3 ms·

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 op

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
    > Anyway they downplay it in the leaflet but its there The bullshit you have to sign before receiving the vaccine here is not downplaying anything here at least, but not that it stops people from signing it; they might as well just sign their rights to health care away altogether. We literally have to sign our rights away for compensation in case something happens to us due to the vaccine, ANY time in the future. If you have complications from the vaccine, you cannot sue anyone, and you cannot get compensation from anyone. They tell you straight that it is a new vaccine and we have no information with regarding to its safety, especially long-term, and that you are receiving the vaccine at your own risk, and that you are on your own if something bad happens. How sketchy is that? More than 5.6 million people signed it. If needed, I will dig it up and translate the entire thing, but I think it is obvious what it is about. :)
  - CogitoCogito 5y ago
    > 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. I'm not supposing it's safe in the long term. I'm supposing _nothing_ about the long term because we don't have that information. Maybe it is not safe in the long term. We'll find out some day I guess. Maybe it will lead to unexpected health _benefits_ in the long term? Who knows? So why would you weigh the potential dangers over any other potential advantages of taking it? Anyway here are two serious questions to you: 1. Specifically how long is long enough before you'd consider the vaccine safe (compared of course to all the problems that can be caused by not taking the vaccine). 2. Do you feel ashamed allowing your fellow citizens to take on this potential risk and you forgoing when it helps end the pandemic for you and them? (Feel free to ignore this question if you are vaccinated, but are just being argumentative.)
    - codeflow2202 5y ago
      1. Normal vaccines take 5 to 10 years to be approved. Covid mrna therapies have been rushed and they aren't even experimenting it correctly. The only data they are taking is what goes in the VAERS database, but if you even try to mention those numbers you get the usual answer that those numbers are meaningless. So tell me: if someone wants to know what the benefit/risk ratio of the therapy is, where should the numbers be found? 2. You cannot force people into taking experimental therapies even if you tricked half of the population into taking them.

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
  > Anyway they downplay it in the leaflet but its there The bullshit you have to sign before receiving the vaccine here is not downplaying anything here at least, but not that it stops people from signing it; they might as well just sign their rights to health care away altogether. We literally have to sign our rights away for compensation in case something happens to us due to the vaccine, ANY time in the future. If you have complications from the vaccine, you cannot sue anyone, and you cannot get compensation from anyone. They tell you straight that it is a new vaccine and we have no information with regarding to its safety, especially long-term, and that you are receiving the vaccine at your own risk, and that you are on your own if something bad happens. How sketchy is that? More than 5.6 million people signed it. If needed, I will dig it up and translate the entire thing, but I think it is obvious what it is about. :)
- CogitoCogito 5y ago
  > 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. I'm not supposing it's safe in the long term. I'm supposing _nothing_ about the long term because we don't have that information. Maybe it is not safe in the long term. We'll find out some day I guess. Maybe it will lead to unexpected health _benefits_ in the long term? Who knows? So why would you weigh the potential dangers over any other potential advantages of taking it? Anyway here are two serious questions to you: 1. Specifically how long is long enough before you'd consider the vaccine safe (compared of course to all the problems that can be caused by not taking the vaccine). 2. Do you feel ashamed allowing your fellow citizens to take on this potential risk and you forgoing when it helps end the pandemic for you and them? (Feel free to ignore this question if you are vaccinated, but are just being argumentative.)
  - codeflow2202 5y ago
    1. Normal vaccines take 5 to 10 years to be approved. Covid mrna therapies have been rushed and they aren't even experimenting it correctly. The only data they are taking is what goes in the VAERS database, but if you even try to mention those numbers you get the usual answer that those numbers are meaningless. So tell me: if someone wants to know what the benefit/risk ratio of the therapy is, where should the numbers be found? 2. You cannot force people into taking experimental therapies even if you tricked half of the population into taking them.