5 ms·

>forcing an experimental vaccine on so many I'm not aware of an experimental vaccine being forced on anyone, can you provide an example? Back when all vaccine

>forcing an experimental vaccine on so many I'm not aware of an experimental vaccine being forced on anyone, can you provide an example? Back when all vaccines were operating under an EUA and were experimental, there were zero vaccine mandates. After a vaccine was fully approved and shown to be unequivocally safe and effective, it was then no longer experimental. Mandating vaccines that are shown to be effective and safe is as old as the USA is as a country, and this is no outlier.

bjt2n3904 5y ago
Yeah, it wasn't forced on anyone! Nobody grabbed you and held you down and injected you... You just couldn't travel, go out in public, work at your job, or send your kids to school without it. Totally voluntary.
- margalabargala 5y ago
  What country are you in that disallowed being in public without a vaccine? That didn't happen anywhere in the US that I'm aware of. As for the rest, again, mandating vaccination is something the US has been doing over and over since the year 1777. This is nothing new. The parent claimed that this vaccine mandate was specifically paired with the vaccine still being in an experimental state, which to my knowledge is not the case.
  - rajin444 5y ago
    I don't think "we've always mandated vaccines" is a good argument. Applying the label of "vaccine" to something does not guarantee anything. Especially when the definition was changed in the past year.
    - margalabargala 5y ago
      > I don't think "we've always mandated vaccines" is a good argument. Applying the label of "vaccine" to something does not guarantee anything. That's a fair point, I agree. > Especially when the definition was changed in the past year. Could you elaborate on this part? I went ahead and checked the dictionary definition: > A substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease. Which tracks with what I remember from my molecular bio degree ten years ago.
      - grillvogel 5y ago
        the CDC recently changed their definition of vaccine from (paraphrasing) "something that provides immunity to disease" to "something that provides protection from a disease" https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article254111268.html https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article25411126...
      - rajin444 5y ago
        https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=50886 https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=50886 It wasn’t just here - the CDC and potentially others (I haven’t looked that hard) changed their definitions as well. I’ve got no issue with making terms more correct, but I think one could make the argument that the covid vaccine is more similar to a flu shot than the polio vaccine w.r.t public perception.
        margalabargala 5y ago
        Hmm, interesting. I don't object to the new definition- the old one explicitly calling out cowpox feels outdated as our medical technology has marched on. You make a very good point though, depending on what definition of "vaccine" one used prior to 2020 the mRNA vaccines might not fall under it. And changing the meaning of the word doesn't magically change the properties of the things it refers to.
  - bjt2n3904 5y ago
    Mandates are totally not happening! But if they are, it's not in the US. And if it is in the US, there's legal precedent, and totally valid.
  - jjtheblunt 5y ago
    what vaccine was out in 1777? or do you mean 1776 + 1?
    - margalabargala 5y ago
      George Washington mandated the smallpox vaccine for his troops in 1777: https://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/GW&smallpoxinoculation.html https://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/GW&smallpoxinoculation.html
      - OrvalWintermute 5y ago
        unlike comparison Smallpox had a mortality varying from 33% to 17% according to what I read last [1] Covid has a mortality rate of < 2% in the US mainly driven by the very old, and severe co-mordibities (diabetic+obese, immunocompromised, etc) that are in many cases annually killed off by influenza & pneumonia. That is why all-cause mortality hasn't shifted that much at the overall population level in the US. [1] https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/clinicians/clinical-disease.html https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/clinicians/clinical-disease.htm...
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
        angelzen 5y ago
        Covid mortality is less than 0.1% for ages younger than 55 years old, and less than 0.0005% for ages younger than 14. https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/1446202920106668034 https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/1446202920106668034
        OrvalWintermute 5y ago
        Agree completely That is why Do No Harm is so pertinent to the discussion of vaccinate or do nothing when it comes to the very young.
  - angelzen 5y ago
    North America. We are not yet at federally mandated vaccine or else, but there is a visible trend to require vaccine mandates in more and more settings: work, travel, shopping. So far it is localized in a handful of spots. Absent strong pushback it is possible the trend will spread like fire. Los Angeles: L.A. to require COVID vaccine proof for indoor restaurants, gyms, malls Canada: Traveling in Canada by plane or train? You'll need to show proof of vaccination IBM/RedHat: Big Blue will require employees in the U.S. to get fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by Dec. 8 while Red Hat requires proof of full vaccination by Nov. 29. https://ktla.com/news/local-news/l-a-poised-to-enact-one-of-nations-strictest-covid-vaccine-mandates https://ktla.com/news/local-news/l-a-poised-to-enact-one-of-... https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/airline-news/2021/10/06/canada-require-covid-vaccine-travel-starting-oct-30/6022048001 https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/airline-news/2021/10/0... https://www.crn.com/news/cloud/ibm-red-hat-issue-new-covid-19-vaccine-mandates https://www.crn.com/news/cloud/ibm-red-hat-issue-new-covid-1...
  - angelzen 5y ago
    Sorry for the double reply, it just came to my attention a story from Lithuania. First EU country with a strict implementation of the CovidPass. Extreme ostracization of a population segment is rather new, if we are not to count some notorious pre WW2 instances. https://twitter.com/gluboco/status/1441691330825031680 https://twitter.com/gluboco/status/1441691330825031680
iammisc 5y ago
There is no fully approved vaccine available in the United States. Most working people now need one to work or they face termination as loss of livelihood Stop pretending it's not required. We're not all trust finders.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > There is no fully approved vaccine available in the United States. Comirnaty (Pfizer-BioNTech) is fully approved for those 16 and over, and has been since late August.
  - hhw3h 5y ago
    From my understanding you can’t get the actual distinct Comirnaty version when you go in and get the shot. They only have EUA Pfizer supplies. Technically the same thing but legally different and therefore has a different liability profile.
    - dragonwriter 5y ago
      > Technically the same thing but legally different and therefore has a different liability profile. AFAIK, any different liability profile between an EUA and approved product is moot in the case of COVID vaccines, because they are out of both normal liability regimes and standard vaccine liability regimes and covered by the PREP Act pandemic countermeasures regime which does not make a distinction.
    - iammisc 5y ago
      Yup... A different liability and legal profile.
- margalabargala 5y ago
  You're mistaken. The Pfizer vaccine is fully approved and available in the United States. Source: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-appr... I never claimed it wasn't required, just that what was required was not experimental.
colechristensen 5y ago
Unequivocal? There is literally no doubt as to the “safety”? That is demonstratively not true. On several occasions, several of the vaccines have been halted by several separate health authorities over safety concerns. That is not zero doubt. This story is about exactly that. You have to come up with a definition of “experimental” that suits you, and “emergency authorization” doesn’t sound like very well tested and understood. People don’t understand risks very well nor can they compare risks very well and that has been demonstrated over and over again. Covid vs vaccine risks vary quite a lot depending on what kind of person you are. If you are quite old or have significant health problems, it is pretty easy to demonstrate with high confidence that the vaccine risk is way smaller than the Covid risk (many orders of magnitude). If you are very young (say a healthy teenager) the Covid risk is very low and the uncertainties of the vaccine risks start to compete where it is much harder to have confidence that for a population vaccinating is a better idea. People also can have different appetites for risk and different appetites for the good of the individual vs the good of the many. The problems with vaccination are many people pretend they are perfect or evil who are either knowingly distorting the truth or repeating lies or dogma. Also many people desire authoritarian solutions for everyone to agree with them. What is actually needed are attempts to accurately represent risks and unknowns, and comparisons of those risks and unknowns which update over time as the unknowns get smaller. There also needs to be the ability to acknowledge that a crossover point may exist where on one side one decision may be better than on the other. People though are being used to turn any contentious issue into political dogma and opportunities to signal morality. The situation is not as simple as you and many people make it.
- margalabargala 5y ago
  > You have to come up with a definition of “experimental” that suits you, and “emergency authorization” doesn’t sound like very well tested and understood. I think you may have misread my comment. I agree that "emergency authorization" constitutes "experimental". My point is that there is now a vaccine that is no longer experimental, i.e. is as fully FDA approved as any other, and the mandates in place were put there after that approval. To the rest of your comment, when dealing with a contagious disease which spreads throughout society, I think that the people participating in a society should be able to set prerequisites for participating in that society. One person's rights end where another's begin, and with contagious diseases, a given person's low risk of death does not prevent them from spreading it to someone with much higher risk.
StanislavPetrov 5y ago
>After a vaccine was fully approved and shown to be unequivocally safe and effective Nothing developed 15 months ago can be shown to be "unequivocally safe". No matter what your position on COVID vaccines, its simply a matter of fact that there's no way to know the long term effects of something that hasn't been around for long.
- margalabargala 5y ago
  There's not really a mechanism of action for an mRNA vaccine to have side effects that manifest after 15 months with nothing in between; any side effects would manifest themselves quite quickly. But that's a fair point, "unequivocally" is a strong word. Would you be okay with "safe and unequivocally effective"?
  - shock 5y ago
    > There's not really a mechanism of action for an mRNA vaccine to have side effects that manifest after 15 months with nothing in between; any side effects would manifest themselves quite quickly. Unless, the vaccine causes a "reprogramming" of the immune system, like some viruses do. Have you considered this vector in your analysis?
shock 5y ago
In Europe all the vaccines that are authorized have a "conditional marketing authorization" with a 1 year time limit, and many countries have vaccine mandates. Under EMA, for a vaccine to be "fully approved" it needs to have a standard marketing authorization; none of the COVID vaccines do.
- orra 5y ago
  And? The original bullshit claim was that the vaccines are “experimental”. A Conditional Marketing Authorization is not an Emergency Use Authorization. The European Medicines Agency even explain this.
  - shock 5y ago
    > A Conditional Marketing Authorization is not an Emergency Use Authorization. The European Medicines Agency even explain this. Please provide a citation for this claim. My reading of the EMA page for Conditional Marketing Authorization states: "Its use is also intended for a public health emergency (e.g. a pandemic). _For these medicines, less comprehensive pharmaceutical and non-clinical data may also be accepted_". The fact that less comprehensive farmaceutical data is accepted for CMA leads me to believe they are experimental.
    - orra 5y ago
      See the section "What are the main differences between the EU's Conditional Marketing Authorisation and the Emergency Use Authorisation issued by some other countries?", onwards. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_20_2390 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_... (this is from the EC, not as I remembered the EMA) It explains amongst other things that a Conditional Marketing Authorisation (CMA) is a real, controlled and robust, authorisation of the vaccine; this is unlike the Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA), which is really an authorisation of the use of an unauthorised vaccine. A CMA requires data on safety and efficacy, showing the benefits outweigh the risks. An EUA has no such requirement.
angelzen 5y ago
> California pushes 1st US vaccine mandate for schoolchildren https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-health-education-california-gavin-newsom-575ef3be2c5c2600664fa48c08041abd https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-health-educa...

bjt2n3904 5y ago

Yeah, it wasn't forced on anyone! Nobody grabbed you and held you down and injected you... You just couldn't travel, go out in public, work at your job, or send your kids to school without it. Totally voluntary.

margalabargala 5y ago
What country are you in that disallowed being in public without a vaccine? That didn't happen anywhere in the US that I'm aware of. As for the rest, again, mandating vaccination is something the US has been doing over and over since the year 1777. This is nothing new. The parent claimed that this vaccine mandate was specifically paired with the vaccine still being in an experimental state, which to my knowledge is not the case.
- rajin444 5y ago
  I don't think "we've always mandated vaccines" is a good argument. Applying the label of "vaccine" to something does not guarantee anything. Especially when the definition was changed in the past year.
  - margalabargala 5y ago
    > I don't think "we've always mandated vaccines" is a good argument. Applying the label of "vaccine" to something does not guarantee anything. That's a fair point, I agree. > Especially when the definition was changed in the past year. Could you elaborate on this part? I went ahead and checked the dictionary definition: > A substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease. Which tracks with what I remember from my molecular bio degree ten years ago.
    - grillvogel 5y ago
      the CDC recently changed their definition of vaccine from (paraphrasing) "something that provides immunity to disease" to "something that provides protection from a disease" https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article254111268.html https://www.miamiherald.com/news/coronavirus/article25411126...
    - rajin444 5y ago
      https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=50886 https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=50886 It wasn’t just here - the CDC and potentially others (I haven’t looked that hard) changed their definitions as well. I’ve got no issue with making terms more correct, but I think one could make the argument that the covid vaccine is more similar to a flu shot than the polio vaccine w.r.t public perception.
      - margalabargala 5y ago
        Hmm, interesting. I don't object to the new definition- the old one explicitly calling out cowpox feels outdated as our medical technology has marched on. You make a very good point though, depending on what definition of "vaccine" one used prior to 2020 the mRNA vaccines might not fall under it. And changing the meaning of the word doesn't magically change the properties of the things it refers to.
- bjt2n3904 5y ago
  Mandates are totally not happening! But if they are, it's not in the US. And if it is in the US, there's legal precedent, and totally valid.
- jjtheblunt 5y ago
  what vaccine was out in 1777? or do you mean 1776 + 1?
  - margalabargala 5y ago
    George Washington mandated the smallpox vaccine for his troops in 1777: https://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/GW&smallpoxinoculation.html https://www.loc.gov/rr/scitech/GW&smallpoxinoculation.html
    - OrvalWintermute 5y ago
      unlike comparison Smallpox had a mortality varying from 33% to 17% according to what I read last [1] Covid has a mortality rate of < 2% in the US mainly driven by the very old, and severe co-mordibities (diabetic+obese, immunocompromised, etc) that are in many cases annually killed off by influenza & pneumonia. That is why all-cause mortality hasn't shifted that much at the overall population level in the US. [1] https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/clinicians/clinical-disease.html https://www.cdc.gov/smallpox/clinicians/clinical-disease.htm...
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - angelzen 5y ago
        Covid mortality is less than 0.1% for ages younger than 55 years old, and less than 0.0005% for ages younger than 14. https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/1446202920106668034 https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/1446202920106668034
        OrvalWintermute 5y ago
        Agree completely That is why Do No Harm is so pertinent to the discussion of vaccinate or do nothing when it comes to the very young.
- angelzen 5y ago
  North America. We are not yet at federally mandated vaccine or else, but there is a visible trend to require vaccine mandates in more and more settings: work, travel, shopping. So far it is localized in a handful of spots. Absent strong pushback it is possible the trend will spread like fire. Los Angeles: L.A. to require COVID vaccine proof for indoor restaurants, gyms, malls Canada: Traveling in Canada by plane or train? You'll need to show proof of vaccination IBM/RedHat: Big Blue will require employees in the U.S. to get fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by Dec. 8 while Red Hat requires proof of full vaccination by Nov. 29. https://ktla.com/news/local-news/l-a-poised-to-enact-one-of-nations-strictest-covid-vaccine-mandates https://ktla.com/news/local-news/l-a-poised-to-enact-one-of-... https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/airline-news/2021/10/06/canada-require-covid-vaccine-travel-starting-oct-30/6022048001 https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/airline-news/2021/10/0... https://www.crn.com/news/cloud/ibm-red-hat-issue-new-covid-19-vaccine-mandates https://www.crn.com/news/cloud/ibm-red-hat-issue-new-covid-1...
- angelzen 5y ago
  Sorry for the double reply, it just came to my attention a story from Lithuania. First EU country with a strict implementation of the CovidPass. Extreme ostracization of a population segment is rather new, if we are not to count some notorious pre WW2 instances. https://twitter.com/gluboco/status/1441691330825031680 https://twitter.com/gluboco/status/1441691330825031680

iammisc 5y ago

There is no fully approved vaccine available in the United States. Most working people now need one to work or they face termination as loss of livelihood Stop pretending it's not required. We're not all trust finders.

dragonwriter 5y ago
> There is no fully approved vaccine available in the United States. Comirnaty (Pfizer-BioNTech) is fully approved for those 16 and over, and has been since late August.
- hhw3h 5y ago
  From my understanding you can’t get the actual distinct Comirnaty version when you go in and get the shot. They only have EUA Pfizer supplies. Technically the same thing but legally different and therefore has a different liability profile.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > Technically the same thing but legally different and therefore has a different liability profile. AFAIK, any different liability profile between an EUA and approved product is moot in the case of COVID vaccines, because they are out of both normal liability regimes and standard vaccine liability regimes and covered by the PREP Act pandemic countermeasures regime which does not make a distinction.
  - iammisc 5y ago
    Yup... A different liability and legal profile.
margalabargala 5y ago
You're mistaken. The Pfizer vaccine is fully approved and available in the United States. Source: https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-appr... I never claimed it wasn't required, just that what was required was not experimental.

colechristensen 5y ago

Unequivocal? There is literally no doubt as to the “safety”? That is demonstratively not true. On several occasions, several of the vaccines have been halted by several separate health authorities over safety concerns. That is not zero doubt. This story is about exactly that. You have to come up with a definition of “experimental” that suits you, and “emergency authorization” doesn’t sound like very well tested and understood. People don’t understand risks very well nor can they compare risks very well and that has been demonstrated over and over again. Covid vs vaccine risks vary quite a lot depending on what kind of person you are. If you are quite old or have significant health problems, it is pretty easy to demonstrate with high confidence that the vaccine risk is way smaller than the Covid risk (many orders of magnitude). If you are very young (say a healthy teenager) the Covid risk is very low and the uncertainties of the vaccine risks start to compete where it is much harder to have confidence that for a population vaccinating is a better idea. People also can have different appetites for risk and different appetites for the good of the individual vs the good of the many. The problems with vaccination are many people pretend they are perfect or evil who are either knowingly distorting the truth or repeating lies or dogma. Also many people desire authoritarian solutions for everyone to agree with them. What is actually needed are attempts to accurately represent risks and unknowns, and comparisons of those risks and unknowns which update over time as the unknowns get smaller. There also needs to be the ability to acknowledge that a crossover point may exist where on one side one decision may be better than on the other. People though are being used to turn any contentious issue into political dogma and opportunities to signal morality. The situation is not as simple as you and many people make it.

margalabargala 5y ago
> You have to come up with a definition of “experimental” that suits you, and “emergency authorization” doesn’t sound like very well tested and understood. I think you may have misread my comment. I agree that "emergency authorization" constitutes "experimental". My point is that there is now a vaccine that is no longer experimental, i.e. is as fully FDA approved as any other, and the mandates in place were put there after that approval. To the rest of your comment, when dealing with a contagious disease which spreads throughout society, I think that the people participating in a society should be able to set prerequisites for participating in that society. One person's rights end where another's begin, and with contagious diseases, a given person's low risk of death does not prevent them from spreading it to someone with much higher risk.

StanislavPetrov 5y ago

>After a vaccine was fully approved and shown to be unequivocally safe and effective Nothing developed 15 months ago can be shown to be "unequivocally safe". No matter what your position on COVID vaccines, its simply a matter of fact that there's no way to know the long term effects of something that hasn't been around for long.

margalabargala 5y ago
There's not really a mechanism of action for an mRNA vaccine to have side effects that manifest after 15 months with nothing in between; any side effects would manifest themselves quite quickly. But that's a fair point, "unequivocally" is a strong word. Would you be okay with "safe and unequivocally effective"?
- shock 5y ago
  > There's not really a mechanism of action for an mRNA vaccine to have side effects that manifest after 15 months with nothing in between; any side effects would manifest themselves quite quickly. Unless, the vaccine causes a "reprogramming" of the immune system, like some viruses do. Have you considered this vector in your analysis?

shock 5y ago

In Europe all the vaccines that are authorized have a "conditional marketing authorization" with a 1 year time limit, and many countries have vaccine mandates. Under EMA, for a vaccine to be "fully approved" it needs to have a standard marketing authorization; none of the COVID vaccines do.

orra 5y ago
And? The original bullshit claim was that the vaccines are “experimental”. A Conditional Marketing Authorization is not an Emergency Use Authorization. The European Medicines Agency even explain this.
- shock 5y ago
  > A Conditional Marketing Authorization is not an Emergency Use Authorization. The European Medicines Agency even explain this. Please provide a citation for this claim. My reading of the EMA page for Conditional Marketing Authorization states: "Its use is also intended for a public health emergency (e.g. a pandemic). _For these medicines, less comprehensive pharmaceutical and non-clinical data may also be accepted_". The fact that less comprehensive farmaceutical data is accepted for CMA leads me to believe they are experimental.
  - orra 5y ago
    See the section "What are the main differences between the EU's Conditional Marketing Authorisation and the Emergency Use Authorisation issued by some other countries?", onwards. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_20_2390 https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/qanda_... (this is from the EC, not as I remembered the EMA) It explains amongst other things that a Conditional Marketing Authorisation (CMA) is a real, controlled and robust, authorisation of the vaccine; this is unlike the Emergency Use Authorisation (EUA), which is really an authorisation of the use of an unauthorised vaccine. A CMA requires data on safety and efficacy, showing the benefits outweigh the risks. An EUA has no such requirement.

angelzen 5y ago

> California pushes 1st US vaccine mandate for schoolchildren https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-health-education-california-gavin-newsom-575ef3be2c5c2600664fa48c08041abd https://apnews.com/article/coronavirus-pandemic-health-educa...