5 ms·

> As far as "belief" goes, you're the one on the side of belief here. No. We don't understand why COVID hits some people harder than others. We don't understa

by wrl 5y ago

> As far as "belief" goes, you're the one on the side of belief here. No. We don't understand why COVID hits some people harder than others. We don't understand why some people end up with "long COVID" sequelae and some don't. I don't particularly want to roll those dice from immunological naivety. The vaccines were free. The biggest risk I would have faced was myocarditis, and the risk even for that is higher from a COVID infection than from the mRNA vaccines. Furthermore, getting vaccinated means that we all get back to a place where COVID is less of a big deal societally. While the data does show that vaccinated individuals can transmit Delta, it shows that they do so for a shorter period of time, and anything we can shave off of R0 is a good thing. Perfect, enemy of good, etc. Getting vaccinated was close to no skin off my back. I had a sore arm for a few days. The payoff is that I reduce the (admittedly small) risk I did have, and I'm part of the herd boxing COVID in. What's the downside?

oliv__ 5y ago
> What's the downside? We don't know what we don't know. That's the downside. You've just taken an experimental drug which has yet to be approved by the FDA, and was designed using novel technology we haven't broadly tested on humans. What's more, the companies providing the shots cannot be held liable for these vaccines. Who's to say we don't discover issues with mRNA delivery 5 years from now? That risk seems much higher to me than the risk of long COVID for individuals such as yourself (and me).
- wrl 5y ago
  You realise that COVID, like other viruses, replicates by injecting mRNA into cells, yes? That mRNA does a lot more than print some spike proteins. Hell, we don't understand what most of the COVID accessory proteins do. Again, I stand by what I said – "foolhardy". > We don't know what we don't know. So you think we should all try our luck with live COVID and just hope for the best? Demonstrated long-term health problems vs potential ones? I fully acknowledge that there could be some side effect from the vaccines down the line that I'm now on the hook for. However, people who have been working in this field for their entire careers say it's unlikely, and that's the best information we have right now. I trust the experts who have trusted their own expertise enough to get their own shots. > That risk seems much higher to me than the risk of long COVID for individuals such as yourself (and me). It isn't. There's not really a nicer way to phrase it. Your sources are questionable, you should fact check them better, you should do your own research. The papers are free to read, there's no excuse. You're Dunning-Kruger-ing this. Get your shit together.
  - oliv__ 5y ago
    > So you think we should all try our luck with live COVID and just hope for the best? Not all: people at risk (older people, people with auto-immune disease and people with existing conditions), just not healthy, active, young people. > Demonstrated long-term health problems vs potential ones? The demonstrated effects you are referring to only affect a minuscule portion of people who get COVID. So it's not exactly demonstrated vs potential. One could also point to the minority of vaccinated people who got ill or died and call that demonstrated. > It isn't. There's not really a nicer way to phrase it. Your sources are questionable, you should fact check them better, you should do your own research. The papers are free to read, there's no excuse. You're Dunning-Kruger-ing this. Get your shit together. If anything, you're the one who's overly confident of their knowledge here. Why didn't you quote some percentages on the risk of getting long COVID? Right, because there are none. Because we don't know what we don't know, just as much as on your side of the argument as on mine. The only difference is: you think what you say is the gospel.
    - loopz 5y ago
      Children, healthy people, athletes and such have been hit hard as well, some of every group have died. It's not enough to be healthy, though much better probability. Some get hit with autoimmune disorder / long covid. Immune system can become "too good" too.
    - the_dune_13 5y ago
      > Just not healthy, active, young people. Not true. https://ctmirror.org/2021/08/10/covid-hospitalizations-skew-younger-as-delta-variant-spreads-in-ct/ https://ctmirror.org/2021/08/10/covid-hospitalizations-skew-... > minuscule portion of people who get COVID Not true. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01511-z https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01511-z > you're the one who's overly confident of their knowledge here. Ironic. > some percentages on the risk of getting long COVID? Linked above. Based on 20k patients in the UK >because there are none They are. >Because we don't know what we don't know I'm pretty sure we know enough to know who is hospitalized. >you think what you say is the gospel Ironic^2
  - 5y ago
- ashildr 5y ago
  Covid19 already has well-known short- and mid-term downsides for >> 1% of grown-ups infected. The hard “downsides“ are so dangerous that we had trouble to properly treat the sick. BNT/Pfizer has so little short- and mid-term downsides that it is difficult to properly spot them statistically, even after about a half billion vaccinations. Both may have long-term downsides, but: all vaccinations we know didn‘t have any long term downsides. The problems were either visible immediately or they were relatively rare so that they were only detected after a significant number of people had been vaccinated. The downsides of Covid-19 are not rare compared to that, for any age. There is no reason to consider the vaccine more frightening than Covid19. On the other hand everything about the virus SARS-CoV-2 and the disease Covid-19 is experimental because this virus has not been tried on humans until now! The infection it causes is way more complex than the immune reaction BNT/Pfizer causes and it definitely would not have passed a phase-1 study. If you are afraid of BNT you should basically panic about Covid-19.
landemva 5y ago
"I'm part of the herd boxing COVID in." The 'rona is in cats and deer, so it will be around for approximately forever. Vaccinated humans still get it and transmit it, though may have less severe symptoms. Will you please explain what you are boxing in?

by wrl 5y ago

oliv__ 5y ago

> What's the downside? We don't know what we don't know. That's the downside. You've just taken an experimental drug which has yet to be approved by the FDA, and was designed using novel technology we haven't broadly tested on humans. What's more, the companies providing the shots cannot be held liable for these vaccines. Who's to say we don't discover issues with mRNA delivery 5 years from now? That risk seems much higher to me than the risk of long COVID for individuals such as yourself (and me).

wrl 5y ago
You realise that COVID, like other viruses, replicates by injecting mRNA into cells, yes? That mRNA does a lot more than print some spike proteins. Hell, we don't understand what most of the COVID accessory proteins do. Again, I stand by what I said – "foolhardy". > We don't know what we don't know. So you think we should all try our luck with live COVID and just hope for the best? Demonstrated long-term health problems vs potential ones? I fully acknowledge that there could be some side effect from the vaccines down the line that I'm now on the hook for. However, people who have been working in this field for their entire careers say it's unlikely, and that's the best information we have right now. I trust the experts who have trusted their own expertise enough to get their own shots. > That risk seems much higher to me than the risk of long COVID for individuals such as yourself (and me). It isn't. There's not really a nicer way to phrase it. Your sources are questionable, you should fact check them better, you should do your own research. The papers are free to read, there's no excuse. You're Dunning-Kruger-ing this. Get your shit together.
- oliv__ 5y ago
  > So you think we should all try our luck with live COVID and just hope for the best? Not all: people at risk (older people, people with auto-immune disease and people with existing conditions), just not healthy, active, young people. > Demonstrated long-term health problems vs potential ones? The demonstrated effects you are referring to only affect a minuscule portion of people who get COVID. So it's not exactly demonstrated vs potential. One could also point to the minority of vaccinated people who got ill or died and call that demonstrated. > It isn't. There's not really a nicer way to phrase it. Your sources are questionable, you should fact check them better, you should do your own research. The papers are free to read, there's no excuse. You're Dunning-Kruger-ing this. Get your shit together. If anything, you're the one who's overly confident of their knowledge here. Why didn't you quote some percentages on the risk of getting long COVID? Right, because there are none. Because we don't know what we don't know, just as much as on your side of the argument as on mine. The only difference is: you think what you say is the gospel.
  - loopz 5y ago
    Children, healthy people, athletes and such have been hit hard as well, some of every group have died. It's not enough to be healthy, though much better probability. Some get hit with autoimmune disorder / long covid. Immune system can become "too good" too.
  - the_dune_13 5y ago
    > Just not healthy, active, young people. Not true. https://ctmirror.org/2021/08/10/covid-hospitalizations-skew-younger-as-delta-variant-spreads-in-ct/ https://ctmirror.org/2021/08/10/covid-hospitalizations-skew-... > minuscule portion of people who get COVID Not true. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01511-z https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01511-z > you're the one who's overly confident of their knowledge here. Ironic. > some percentages on the risk of getting long COVID? Linked above. Based on 20k patients in the UK >because there are none They are. >Because we don't know what we don't know I'm pretty sure we know enough to know who is hospitalized. >you think what you say is the gospel Ironic^2
- 5y ago
ashildr 5y ago
Covid19 already has well-known short- and mid-term downsides for >> 1% of grown-ups infected. The hard “downsides“ are so dangerous that we had trouble to properly treat the sick. BNT/Pfizer has so little short- and mid-term downsides that it is difficult to properly spot them statistically, even after about a half billion vaccinations. Both may have long-term downsides, but: all vaccinations we know didn‘t have any long term downsides. The problems were either visible immediately or they were relatively rare so that they were only detected after a significant number of people had been vaccinated. The downsides of Covid-19 are not rare compared to that, for any age. There is no reason to consider the vaccine more frightening than Covid19. On the other hand everything about the virus SARS-CoV-2 and the disease Covid-19 is experimental because this virus has not been tried on humans until now! The infection it causes is way more complex than the immune reaction BNT/Pfizer causes and it definitely would not have passed a phase-1 study. If you are afraid of BNT you should basically panic about Covid-19.

landemva 5y ago

"I'm part of the herd boxing COVID in." The 'rona is in cats and deer, so it will be around for approximately forever. Vaccinated humans still get it and transmit it, though may have less severe symptoms. Will you please explain what you are boxing in?