3 ms·

That would count if our question was “What are the likely side effects after one year?” But it’s not. The question is long term side effects. Unless you have a

That would count if our question was “What are the likely side effects after one year?” But it’s not. The question is long term side effects. Unless you have a time machine, I’m gonna say we can’t know those for quite a bit - unlike other vaccines which have decades of testing data.

ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
I haven't seen any reason to believe that longER-term side effects will differ significantly from the small amount of side effects we've already seen in the long period of time since the first vaccinations obviously we can't just wait forever with the worry that in year forever+1 some random side effect completely different from what the evidence currently indicates will manifest itself
- disneygibson 5y ago
  So you think that all side effects of substances are either noticeable in the first year or not at all? Have you heard of DDT?
  - ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
    I must have missed the study that showed the long-term side effects of the vaccine were determined by the long-term side effects of DDT if you would be so kind as to link it here...
    - disneygibson 5y ago
      This really isn’t hard to understand. In the past, some substances were thought to be safe, but turned out not to be. The “it’s safe” period of time was longer than a year. Ergo it is reasonable to assume that we can’t know all of the side effects of current novel vaccines. It doesn’t mean there will be any, but it doesn’t mean there won’t be either. That’s how science works.
      - ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
        actually, science and logic do not work in the manner of "in the past, X did Z, therefore Y will also do Z, QED" see, in that example, you made up a rule that anything you want will cause Z, but there's no actual scientific basis for the rule you have to actually prove Y will do Z, you can't just claim something else did Z, therefore anything can do Z
        disneygibson 5y ago
        I’m not proving anything. Simply saying that we lack data and if we go by past examples, we have a reason to be cautious. Again, you lack a basic understanding of the scientific method.
        ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
        you are correct, you are not proving anything to wit, you have not proven there is a good reason to worry about widespread significant long-term side effects of the COVID vaccines -- specifically, DDT is not a past example of a vaccine resembling any of the COVID vaccines the lack of evidence pointing to widespread, significant, long-term side-effects so far, however, is evidence enough for us to lean in that direction I do, however, support your right to avoid the vaccine, as well as your right to avoid any place or activity that requires those present to have it, so at least there's that
slenk 5y ago
Why is this vaccine likely to have long term side effects after a year+ when others don't? How long is long enough?
- disneygibson 5y ago
  There have been many negative side effects of other vaccines which were discovered after years of study. This is basic medical knowledge. Not a conspiracy.
  - ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
    "many negative side effects of other vaccines" is a profoundly unscientific statement, particularly when you're trying to prove the likelihood of a completely different vaccine having side effects for other reasons if I could just offer a piece of friendly advice, for anyone trying to convince the majority that the COVID-19 vaccines show a strong likelihood of negative side effects long-term: try to show the actual frequency of each long-term side effect you mention, as a proportion of # of those vaccines administered, and explain the physical mechanism by which each of those side effects will manifest in recipients of the COVID-19 vaccines
    - disneygibson 5y ago
      No, it’s basic medical knowledge. You seem to have very little understanding of how medicine works.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
        could you post those frequencies, please? if you're trying to convince the vast majority of Americans who aren't opposed to vaccine mandates, that they should change their mind, you should probably be able to show that significant side effects occur a significant % of the time in another vaccine, then explain how that side effect modality would transfer to this vaccine (IE what they have in common which indicates the COVID vaccine will probably have the same long-term side effects) oh, also, you never answered OP's question: how long do you think is enough?

ImPostingOnHN 5y ago

I haven't seen any reason to believe that longER-term side effects will differ significantly from the small amount of side effects we've already seen in the long period of time since the first vaccinations obviously we can't just wait forever with the worry that in year forever+1 some random side effect completely different from what the evidence currently indicates will manifest itself

disneygibson 5y ago
So you think that all side effects of substances are either noticeable in the first year or not at all? Have you heard of DDT?
- ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
  I must have missed the study that showed the long-term side effects of the vaccine were determined by the long-term side effects of DDT if you would be so kind as to link it here...
  - disneygibson 5y ago
    This really isn’t hard to understand. In the past, some substances were thought to be safe, but turned out not to be. The “it’s safe” period of time was longer than a year. Ergo it is reasonable to assume that we can’t know all of the side effects of current novel vaccines. It doesn’t mean there will be any, but it doesn’t mean there won’t be either. That’s how science works.
    - ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
      actually, science and logic do not work in the manner of "in the past, X did Z, therefore Y will also do Z, QED" see, in that example, you made up a rule that anything you want will cause Z, but there's no actual scientific basis for the rule you have to actually prove Y will do Z, you can't just claim something else did Z, therefore anything can do Z
      - disneygibson 5y ago
        I’m not proving anything. Simply saying that we lack data and if we go by past examples, we have a reason to be cautious. Again, you lack a basic understanding of the scientific method.
        ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
        you are correct, you are not proving anything to wit, you have not proven there is a good reason to worry about widespread significant long-term side effects of the COVID vaccines -- specifically, DDT is not a past example of a vaccine resembling any of the COVID vaccines the lack of evidence pointing to widespread, significant, long-term side-effects so far, however, is evidence enough for us to lean in that direction I do, however, support your right to avoid the vaccine, as well as your right to avoid any place or activity that requires those present to have it, so at least there's that

slenk 5y ago

Why is this vaccine likely to have long term side effects after a year+ when others don't? How long is long enough?

disneygibson 5y ago
There have been many negative side effects of other vaccines which were discovered after years of study. This is basic medical knowledge. Not a conspiracy.
- ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
  "many negative side effects of other vaccines" is a profoundly unscientific statement, particularly when you're trying to prove the likelihood of a completely different vaccine having side effects for other reasons if I could just offer a piece of friendly advice, for anyone trying to convince the majority that the COVID-19 vaccines show a strong likelihood of negative side effects long-term: try to show the actual frequency of each long-term side effect you mention, as a proportion of # of those vaccines administered, and explain the physical mechanism by which each of those side effects will manifest in recipients of the COVID-19 vaccines
  - disneygibson 5y ago
    No, it’s basic medical knowledge. You seem to have very little understanding of how medicine works.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
      could you post those frequencies, please? if you're trying to convince the vast majority of Americans who aren't opposed to vaccine mandates, that they should change their mind, you should probably be able to show that significant side effects occur a significant % of the time in another vaccine, then explain how that side effect modality would transfer to this vaccine (IE what they have in common which indicates the COVID vaccine will probably have the same long-term side effects) oh, also, you never answered OP's question: how long do you think is enough?