3 ms·

I don't know if the potential benefit to me and others like me, having already recovered, somehow offsets the known risks of taking the medical treatment plus s

I don't know if the potential benefit to me and others like me, having already recovered, somehow offsets the known risks of taking the medical treatment plus some number of booster treatments. There is a disconnect between the thinking of those who make policy, seemingly many of the work-from-home formerly worked at office workers, and people who regularly toil in the field and have dirty fingernails.

colechristensen 5y ago
Getting Covid obviously introduces a risk (short term and long term), surviving definitely reduces the risk of future Covid infections. I don’t think anybody disagrees with that. Each dose of the vaccine likewise introduces new short term and long term risks and reduces future risks from covid. More so if you’ve never had covid, but still nonzero if you have had it and recovered. (Lots of people don’t really want to acknowledge one part of this or another) The problem is how big are each of these risks and what is your tolerance for taking a certain risk (a vaccine) to prevent an uncertain risk (potentially contracting covid again) Lots of people take sides and emphasize one set of risks as “known” and sort of pretend the other set doesn’t exist. Covid has certainly killed a whole lot of people. A very very large number of people have taken vaccines and a very very small number of them have had negative outcomes. There is a risk to taking a vaccine and there is a risk to not taking a vaccine. How big is that risk and when do you decide one risk is worth the other? One thing is for sure, whatever your opinion is, there are a lot of people out there trying to make money by reenforcing that opinion with “facts”. Taking the vaccine is, if anything, a very small risk compared to many other risks you take every day (demonstrable by just how many people have taken it already and comparing it to, say, traffic accident statistics). The risk protection you have from surviving covid is also definitely decreasing with time. It is hard to find information because so many people are pretending these risks are known. They just aren’t, there are bounds of uncertainty. Not huge bounds, quite a bit is actually known, but there is still uncertainty and you have to decide for yourself which risk to take and when.
- propogandist 5y ago
  >and a very very small number of them have had negative outcomes. There's no method to report adverse event, unless you go to VAERS and report it. Since coverage of negative effects will reduce the effectiveness of the propaganda being pushed, there's little coverage of adverse events, enabling the narrative to continue. The CDC also doesn't consider people as fully vaccinated until 14 days after the 2nd injection, enabling them to skirt attribution of hospitalization or deaths that occur after the Jab. Look at the VAERS charts of adverse events & vaccine deaths reported in 2021 VEARS compared to all other vaccines, as a starting point... https://vaersanalysis.info/2021/12/25/vaers-summary-for-covid-19-vaccines-through-12-17-2021/ https://vaersanalysis.info/2021/12/25/vaers-summary-for-covi... https://vaers.hhs.gov/data.html https://vaers.hhs.gov/data.html

colechristensen 5y ago

Getting Covid obviously introduces a risk (short term and long term), surviving definitely reduces the risk of future Covid infections. I don’t think anybody disagrees with that. Each dose of the vaccine likewise introduces new short term and long term risks and reduces future risks from covid. More so if you’ve never had covid, but still nonzero if you have had it and recovered. (Lots of people don’t really want to acknowledge one part of this or another) The problem is how big are each of these risks and what is your tolerance for taking a certain risk (a vaccine) to prevent an uncertain risk (potentially contracting covid again) Lots of people take sides and emphasize one set of risks as “known” and sort of pretend the other set doesn’t exist. Covid has certainly killed a whole lot of people. A very very large number of people have taken vaccines and a very very small number of them have had negative outcomes. There is a risk to taking a vaccine and there is a risk to not taking a vaccine. How big is that risk and when do you decide one risk is worth the other? One thing is for sure, whatever your opinion is, there are a lot of people out there trying to make money by reenforcing that opinion with “facts”. Taking the vaccine is, if anything, a very small risk compared to many other risks you take every day (demonstrable by just how many people have taken it already and comparing it to, say, traffic accident statistics). The risk protection you have from surviving covid is also definitely decreasing with time. It is hard to find information because so many people are pretending these risks are known. They just aren’t, there are bounds of uncertainty. Not huge bounds, quite a bit is actually known, but there is still uncertainty and you have to decide for yourself which risk to take and when.

propogandist 5y ago
>and a very very small number of them have had negative outcomes. There's no method to report adverse event, unless you go to VAERS and report it. Since coverage of negative effects will reduce the effectiveness of the propaganda being pushed, there's little coverage of adverse events, enabling the narrative to continue. The CDC also doesn't consider people as fully vaccinated until 14 days after the 2nd injection, enabling them to skirt attribution of hospitalization or deaths that occur after the Jab. Look at the VAERS charts of adverse events & vaccine deaths reported in 2021 VEARS compared to all other vaccines, as a starting point... https://vaersanalysis.info/2021/12/25/vaers-summary-for-covid-19-vaccines-through-12-17-2021/ https://vaersanalysis.info/2021/12/25/vaers-summary-for-covi... https://vaers.hhs.gov/data.html https://vaers.hhs.gov/data.html