of information on the long term effects of vaccination, from studying many vaccines. It's quite wrong to say we have no idea. Are you talking about mRNA vaccines? How many people have gotten such a vaccine before the COVID-19 vaccines and when?
      - Nursie 5y ago
        > Are you talking about mRNA vaccines? Are you? You seemed to be talking about all vaccines. > How many people have gotten such a vaccine before the COVID-19 vaccines and when? I don't have the exact figures but if you search for human mRNA trials, they seem to go back about 10 years.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
johnisgood 5y ago
> Does nobody understand the amount of time needed to do this kind of study properly and thoroughly? Plus they do not get that new vaccines (I am not referring to vaccines using the same technology as the previous ones, I thought that was obvious) usually take 10-15 years (!) to develop. How long did it take to develop this one with a tech that has not yet been used on humans? Months?
- Nursie 5y ago
  > Plus they do not get that new vaccines usually take 10-15 years This is outdated info, vaccines don't typically take that long any more, and there was a bit of a head-start here due to the work on SARS and MERS. > How long did it take to develop this one with a tech that has not yet been used on humans? Which tech are you talking about? And which vaccine? J&J and AZ, for instance, are more 'traditional' and based on adenovirus.
  - johnisgood 5y ago
    Yes, and we have seasonal flu vaccines that do not take that much of a long time to develop, we know that. The same case with other vaccines that are based on what our other vaccines are using. I was talking about the mRNA vaccines. When was the first time that any mRNA vaccine has been approved for human use? --- To the down-voters of my previous comment: This is the source of my claim: https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/vaccine-development-testing-and-regulation https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/vaccine-d... Or take a look at https://www.uchicagomedicine.org/forefront/coronavirus-disease-covid-19/how-does-the-fda-approve-vaccines https://www.uchicagomedicine.org/forefront/coronavirus-disea... which says: > The process of getting a vaccine approved for use in the general public is no picnic and can take several years --- If you know it differently, let me know. Please consider that I was not referring to seasonal flu vaccines and the like. In fact, currently, no coronavirus vaccine is fully approved by the FDA, but three (or more by now?) were given emergency use authorization by the agency. Plus, I did say the word "develop", but I was thinking about the whole process, my bad.
    - 5y ago
Nursie 5y ago
> "In the UK, most people getting into hospitals now with severe Covid are young and unvaccinated" The stats I can find are here - https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-hospital-activity https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas... AFAICT they don't give a lot to work with, thought the 18-54 crowd do now make a large proportion of hospital intake than earlier in the pandemic. The ONS - https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19/latestinsights https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthan... Report that "The proportion of deaths involving COVID-19 has been highest in those aged 75 years and over throughout the pandemic, however, this proportion has been lower since the start of January 2021. This likely reflects the impact of vaccinations." And we have the independent reporting that hospitalisations are now mostly among the under-45 and unvaccinated groups, and that as a result there is less pressure on the intensive wards - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/covid-hospital-admissions-care-home-b1854083.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/covid-hospital-adm... So I would say the claim that "most people getting into hospitals now with severe Covid are young and unvaccinated" is probably overstated.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

oshkarr 5y ago

"Truly staggering" is 4 million dead people and maybe 61 million more who are dealing with "long-Covid" symptoms. The quotes you cited are just people being considerate of others. Sometimes doing the right thing doesn't need—or hasn't time—to be scientifically proven.

johnisgood 5y ago
There is no right thing. I can fight rhetoric with rhetoric, too. Say: "Those who are afraid can stay home, mandating a new vaccine with no long-term track record is pure evil.". I am saying this because of such statements: > From a societal standpoint, he said people who skip the vaccine could compromise the safety of others. > I hear everyone saying deciding to get vaccinated is an individual choice, but the calculus in that choice is twofold — one is to vaccinate yourself and the other is protect others. I think we have a responsibility to protect our communities. It is absolutely disgusting to appeal to emotions and shame to make me have something injected into me that has not been extensively studied and of what we have literally no clue with regarding to its long-term effects[1] especially given that I have an immunologic autoimmune disorder. In any case, what happens to those who cannot get the vaccine passport due to not being able to get the vaccine due to health reasons? Nobody seems to talk about this, or at least I am not informed on this. [1] On top of that, recent evidence seems to be piling up about their serious adverse effects that are coming to light now. I am expecting more to come.
- Nursie 5y ago
  > From a societal standpoint, he said people who skip the vaccine could compromise the safety of others. But this is a discussion of fact, not an appeal to emotions. > we have literally no clue with regarding to its long-term effects Except we have a great deal of information on the long term effects of vaccination, from studying many vaccines. It's quite wrong to say we have no idea.
  - johnisgood 5y ago
    > Except we have a great deal of information on the long term effects of vaccination, from studying many vaccines. It's quite wrong to say we have no idea. Are you talking about mRNA vaccines? How many people have gotten such a vaccine before the COVID-19 vaccines and when?
    - Nursie 5y ago
      > Are you talking about mRNA vaccines? Are you? You seemed to be talking about all vaccines. > How many people have gotten such a vaccine before the COVID-19 vaccines and when? I don't have the exact figures but if you search for human mRNA trials, they seem to go back about 10 years.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]

johnisgood 5y ago

> Does nobody understand the amount of time needed to do this kind of study properly and thoroughly? Plus they do not get that new vaccines (I am not referring to vaccines using the same technology as the previous ones, I thought that was obvious) usually take 10-15 years (!) to develop. How long did it take to develop this one with a tech that has not yet been used on humans? Months?

Nursie 5y ago
> Plus they do not get that new vaccines usually take 10-15 years This is outdated info, vaccines don't typically take that long any more, and there was a bit of a head-start here due to the work on SARS and MERS. > How long did it take to develop this one with a tech that has not yet been used on humans? Which tech are you talking about? And which vaccine? J&J and AZ, for instance, are more 'traditional' and based on adenovirus.
- johnisgood 5y ago
  Yes, and we have seasonal flu vaccines that do not take that much of a long time to develop, we know that. The same case with other vaccines that are based on what our other vaccines are using. I was talking about the mRNA vaccines. When was the first time that any mRNA vaccine has been approved for human use? --- To the down-voters of my previous comment: This is the source of my claim: https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/vaccine-development-testing-and-regulation https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/vaccine-d... Or take a look at https://www.uchicagomedicine.org/forefront/coronavirus-disease-covid-19/how-does-the-fda-approve-vaccines https://www.uchicagomedicine.org/forefront/coronavirus-disea... which says: > The process of getting a vaccine approved for use in the general public is no picnic and can take several years --- If you know it differently, let me know. Please consider that I was not referring to seasonal flu vaccines and the like. In fact, currently, no coronavirus vaccine is fully approved by the FDA, but three (or more by now?) were given emergency use authorization by the agency. Plus, I did say the word "develop", but I was thinking about the whole process, my bad.
  - 5y ago

Nursie 5y ago

> "In the UK, most people getting into hospitals now with severe Covid are young and unvaccinated" The stats I can find are here - https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-hospital-activity https://www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas... AFAICT they don't give a lot to work with, thought the 18-54 crowd do now make a large proportion of hospital intake than earlier in the pandemic. The ONS - https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/articles/coronaviruscovid19/latestinsights https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthan... Report that "The proportion of deaths involving COVID-19 has been highest in those aged 75 years and over throughout the pandemic, however, this proportion has been lower since the start of January 2021. This likely reflects the impact of vaccinations." And we have the independent reporting that hospitalisations are now mostly among the under-45 and unvaccinated groups, and that as a result there is less pressure on the intensive wards - https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/covid-hospital-admissions-care-home-b1854083.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/covid-hospital-adm... So I would say the claim that "most people getting into hospitals now with severe Covid are young and unvaccinated" is probably overstated.