4 ms·

I’m still excited about MRNA vaccines (and therapies). What’s wrong with Covid vaccines apart from particular politicians demonizing them and their respective

I’m still excited about MRNA vaccines (and therapies). What’s wrong with Covid vaccines apart from particular politicians demonizing them and their respective electorate getting all crazy about non existing issues in their heads?

noworriesnate 1y ago
Off the top of my head: First they were supposed to prevent COVID. That turned out to not be true, so then they were supposed to lessen the symptoms. Everyone I know who still frequently gets COVID had the shot. Anyone paying attention was lied to. There were tons of surprise side effects especially relating to women’s periods getting screwed up. They were administered to children, when children were not in any serious danger. The official story was that we were trying to make COVID die out before it mutated again, but to do that would have required vaccinating all animals as well. Despite the above, there was tremendous pressure from left wing institutions to vaccinate everyone, proving that their values were about pharmaceutical profits instead of my body my choice. Anyone who investigated the origin story became spontaneously racist. But then later morality reversed and it was fine.
- helsinki8 1y ago
  This is all misinformation. The vaccine significantly reduced severity of infection, likelihood to become infected at all, and likelihood of transmitting there infection. The side effects impacting periods were incredibly rare, mild and fully disclosed. Children's test scores are still substantially lower now than pre-covid, likely some of that is due to brain damage from the covid virus (remember that the "brain fog" was a common symptom for weeks or months, sometimes longer) and many children died or developed serious health issues like diabetes from the virus. But needles are scary, so some people will claim anything to justify their aversion rather than admit they have a phobia of injections.
  - noworriesnate 1y ago
    A female close to me experienced side effects from shedding of the vaccine. She was not initially an “anti-vaxxer.” These symptoms were absolutely not disclosed ahead of time. I’ve seen with my own eyes people who tried to shame me for not getting the vaccine come down with COVID over and over again. When you tell someone that their personal experience and that of their trusted friends is misinformation, you lose all credibility.
    - dekhn 1y ago
      Think of it from this perspective: you made a claim but you don't have data to support it. It's easy for individuals to be prone to false conclusions because we often conflate weak correlations as causation, when often times, randomness is a better explanation, or "not sure if causation".
    - ChocolateGod 1y ago
      > A female close to me experienced side effects from shedding of the vaccine There are always risks with vaccines, given you are trying to introduce an immune response to a contagion and it's no secret that the immune system can get it wrong (e.g. overreacting, attacking own tissue). It's about balancing the benefits of the vaccine with the risks. You can get the same consequences from having the disease itself, as well as the risks the disease will kill you. The COVID shot was deployed in a little amount of time, so it's understandable that there are more notable cases of side effects, because it was deployed over months, not decades as is the case with other vaccines.
  - Izkata 1y ago
    > The vaccine significantly reduced severity of infection, likelihood to become infected at all, and likelihood of transmitting there infection. The first was what the clinical trials tested for, the second and third were hopes that we never had confirmation of. And with how much the waves continued to spike everywhere afterwards, those two seem to have been false - that the mRNA vaccines only suppressed symptoms without reducing infection/transmission.
- jghn 1y ago
  > First they were supposed to prevent COVID This was never the case. That's not how vaccines work. > There were tons of surprise side effects especially relating to women’s periods getting screwed up. citation from an actual health study that this actually caused health risks? > when children were not in any serious danger. Again, citation needed? > Anyone who investigated the origin story became spontaneously racist. But then later morality reversed and it was fine. What does this have to do with mRNA vaccines?
  - nailer 1y ago
    > > First they were supposed to prevent COVID > This was never the case. That's not how vaccines work. Vaccines aren't supposed to prevent disease? That's a very bold claim - what are your supporting arguments?
    - jghn 1y ago
      Vaccines are designed to reduce likelihood of contracting disease and/or reduce the effects of disease if contracted. The COVID vaccines did both of these things Vaccines are never perfect barriers. It's better to think in terms of population scales. if enough people are vaccinated against a disease, then most of the people who would have contracted it will not. And that means a large reduction in the amount of that disease floating around, and that effect compounds. For you to claim otherwise is either naïveté or trolling
      - nailer 1y ago
        > Vaccines are designed to reduce likelihood of contracting disease and/or reduce the effects of disease if contracted. You previously stated "(Vaccines being supposed to prevent Covid) was never the case." It sounds like you are claiming that vaccines prevented transmission of Covid at acceptable rates but you've provided no supporting arguments. > Vaccines are never perfect barriers. This is a straw man. Nobody in the conversation claimed vaccines were supposed to prevent Covid 100% of the time, just they were originally claimed to prevent people from contracting Covid and generally did not do so. I am sure you already aware of this and are projecting regarding your accusations of trolling.
- hulitu 1y ago
  > there was tremendous pressure from left wing institutions vdL would like to have a word with you. /s
- Majromax 1y ago
  > First they were supposed to prevent COVID. That turned out to not be true, In fact, the vaccines did a fantastic job at preventing covid's spread. The problem was that they were developed for (and had clinical trial results for) the variant-free covid-classic. By the time they were widely deployed, the virus in circulation was already one of several more-easily-spread variants. Had covid not mutated into variants, it seems very likely that widespread vaccination would have given us true 'herd immunity'. > That turned out to not be true, so then they were supposed to lessen the symptoms. They were also always supposed to do this, by making infection less severe and more easily fought-off. Many vaccines operate this way, including the seasonal flu vaccine. Remember that until clinical trial results came in, we weren't sure exactly what the vaccine was going to do. Something that "merely" helped keep elderly people alive would have been good enough, and by that standard what we ended up with was a fantastic success. > Everyone I know who still frequently gets COVID had the shot. As phrased, you've walked right into selection bias; perhaps those people you know choose to get the booster vaccines because they recognize they're more likely to be exposed to covid. > There were tons of surprise side effects especially relating to women’s periods getting screwed up. Treatments have side effects, but for pandemic covid the right comparison was "vaccine plus none-to-mild covid" versus "no vaccine plus unmitigated component." Infection with covid has plenty of 'side effects', and women frequently report disrupted menstrual cycles from infections. > The official story was that we were trying to make COVID die out before it mutated again, but to do that would have required vaccinating all animals as well. As far as I'm aware, every circulating covid variant that we've traced has likely come from mutations inside humans, not zoonotic intermixing. > Despite the above, there was tremendous pressure from left wing institutions to vaccinate everyone, proving that their values were about pharmaceutical profits instead of my body my choice. Now you're just being disingenuous. "Left wing institutions" were at the forefront of vaccine equality among nations, arguing strongly for coordinated buying approaches to ensure access to developing nations. If anything, that contributed to early politicization of the vaccine as the counter-reaction was "if this vaccine is so good, we need to have it for ourselves first." The values involved were simply that of the common/societal good against individualist freedom, the same ones at play in lockdown/distancing rules. > Anyone who investigated the origin story became spontaneously racist. But then later morality reversed and it was fine. Note that this has absolutely nothing to do with vaccines.
- seanclausi 1y ago
  > Everyone I know who still frequently gets COVID had the shot. Your observation matches what I'm seeing among the many people I know. One middle-aged man in particular, who's quite active and otherwise healthy, got at least 3 of those shots back then so he could travel overseas. There were at least 2 separate international trips he subsequently went on where he got sick on the way home, tested positive once back, and then needed a week or two to recover. He still tends to get quite sick after trips now, but he ran out of those home tests, so he can't confirm the cause.
  - const_cast 1y ago
    Could it be because anti-vaxxers are generally anti-medicine and are therefore not getting tested when they probably should? Obviously, if you don't believe in Covid, you're going to have way less Covid. Because you don't even believe it exists - so when would you ever admit to having it? It could also be that the people who get boosters happen to be the most likely to contract Covid, and that's why they're getting the booster. Like if they're immune-compromised, or work at an Airport or something.

noworriesnate 1y ago

Off the top of my head: First they were supposed to prevent COVID. That turned out to not be true, so then they were supposed to lessen the symptoms. Everyone I know who still frequently gets COVID had the shot. Anyone paying attention was lied to. There were tons of surprise side effects especially relating to women’s periods getting screwed up. They were administered to children, when children were not in any serious danger. The official story was that we were trying to make COVID die out before it mutated again, but to do that would have required vaccinating all animals as well. Despite the above, there was tremendous pressure from left wing institutions to vaccinate everyone, proving that their values were about pharmaceutical profits instead of my body my choice. Anyone who investigated the origin story became spontaneously racist. But then later morality reversed and it was fine.

helsinki8 1y ago
This is all misinformation. The vaccine significantly reduced severity of infection, likelihood to become infected at all, and likelihood of transmitting there infection. The side effects impacting periods were incredibly rare, mild and fully disclosed. Children's test scores are still substantially lower now than pre-covid, likely some of that is due to brain damage from the covid virus (remember that the "brain fog" was a common symptom for weeks or months, sometimes longer) and many children died or developed serious health issues like diabetes from the virus. But needles are scary, so some people will claim anything to justify their aversion rather than admit they have a phobia of injections.
- noworriesnate 1y ago
  A female close to me experienced side effects from shedding of the vaccine. She was not initially an “anti-vaxxer.” These symptoms were absolutely not disclosed ahead of time. I’ve seen with my own eyes people who tried to shame me for not getting the vaccine come down with COVID over and over again. When you tell someone that their personal experience and that of their trusted friends is misinformation, you lose all credibility.
  - dekhn 1y ago
    Think of it from this perspective: you made a claim but you don't have data to support it. It's easy for individuals to be prone to false conclusions because we often conflate weak correlations as causation, when often times, randomness is a better explanation, or "not sure if causation".
  - ChocolateGod 1y ago
    > A female close to me experienced side effects from shedding of the vaccine There are always risks with vaccines, given you are trying to introduce an immune response to a contagion and it's no secret that the immune system can get it wrong (e.g. overreacting, attacking own tissue). It's about balancing the benefits of the vaccine with the risks. You can get the same consequences from having the disease itself, as well as the risks the disease will kill you. The COVID shot was deployed in a little amount of time, so it's understandable that there are more notable cases of side effects, because it was deployed over months, not decades as is the case with other vaccines.
- Izkata 1y ago
  > The vaccine significantly reduced severity of infection, likelihood to become infected at all, and likelihood of transmitting there infection. The first was what the clinical trials tested for, the second and third were hopes that we never had confirmation of. And with how much the waves continued to spike everywhere afterwards, those two seem to have been false - that the mRNA vaccines only suppressed symptoms without reducing infection/transmission.
jghn 1y ago
> First they were supposed to prevent COVID This was never the case. That's not how vaccines work. > There were tons of surprise side effects especially relating to women’s periods getting screwed up. citation from an actual health study that this actually caused health risks? > when children were not in any serious danger. Again, citation needed? > Anyone who investigated the origin story became spontaneously racist. But then later morality reversed and it was fine. What does this have to do with mRNA vaccines?
- nailer 1y ago
  > > First they were supposed to prevent COVID > This was never the case. That's not how vaccines work. Vaccines aren't supposed to prevent disease? That's a very bold claim - what are your supporting arguments?
  - jghn 1y ago
    Vaccines are designed to reduce likelihood of contracting disease and/or reduce the effects of disease if contracted. The COVID vaccines did both of these things Vaccines are never perfect barriers. It's better to think in terms of population scales. if enough people are vaccinated against a disease, then most of the people who would have contracted it will not. And that means a large reduction in the amount of that disease floating around, and that effect compounds. For you to claim otherwise is either naïveté or trolling
    - nailer 1y ago
      > Vaccines are designed to reduce likelihood of contracting disease and/or reduce the effects of disease if contracted. You previously stated "(Vaccines being supposed to prevent Covid) was never the case." It sounds like you are claiming that vaccines prevented transmission of Covid at acceptable rates but you've provided no supporting arguments. > Vaccines are never perfect barriers. This is a straw man. Nobody in the conversation claimed vaccines were supposed to prevent Covid 100% of the time, just they were originally claimed to prevent people from contracting Covid and generally did not do so. I am sure you already aware of this and are projecting regarding your accusations of trolling.
hulitu 1y ago
> there was tremendous pressure from left wing institutions vdL would like to have a word with you. /s
Majromax 1y ago
> First they were supposed to prevent COVID. That turned out to not be true, In fact, the vaccines did a fantastic job at preventing covid's spread. The problem was that they were developed for (and had clinical trial results for) the variant-free covid-classic. By the time they were widely deployed, the virus in circulation was already one of several more-easily-spread variants. Had covid not mutated into variants, it seems very likely that widespread vaccination would have given us true 'herd immunity'. > That turned out to not be true, so then they were supposed to lessen the symptoms. They were also always supposed to do this, by making infection less severe and more easily fought-off. Many vaccines operate this way, including the seasonal flu vaccine. Remember that until clinical trial results came in, we weren't sure exactly what the vaccine was going to do. Something that "merely" helped keep elderly people alive would have been good enough, and by that standard what we ended up with was a fantastic success. > Everyone I know who still frequently gets COVID had the shot. As phrased, you've walked right into selection bias; perhaps those people you know choose to get the booster vaccines because they recognize they're more likely to be exposed to covid. > There were tons of surprise side effects especially relating to women’s periods getting screwed up. Treatments have side effects, but for pandemic covid the right comparison was "vaccine plus none-to-mild covid" versus "no vaccine plus unmitigated component." Infection with covid has plenty of 'side effects', and women frequently report disrupted menstrual cycles from infections. > The official story was that we were trying to make COVID die out before it mutated again, but to do that would have required vaccinating all animals as well. As far as I'm aware, every circulating covid variant that we've traced has likely come from mutations inside humans, not zoonotic intermixing. > Despite the above, there was tremendous pressure from left wing institutions to vaccinate everyone, proving that their values were about pharmaceutical profits instead of my body my choice. Now you're just being disingenuous. "Left wing institutions" were at the forefront of vaccine equality among nations, arguing strongly for coordinated buying approaches to ensure access to developing nations. If anything, that contributed to early politicization of the vaccine as the counter-reaction was "if this vaccine is so good, we need to have it for ourselves first." The values involved were simply that of the common/societal good against individualist freedom, the same ones at play in lockdown/distancing rules. > Anyone who investigated the origin story became spontaneously racist. But then later morality reversed and it was fine. Note that this has absolutely nothing to do with vaccines.
seanclausi 1y ago
> Everyone I know who still frequently gets COVID had the shot. Your observation matches what I'm seeing among the many people I know. One middle-aged man in particular, who's quite active and otherwise healthy, got at least 3 of those shots back then so he could travel overseas. There were at least 2 separate international trips he subsequently went on where he got sick on the way home, tested positive once back, and then needed a week or two to recover. He still tends to get quite sick after trips now, but he ran out of those home tests, so he can't confirm the cause.
- const_cast 1y ago
  Could it be because anti-vaxxers are generally anti-medicine and are therefore not getting tested when they probably should? Obviously, if you don't believe in Covid, you're going to have way less Covid. Because you don't even believe it exists - so when would you ever admit to having it? It could also be that the people who get boosters happen to be the most likely to contract Covid, and that's why they're getting the booster. Like if they're immune-compromised, or work at an Airport or something.