3 ms·

Re 2. Which programs? Not even polio vaccinations worked to eradicate the virus completely, and these came the closest. Much less BCG or variola (pox). Viruse

Re 2. Which programs? Not even polio vaccinations worked to eradicate the virus completely, and these came the closest. Much less BCG or variola (pox). Viruses like flu and coronaviruses, nigh impossible to eradicate. 1 and 3, sure. And mRNA vaccine is not particularly more dangerous than any other type. The cost-benefit is strongly on the side of vaccination there.

native_samples 5y ago
Why do you think smallpox wasn't eliminated by vaccines? mRNA vaccine is not particularly more dangerous than any other type I don't understand how that is consistent with the data from the various vaccine surveillance systems which show clearly that it's drastically more dangerous. It's also inconsistent with anecdotes that I've been hearing from people around me, of whom a disturbingly large number say that the vaccines made them very sick (i.e. they describe symptoms similar to that of COVID itself).
- effie 5y ago
  Indeed. It is also inconsistent with the fact that COVID vaccines are still in clinical trials, with no data regarding long-term (10 years) effects.
- Grimm1 5y ago
  Of course the vaccine made them feel sick, that's how immune responses tend to, much of the time, work. I felt like shit for about 12 hours, with fever and muscle soreness all over my body. Then it abated, as expected, and I went about my life knowing in two weeks I'd be at peak protection and could start participating in society again with a flipped risk profile. I read a lot of your other comments so far and I had a suspicion, but this lone comment of yours confirmed it for me. You have some basic internal fear of the vaccine so you've done a bunch of rationalizing to make it seem worse and confirm your own bias. I've looked at the VAERS data this morning for the US and you have a much higher chance of getting hit by a car and dying, or as is the very prescient case, getting COVID and having more adverse affects from that than an adverse vaccination, but I'm not going to convince you of anything because of that basic fear you have.
  - native_samples 5y ago
    No, you're mis-understanding cause and effect. I've had vaccines before and have no fear of vaccines in general. This round in particular does concern me, but that concern arose due to the data and anecdotes that I already mentioned. Concern follows reason for concern. You're asserting it's the other way around, which is: a. Not very charitable. b. Not the simplest possible explanation. Occam would not approve.
vampirical 5y ago
native_samples You've been misinformed. We have pre launch studies with 40k+ participants showing no meaningful risk. And post launch when there were exceedingly rare ("This adverse event is rare, occurring at a rate of about 7 per 1 million vaccinated women between 18 and 49 years old. For women 50 years and older and men of all ages, this adverse event is even more rare.") and not unexpected clotting issues vaccine administration was paused so the issue could be analyzed more thoroughly and quantified specifying to defeat this kind of FUD. "As to safety The Pfizer trial reported serious adverse reactions in 0.6% of vaccine recipients and 0.5% of placebo recipients." https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-phase-3-results-for-the-pfizer-biontech-bnt162b2-mrna-covid-19-vaccine/ https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-phase-... https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/safety-of-vaccines.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/sa... https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer/reactogenicity.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer...
- native_samples 5y ago
  I know about the trials. I'm sure everyone does. Unfortunately, there is evidence that trials under-state risks. Evidence for this is: 1. Safety notices for the vaccines have been edited post launch to start talking about risks of heart inflammation and other problems, which were not detected by the trials but are now common enough to justify people being warned about them. 2. Drug trials appear to regularly understate the scale of side effects and nobody can figure out why: https://sebastianrushworth.com/2021/07/19/do-drug-trials-underestimate-side-effects/ https://sebastianrushworth.com/2021/07/19/do-drug-trials-und... Additionally, the trials never formally completed, cannot now complete because the control groups have been vaccinated, and some of them excluded whole groups of people e.g. pregnant women, children and in some cases the elderly! This leads to an absurd situation in which the US CDC is saying that the vaccine is safe for pregnant women simultaneous with Moderna starting trials in pregnant women (who were previously excluded). And finally, putting all those problems to one side, the issue is actually relative risks. Even if the risk of a vaccine is low, even if similar to or higher than the risks of the thing it's trying to vaccinate you against, it may not make sense to take it. That is just basic cost/benefit analysis.

native_samples 5y ago

Why do you think smallpox wasn't eliminated by vaccines? mRNA vaccine is not particularly more dangerous than any other type I don't understand how that is consistent with the data from the various vaccine surveillance systems which show clearly that it's drastically more dangerous. It's also inconsistent with anecdotes that I've been hearing from people around me, of whom a disturbingly large number say that the vaccines made them very sick (i.e. they describe symptoms similar to that of COVID itself).

effie 5y ago
Indeed. It is also inconsistent with the fact that COVID vaccines are still in clinical trials, with no data regarding long-term (10 years) effects.
Grimm1 5y ago
Of course the vaccine made them feel sick, that's how immune responses tend to, much of the time, work. I felt like shit for about 12 hours, with fever and muscle soreness all over my body. Then it abated, as expected, and I went about my life knowing in two weeks I'd be at peak protection and could start participating in society again with a flipped risk profile. I read a lot of your other comments so far and I had a suspicion, but this lone comment of yours confirmed it for me. You have some basic internal fear of the vaccine so you've done a bunch of rationalizing to make it seem worse and confirm your own bias. I've looked at the VAERS data this morning for the US and you have a much higher chance of getting hit by a car and dying, or as is the very prescient case, getting COVID and having more adverse affects from that than an adverse vaccination, but I'm not going to convince you of anything because of that basic fear you have.
- native_samples 5y ago
  No, you're mis-understanding cause and effect. I've had vaccines before and have no fear of vaccines in general. This round in particular does concern me, but that concern arose due to the data and anecdotes that I already mentioned. Concern follows reason for concern. You're asserting it's the other way around, which is: a. Not very charitable. b. Not the simplest possible explanation. Occam would not approve.

vampirical 5y ago

native_samples You've been misinformed. We have pre launch studies with 40k+ participants showing no meaningful risk. And post launch when there were exceedingly rare ("This adverse event is rare, occurring at a rate of about 7 per 1 million vaccinated women between 18 and 49 years old. For women 50 years and older and men of all ages, this adverse event is even more rare.") and not unexpected clotting issues vaccine administration was paused so the issue could be analyzed more thoroughly and quantified specifying to defeat this kind of FUD. "As to safety The Pfizer trial reported serious adverse reactions in 0.6% of vaccine recipients and 0.5% of placebo recipients." https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-phase-3-results-for-the-pfizer-biontech-bnt162b2-mrna-covid-19-vaccine/ https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-phase-... https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/safety-of-vaccines.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/sa... https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer/reactogenicity.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer...

native_samples 5y ago
I know about the trials. I'm sure everyone does. Unfortunately, there is evidence that trials under-state risks. Evidence for this is: 1. Safety notices for the vaccines have been edited post launch to start talking about risks of heart inflammation and other problems, which were not detected by the trials but are now common enough to justify people being warned about them. 2. Drug trials appear to regularly understate the scale of side effects and nobody can figure out why: https://sebastianrushworth.com/2021/07/19/do-drug-trials-underestimate-side-effects/ https://sebastianrushworth.com/2021/07/19/do-drug-trials-und... Additionally, the trials never formally completed, cannot now complete because the control groups have been vaccinated, and some of them excluded whole groups of people e.g. pregnant women, children and in some cases the elderly! This leads to an absurd situation in which the US CDC is saying that the vaccine is safe for pregnant women simultaneous with Moderna starting trials in pregnant women (who were previously excluded). And finally, putting all those problems to one side, the issue is actually relative risks. Even if the risk of a vaccine is low, even if similar to or higher than the risks of the thing it's trying to vaccinate you against, it may not make sense to take it. That is just basic cost/benefit analysis.