4 ms·

This further redefinition of the term "vaccine" is a huge problem by definition a vaccine should NOT be a treatment, a vaccine has to be preventative, and fu

This further redefinition of the term "vaccine" is a huge problem by definition a vaccine should NOT be a treatment, a vaccine has to be preventative, and further personally I believe only Sterilizing immunity should be considered a "vaccine" This is very important, because a "vaccine" in the US has legal protections other medical drugs, treatments, etc do not get, which is why there is a push to include alot of these things under the definition of "vaccine" so now they get the legal shield

shibopo 3y ago
I mean the general problem is that the word vaccine has been merged with two meanings of "creating something so your immune system gets prepped to prevent disease". Moderna here create something so your immune system gets prepper but it doesn't prevent it's used to fight. I mean this word came from cow, you are right, it's time to redefine some of these terms.
beowulfey 3y ago
That's not the definition of a vaccine. A vaccine is something that registers our active immune system against an antigen, so that our body detects and eradicates it upon detection. The timing doesn't really matter and there are a lot of therapeutic vaccines [1]. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9729511/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9729511/
- phpisthebest 3y ago
  It is now, it has been expanded over the years most recently in response to covid as to include mRNA in the definition of what a vaccine is explicitly to shield these big pharma companies from liability for any harm adverse reactions to mRNA may have to individuals It is shocking to me that soo many people that normally at against large companies, and against even capitalism do not see the huge danger in classifying these things as something that gives the companies creating them an almost complete liability shield from harms caused by their products. Once something is a "vaccine" in the US you lose all ability to sue for most harms caused by said vaccine.
  - vaidhy 3y ago
    Citation please? Here is the procedure for getting compensated for vaccine caused issues - https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccine-compensation https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccine-compensation It should not matter to you whether the compensation is paid by the government or a company, but you can file for compensation and if valid, get compensated for it.
    - phpisthebest 3y ago
      there are all kinds of problems first and foremost is incentives if tax payers (i.e government) are paying for the losses why should they care if they injure anyone? removing product liability is universally a bad idea Further there is all kinds of Due process issues that make filing a Vaccine claim problematic and very expensive to appeal, there are all kinds of horror stories out there about denied claims, and to appeal the denial is $$$$$$$$$$$$ and no lawyer will take it with out up front payment, and no class action is possible to spread the costs out...
      - vaidhy 3y ago
        That is why vaccines need FDA approval in the first place. Everything else you said is true for all kinds of appeal and not just for vaccines. There are horror stories about everything and lawyers not wanting to take things up without upfront payment. But that does not stop those things. Marriage and divorce, child custody, DUI cases, police excess, companies overcharging for things, DMCA being used incorrectly, tech companies having too much power etc. are all problematic and very expensive to appeal. But we live with those. Similarly, there are trade-offs here.
        phpisthebest 3y ago
        >>That is why vaccines need FDA approval in the first place. this is probably where the most of our different world view comes from, I believe the FDA is just a corrupt organization rubber stamping big Pharma, and serves no actual safety purpose. Given the revolving door between the major companies and top level positions in the FDA and the actions of the FDA during COVID I have lots of examples to prove my position. >>Everything else you said is true for all kinds of appeal and not just for vaccines Incorrect, the Vaccine process establishes an extra Judicial process where by a committee at the DHHS gets to choose if you were actually injured by the vaccine or not, skipping the jury process completely. if you are denied by the DHHS you have to jump right to the Expensive Appeals process, there is no way to fine a standard civil lawsuit and get a Jury of your peers. Also there is no way to form a class if the FDA screws up and a vaccine causes harm to 100's. 1000's or 10'000s of people, each case has to go through the process individually I understand that this point you believe the FDA is infallible organization that only cares for the individual, but the FDA has proven time and time again that to be false.
- jonhohle 3y ago
  I took it as the literal and previously accepted definition was uniformly changed by both government and secular organizations in near unison. As late as January 2021 vaccines were thought of as dead pathogens - https://web.archive.org/web/20210118194713/https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vaccine https://web.archive.org/web/20210118194713/https://www.merri...
  - johncolanduoni 3y ago
    There were plenty of protein subunit vaccines and a few viral vector vaccines in use in humans prior to the COVID vaccines. Neither of these are dead pathogens.
  - beowulfey 3y ago
    it started as live pathogens (cowpox) so it must have gone through many iterations if that were the case
    - labster 3y ago
      Live poliovirus vaccine continues to be used, and continues to cause occasional active cases and transmission.
  - pseudalopex 3y ago
    Merriam Webster's old definition did not exclude therapeutic vaccines. But it did exclude vaccines prepared from viruses.[1] Probably you heard about diphtheria and tetanus vaccines before 2020. They are prepared from toxins. Other definitions did not restrict what a vaccine must contain.[2] [1] http://web.archive.org/web/20190118214500/https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/virus http://web.archive.org/web/20190118214500/https://www.merria... [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20160402152957/https://www.dictionary.com/browse/vaccine https://web.archive.org/web/20160402152957/https://www.dicti...
  - snowwrestler 3y ago
    The word “vaccine” comes from the recognition that people could gain immunity against smallpox via infection with the less-deadly (and live) virus cowpox. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccinia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccinia The definition has never been constrained to dead pathogens.
bawolff 3y ago
> by definition a vaccine should NOT be a treatment Umm. You have never heard of rabies or tetnus vaccines? This is not a change in definition.
- phpisthebest 3y ago
  I am aware of them, these also should not be called vaccines.
  - woodruffw 3y ago
    This is a bullet you can bite, but it’s inconsistent with your original point: the tetanus and rabies vaccines have long been called vaccines, undermining any claim that we’ve somehow only recently redefined the word “vaccine.” Edit: to be clear, this kind of argument is only slightly less asinine than arguing that a vaccine isn’t a vaccine unless it comes from a cow’s udder.
dev_tty01 3y ago
>> by definition a vaccine should NOT be a treatment, a vaccine has to be preventative, and further personally I believe... Hmm, I don't see the basis for this conclusion. This treatment is acting according to the common definition of a vaccine. Whether before or after disease activation is not part of the definition. As far as your personal belief, I understand that you may feel strongly, but I'm sorry to say that doesn't really enter into articulating an accepted scientific definition. vaccine: any preventive preparation used to stimulate the body’s immune response against a specific disease, ... https://www.dictionary.com/browse/vaccine https://www.dictionary.com/browse/vaccine Could you be more specific about any particular legal shield? They all have to go through the same phased trials system. I don't see any reason to conclude this is a legal shenanigan. What they have created meets the well-known definition of a vaccine.
- AYBABTME 3y ago
  Without taking a side or another.. I just want to note that the definition you shared starts with "preventive" which is the point GP is focusing on.
  - futuretaint 3y ago
    I'm not taking a side either, but seeing as drug companies are shielded from liability w/ vaccines, if I was a drug company I would be motivated to lobby broadening the definition. it would just be good business.
    - ceejayoz 3y ago
      Drug companies are only shielded for specific vaccines deemed necessary countermeasures. It isn’t automatic for all vaccines; the COVID vaccines had to be deliberately added to the list via a formal process.

shibopo 3y ago

I mean the general problem is that the word vaccine has been merged with two meanings of "creating something so your immune system gets prepped to prevent disease". Moderna here create something so your immune system gets prepper but it doesn't prevent it's used to fight. I mean this word came from cow, you are right, it's time to redefine some of these terms.

beowulfey 3y ago

That's not the definition of a vaccine. A vaccine is something that registers our active immune system against an antigen, so that our body detects and eradicates it upon detection. The timing doesn't really matter and there are a lot of therapeutic vaccines [1]. [1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9729511/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9729511/

phpisthebest 3y ago
It is now, it has been expanded over the years most recently in response to covid as to include mRNA in the definition of what a vaccine is explicitly to shield these big pharma companies from liability for any harm adverse reactions to mRNA may have to individuals It is shocking to me that soo many people that normally at against large companies, and against even capitalism do not see the huge danger in classifying these things as something that gives the companies creating them an almost complete liability shield from harms caused by their products. Once something is a "vaccine" in the US you lose all ability to sue for most harms caused by said vaccine.
- vaidhy 3y ago
  Citation please? Here is the procedure for getting compensated for vaccine caused issues - https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccine-compensation https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccine-compensation It should not matter to you whether the compensation is paid by the government or a company, but you can file for compensation and if valid, get compensated for it.
  - phpisthebest 3y ago
    there are all kinds of problems first and foremost is incentives if tax payers (i.e government) are paying for the losses why should they care if they injure anyone? removing product liability is universally a bad idea Further there is all kinds of Due process issues that make filing a Vaccine claim problematic and very expensive to appeal, there are all kinds of horror stories out there about denied claims, and to appeal the denial is $$$$$$$$$$$$ and no lawyer will take it with out up front payment, and no class action is possible to spread the costs out...
    - vaidhy 3y ago
      That is why vaccines need FDA approval in the first place. Everything else you said is true for all kinds of appeal and not just for vaccines. There are horror stories about everything and lawyers not wanting to take things up without upfront payment. But that does not stop those things. Marriage and divorce, child custody, DUI cases, police excess, companies overcharging for things, DMCA being used incorrectly, tech companies having too much power etc. are all problematic and very expensive to appeal. But we live with those. Similarly, there are trade-offs here.
      - phpisthebest 3y ago
        >>That is why vaccines need FDA approval in the first place. this is probably where the most of our different world view comes from, I believe the FDA is just a corrupt organization rubber stamping big Pharma, and serves no actual safety purpose. Given the revolving door between the major companies and top level positions in the FDA and the actions of the FDA during COVID I have lots of examples to prove my position. >>Everything else you said is true for all kinds of appeal and not just for vaccines Incorrect, the Vaccine process establishes an extra Judicial process where by a committee at the DHHS gets to choose if you were actually injured by the vaccine or not, skipping the jury process completely. if you are denied by the DHHS you have to jump right to the Expensive Appeals process, there is no way to fine a standard civil lawsuit and get a Jury of your peers. Also there is no way to form a class if the FDA screws up and a vaccine causes harm to 100's. 1000's or 10'000s of people, each case has to go through the process individually I understand that this point you believe the FDA is infallible organization that only cares for the individual, but the FDA has proven time and time again that to be false.
jonhohle 3y ago
I took it as the literal and previously accepted definition was uniformly changed by both government and secular organizations in near unison. As late as January 2021 vaccines were thought of as dead pathogens - https://web.archive.org/web/20210118194713/https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vaccine https://web.archive.org/web/20210118194713/https://www.merri...
- johncolanduoni 3y ago
  There were plenty of protein subunit vaccines and a few viral vector vaccines in use in humans prior to the COVID vaccines. Neither of these are dead pathogens.
- beowulfey 3y ago
  it started as live pathogens (cowpox) so it must have gone through many iterations if that were the case
  - labster 3y ago
    Live poliovirus vaccine continues to be used, and continues to cause occasional active cases and transmission.
- pseudalopex 3y ago
  Merriam Webster's old definition did not exclude therapeutic vaccines. But it did exclude vaccines prepared from viruses.[1] Probably you heard about diphtheria and tetanus vaccines before 2020. They are prepared from toxins. Other definitions did not restrict what a vaccine must contain.[2] [1] http://web.archive.org/web/20190118214500/https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/virus http://web.archive.org/web/20190118214500/https://www.merria... [2] https://web.archive.org/web/20160402152957/https://www.dictionary.com/browse/vaccine https://web.archive.org/web/20160402152957/https://www.dicti...
- snowwrestler 3y ago
  The word “vaccine” comes from the recognition that people could gain immunity against smallpox via infection with the less-deadly (and live) virus cowpox. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccinia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccinia The definition has never been constrained to dead pathogens.

bawolff 3y ago

> by definition a vaccine should NOT be a treatment Umm. You have never heard of rabies or tetnus vaccines? This is not a change in definition.

phpisthebest 3y ago
I am aware of them, these also should not be called vaccines.
- woodruffw 3y ago
  This is a bullet you can bite, but it’s inconsistent with your original point: the tetanus and rabies vaccines have long been called vaccines, undermining any claim that we’ve somehow only recently redefined the word “vaccine.” Edit: to be clear, this kind of argument is only slightly less asinine than arguing that a vaccine isn’t a vaccine unless it comes from a cow’s udder.

dev_tty01 3y ago

>> by definition a vaccine should NOT be a treatment, a vaccine has to be preventative, and further personally I believe... Hmm, I don't see the basis for this conclusion. This treatment is acting according to the common definition of a vaccine. Whether before or after disease activation is not part of the definition. As far as your personal belief, I understand that you may feel strongly, but I'm sorry to say that doesn't really enter into articulating an accepted scientific definition. vaccine: any preventive preparation used to stimulate the body’s immune response against a specific disease, ... https://www.dictionary.com/browse/vaccine https://www.dictionary.com/browse/vaccine Could you be more specific about any particular legal shield? They all have to go through the same phased trials system. I don't see any reason to conclude this is a legal shenanigan. What they have created meets the well-known definition of a vaccine.

AYBABTME 3y ago
Without taking a side or another.. I just want to note that the definition you shared starts with "preventive" which is the point GP is focusing on.
- futuretaint 3y ago
  I'm not taking a side either, but seeing as drug companies are shielded from liability w/ vaccines, if I was a drug company I would be motivated to lobby broadening the definition. it would just be good business.
  - ceejayoz 3y ago
    Drug companies are only shielded for specific vaccines deemed necessary countermeasures. It isn’t automatic for all vaccines; the COVID vaccines had to be deliberately added to the list via a formal process.