2 ms·

Thank you, at least I got a single useful reply :)

sethammons 5y ago
So I ran that calculator on myself, and apparently I have a 1/88k (0.002%) chance of developing long covid and a smaller chance of dying. The argument you are facing is "what about the side effects?" - so I looked up an article on side effects that I thought was very fair (note, I'm not an expert, I'm not even a novice): https://www.uab.edu/news/health/item/12143-three-things-to-know-about-the-long-term-side-effects-of-covid-vaccines https://www.uab.edu/news/health/item/12143-three-things-to-k... In it, it talks about historic vaccine fails (mostly due to contamination) and concludes that the vaccine should be safe, even considering long term effects. But then you read something like this: https://www.visiontimes.com/2021/04/27/first-nations-vaccine-adverse-reactions-charles-hoffe.html https://www.visiontimes.com/2021/04/27/first-nations-vaccine... And it talks about a doctor's experience trying to understand side effects he is witnessing with his patients and he can't get _anyone_ to engage and gets lumped in as promoting vaccine hesitancy. His data is rejected. I'm not sure what sources of data your brother accesses (if any), but I have family sending me videos like the following that bring up very good points against the vaccine, and this is from a Ph.D. in cellular and molecular biology: https://theplantstrongclub.org/2021/08/26/dr-christina-parks-testimony-for-michigan-house-bill-4471-hb4471-on-8-19-21/ https://theplantstrongclub.org/2021/08/26/dr-christina-parks... With stories of data being refused that goes against the grain and the most convincing message from the government that I see is "trust us," I can see why someone with a very small chance of being harmed by COVID would want to wait for more data to surface. Note, I would like to be corrected for anything that is incorrectly presented in the above links. I'm not anti-vax. I would like to understand if the second two links are non-credible.

So I ran that calculator on myself, and apparently I have a 1/88k (0.002%) chance of developing long covid and a smaller chance of dying. The argument you are facing is "what about the side effects?" - so I looked up an article on side effects that I thought was very fair (note, I'm not an expert, I'm not even a novice): https://www.uab.edu/news/health/item/12143-three-things-to-know-about-the-long-term-side-effects-of-covid-vaccines https://www.uab.edu/news/health/item/12143-three-things-to-k... In it, it talks about historic vaccine fails (mostly due to contamination) and concludes that the vaccine should be safe, even considering long term effects. But then you read something like this: https://www.visiontimes.com/2021/04/27/first-nations-vaccine-adverse-reactions-charles-hoffe.html https://www.visiontimes.com/2021/04/27/first-nations-vaccine... And it talks about a doctor's experience trying to understand side effects he is witnessing with his patients and he can't get _anyone_ to engage and gets lumped in as promoting vaccine hesitancy. His data is rejected. I'm not sure what sources of data your brother accesses (if any), but I have family sending me videos like the following that bring up very good points against the vaccine, and this is from a Ph.D. in cellular and molecular biology: https://theplantstrongclub.org/2021/08/26/dr-christina-parks-testimony-for-michigan-house-bill-4471-hb4471-on-8-19-21/ https://theplantstrongclub.org/2021/08/26/dr-christina-parks... With stories of data being refused that goes against the grain and the most convincing message from the government that I see is "trust us," I can see why someone with a very small chance of being harmed by COVID would want to wait for more data to surface. Note, I would like to be corrected for anything that is incorrectly presented in the above links. I'm not anti-vax. I would like to understand if the second two links are non-credible.