4 ms·

> Personally I have been exposed to COVID-19 at the hospital on a regular basis, and I have been quarantined before with people who were positive. It does not s

> Personally I have been exposed to COVID-19 at the hospital on a regular basis, and I have been quarantined before with people who were positive. It does not seem to pose such a risk that you are talking about to me. I have an immunologic autoimmune disorder, too. This is my personal experience and case. There's nothing scientific about any of that. You could have some natural immunity. You could also simply have been lucky. You might never be infected. You might also someday die from the disease. This is entirely anecdotal and basically useless information. > Plus I do not know if I was talking against getting vaccinated, I merely said that more side-effects may come to light, which I mention because many people seem to have excluded it from the list of possibilities. People shouldn't exclude that from the list of possibilities. But people _should not_ take it into account with their decision-making. If they are going to give weight to the future possibility of negative side-effects coming to light, they should also give weight to the future possibility that positive side-effects may come to light. Said simply, there's nothing very useful in the statement "we might know more in the future than now".

johnisgood 5y ago
> There's nothing scientific about any of that. You could have some natural immunity. You could also simply have been lucky. You might never be infected. You might also someday die from the disease. This is entirely anecdotal and basically useless information. Not for me though it is not, and that is the only reason I mentioned it, that there are such occurrences, too. Whether or not you believe me, well, that is up to you, and you can do whatever you want with it. :) I did add "personal experience", so yes, of course, it is anecdotal. > there's nothing very useful in the statement "we might know more in the future than now" OK, time will tell regardless.
- CogitoCogito 5y ago
  > Not for me though it is not, and that is the only reason I mentioned it, that there are such occurrences, too. Whether or not you believe me, well, that is up to you, and you can do whatever you want with it. :) I never said I don't believe you. I just said there was nothing scientific in your reasoning. It's completely obvious that not all people get covid that are exposed to people. I've also been exposed to covid and not been infected. But it's just anecdotal information. I could get covid and die just the same. Drawing any conclusions off of these individual occurrence is not very intelligent.
  - johnisgood 5y ago
    Why I was mentioning that is because I personally would not like to get the vaccine because: I am in my twenties, I have an immunological autoimmune disorder (and I recently developed allergies, to my luck), and I have not caught COVID-19 despite constant exposure to it. Does it sound a good enough reason for not getting vaccinated?
    - CogitoCogito 5y ago
      I don't think you should take into account the fact that you haven't gotten it despite being exposed. But yeah if you have a disorder that increases the likelihood for complications of course you should take that into account. (I also presume you've spoken to doctors about this.) But none of that has to do with the issue that something may happen in the future. You are making your choices with the information you have _now_.
      - johnisgood 5y ago
        I suppose it is possible that some people may be more immune to COVID-19 than others. I am curious about this. I hope there will be research on this, but that is just for my curiosity. By the way, something related: I cannot get a job because I am not vaccinated. No one cares here about people who cannot get vaccinated for health reasons. It is tough. For Americans: https://www.axios.com/republicans-coronavirus-vaccines-discrimination-law-states-533503fb-fa83-43d0-bd51-2d614483d241.html https://www.axios.com/republicans-coronavirus-vaccines-discr... > Republicans push to ban "discrimination" against unvaccinated people I am sure many people are against it, but if we push people to get the vaccine because of society and its people, then surely they should care about those who cannot get vaccinated for health reasons. They are currently unable to get a job here.
        CogitoCogito 5y ago
        I mean it basically _has_ to be true. We all have different bodies. We are have different levels of health. We are of different ages. I find the question highly interesting as well and it might very well be that you or I never will get the disease regardless of vaccination. In fact I hope that that's the case for both of us. But it doesn't change the fact that it isn't reasonable to assume it's true just by our experiences. There are probably an enormous number of people just like us that one day get covid after a year of presumed exposures.
codeflow2202 5y ago
This is ridiculous. The body as anything in nature is always struggling to stay in balance. To maintain this balance it had millions of years of evolution to optimize strategies that counteract external and internals effects. But in general the chances are much higher for a neutral/bad result in case of an external intervention for which our body was never put in contact before (not even in past generations as in the case of lipid nano particles). In general people hates to accept that not everyone reasons in the same way. Many societies aren't as trustworthy as you are to whatever decision is taken by their elites (being either for historical or cultural reasons). You need to accept that many would consider something in front of them poisonous until the contrary is proven (as opposed to more trustworthy people who sees everything safe until proven poisonous).
- CogitoCogito 5y ago
  I honestly don't understand your post. > But in general the chances are much higher for a neutral/bad result in case of an external intervention for which our body was never put in contact before (not even in past generations as in the case of lipid nano particles). What is this even saying? The virus is external to the body. The vaccines are external to the body as well. Study after study shows that the side-effects of the vaccine are lower than the issues caused by the disease. > In general people hates to accept that not everyone reasons in the same way. Many societies aren't as trustworthy as you are to whatever decision is taken by their elites (being either for historical or cultural reasons). You need to accept that many would consider something in front of them poisonous until the contrary is proven (as opposed to more trustworthy people who sees everything safe until proven poisonous). It's been proven non-poisonous hundreds of millions of times already. But yeah if your point is that there are many people who for cultural/societal/ignorance/etc. reasons act irrationally, the of course that's true. I just don't understand why you're pointing it out.
  - codeflow2202 5y ago
    > What is this even saying? The virus is external to the body. The vaccines are external to the body as well. Study after study shows that the side-effects of the vaccine are lower than the issues caused by the disease. Saying that the virus is dangerous doesn't make the vaccine safe in the long term. You might be right, but you have no basis to suppose it's safe in the long run. You are just betting it because tv told you so. > It's been proven non-poisonous hundreds of millions of times already. You are talking about possible future unknown effects. No it hasn't been proven at all. They aren't even looking for possible long term damage. Anyway they downplay it in the leaflet but its there: "The COVID-19 vaccine has gone through the same clinical trials and safety checks as all other licensed vaccines, however the vaccine is new and long-term side effect information is limited." https://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/newsfeatures/covid19-updates/covid-19-vaccine-materials/covid-19-vaccine-information-leaflet-after-18-jan.pdf https://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/newsfeatures/covid19-up...

johnisgood 5y ago

> There's nothing scientific about any of that. You could have some natural immunity. You could also simply have been lucky. You might never be infected. You might also someday die from the disease. This is entirely anecdotal and basically useless information. Not for me though it is not, and that is the only reason I mentioned it, that there are such occurrences, too. Whether or not you believe me, well, that is up to you, and you can do whatever you want with it. :) I did add "personal experience", so yes, of course, it is anecdotal. > there's nothing very useful in the statement "we might know more in the future than now" OK, time will tell regardless.

CogitoCogito 5y ago
> Not for me though it is not, and that is the only reason I mentioned it, that there are such occurrences, too. Whether or not you believe me, well, that is up to you, and you can do whatever you want with it. :) I never said I don't believe you. I just said there was nothing scientific in your reasoning. It's completely obvious that not all people get covid that are exposed to people. I've also been exposed to covid and not been infected. But it's just anecdotal information. I could get covid and die just the same. Drawing any conclusions off of these individual occurrence is not very intelligent.
- johnisgood 5y ago
  Why I was mentioning that is because I personally would not like to get the vaccine because: I am in my twenties, I have an immunological autoimmune disorder (and I recently developed allergies, to my luck), and I have not caught COVID-19 despite constant exposure to it. Does it sound a good enough reason for not getting vaccinated?
  - CogitoCogito 5y ago
    I don't think you should take into account the fact that you haven't gotten it despite being exposed. But yeah if you have a disorder that increases the likelihood for complications of course you should take that into account. (I also presume you've spoken to doctors about this.) But none of that has to do with the issue that something may happen in the future. You are making your choices with the information you have _now_.
    - johnisgood 5y ago
      I suppose it is possible that some people may be more immune to COVID-19 than others. I am curious about this. I hope there will be research on this, but that is just for my curiosity. By the way, something related: I cannot get a job because I am not vaccinated. No one cares here about people who cannot get vaccinated for health reasons. It is tough. For Americans: https://www.axios.com/republicans-coronavirus-vaccines-discrimination-law-states-533503fb-fa83-43d0-bd51-2d614483d241.html https://www.axios.com/republicans-coronavirus-vaccines-discr... > Republicans push to ban "discrimination" against unvaccinated people I am sure many people are against it, but if we push people to get the vaccine because of society and its people, then surely they should care about those who cannot get vaccinated for health reasons. They are currently unable to get a job here.
      - CogitoCogito 5y ago
        I mean it basically _has_ to be true. We all have different bodies. We are have different levels of health. We are of different ages. I find the question highly interesting as well and it might very well be that you or I never will get the disease regardless of vaccination. In fact I hope that that's the case for both of us. But it doesn't change the fact that it isn't reasonable to assume it's true just by our experiences. There are probably an enormous number of people just like us that one day get covid after a year of presumed exposures.

codeflow2202 5y ago

This is ridiculous. The body as anything in nature is always struggling to stay in balance. To maintain this balance it had millions of years of evolution to optimize strategies that counteract external and internals effects. But in general the chances are much higher for a neutral/bad result in case of an external intervention for which our body was never put in contact before (not even in past generations as in the case of lipid nano particles). In general people hates to accept that not everyone reasons in the same way. Many societies aren't as trustworthy as you are to whatever decision is taken by their elites (being either for historical or cultural reasons). You need to accept that many would consider something in front of them poisonous until the contrary is proven (as opposed to more trustworthy people who sees everything safe until proven poisonous).

CogitoCogito 5y ago
I honestly don't understand your post. > But in general the chances are much higher for a neutral/bad result in case of an external intervention for which our body was never put in contact before (not even in past generations as in the case of lipid nano particles). What is this even saying? The virus is external to the body. The vaccines are external to the body as well. Study after study shows that the side-effects of the vaccine are lower than the issues caused by the disease. > In general people hates to accept that not everyone reasons in the same way. Many societies aren't as trustworthy as you are to whatever decision is taken by their elites (being either for historical or cultural reasons). You need to accept that many would consider something in front of them poisonous until the contrary is proven (as opposed to more trustworthy people who sees everything safe until proven poisonous). It's been proven non-poisonous hundreds of millions of times already. But yeah if your point is that there are many people who for cultural/societal/ignorance/etc. reasons act irrationally, the of course that's true. I just don't understand why you're pointing it out.
- codeflow2202 5y ago
  > What is this even saying? The virus is external to the body. The vaccines are external to the body as well. Study after study shows that the side-effects of the vaccine are lower than the issues caused by the disease. Saying that the virus is dangerous doesn't make the vaccine safe in the long term. You might be right, but you have no basis to suppose it's safe in the long run. You are just betting it because tv told you so. > It's been proven non-poisonous hundreds of millions of times already. You are talking about possible future unknown effects. No it hasn't been proven at all. They aren't even looking for possible long term damage. Anyway they downplay it in the leaflet but its there: "The COVID-19 vaccine has gone through the same clinical trials and safety checks as all other licensed vaccines, however the vaccine is new and long-term side effect information is limited." https://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/newsfeatures/covid19-updates/covid-19-vaccine-materials/covid-19-vaccine-information-leaflet-after-18-jan.pdf https://www.hse.ie/eng/services/news/newsfeatures/covid19-up...