Right now in the US the biggest travesty is: (1) we have a large anti-vax movement that hasn't let us get to herd immunity. (2) the government has banned those under 12 from taking the vaccine.
This creates a situation where now the only ones still taking a risk against their will is children.
I have no idea how the idea of vaccine bans is still a "thing" after it failing in every way possible over the last 1.5 years. We need to learn a lesson and stop doing this.
(1) At least it’ll help offset gerrymandering a bit. Note that we’ll have variants moving forward regardless of what the anti-vaxxers do, since variants generally come from reservoir populations, not humans. We don’t have any real hope of vaccinating all mammals.
(2) They’re rushing through the approvals for ages 2-12 as quickly as they can. They don’t even know what the correct (safe but effective) dose is for that age group yet.
What do you mean by 'vaccine ban'? We had one of those [0] when the vaccine first came out and we had limited supply. This has not been a thing for months.
What we do have is an 'unapproved drug ban', and a policy of testing experimental drugs on adults first. The government significantly accelerated the process of getting the vaccines approved. What precisely are you proposing they do differently as a matter of policy next time?
[0] Actually, many more than 1 as there was no federal plan, so each state came up with its own.
How would children not be taking a risk against their will being forced to have a vaccine linked to acute myocarditis? (Pfizer)
Public health is not an excuse to force things on people against their will. No one is hurt by continuing with mask culture, and until a child cohort study of sufficient size is completed, with no red flags we should continue to wait and see as the numbers roll in.
I have no desire to see the mistakes of Thalidomide repeated. Do not fuck around recklessly with biology. It is more complex and unintuitive than your wildest imaginings. Given the Yolo approach applied with recent questionable approvals, FDA has some quality work to do.
Not action is also an action. But, we humans feel that to do the default is to not take action and thus be free of consequences.
Most parents brains are going to think: what happens if my kid is vaccinated and something bad happens, if I do nothing then I have "no remorse".
Of course, this quite normal way of thinking misses the future you with a sick kid thinking why the hell you didn't do anything. The To overcome the otherwise rational decision of postponing to take action what is needed is education. In this situation, trust in the authorities, media and medical profession also help to reduce the fear to vaccination.
I hope that most people sees the need to vaccinate their children, and thus the children can avoid future consequences of a lapse in their parents reasoning.
The mRNA vaccine is just one of the pieces of genetic material coronavirus tricks your body into producing. The main difference is that the vaccine can’t reproduce itself, and therefore can’t lay waste to your body.
By “genetic drug” I’m assuming you mean either the mRNA vaccines developed by Pfizer/Moderna or the viral vector vaccines developed by AstraZeneca/Johnson & Johnson.
Your “natural immunity” also doesn’t protect other people around you from contracting the disease and suffering from a very severe illness, whereas there is growing evidence that the vaccines available also cut transmission risk: https://khub.net/documents/135939561/390853656/Impact+of+vac...
At least in the United States, most children are currently unable to receive a vaccine so they cannot protect themselves.
Would you feel the same way if you were to come across a child drowning in a shallow pond and had an opportunity to save them with the only “cost” to you being the inconvenience of being cold and wet?
They may not see the vaccine as an issue of 'cold and wet' as you deem getting the vaccine to be, keep that in mind. As misguided as it may be. There is also a gairly big difference between jumping in a pool of water to save a drowning child (something likely universally familiar, and processable by anyone), and trusting a bunch of other humans you don't know from Adam, who have God knows what incentives guiding them, while possibly being a member of a population the United States has shown a willingness to be less than straightforward with when it comes to injecting things into.
Welcome to a low trust society.
Where collective action is nigh impossible by virtue of the near constant degree to which people can be found to have ulterior motives.
> I prefer to be a test subject to a virus rather than get a safe vaccine, even though the virus has been proven to be worse than the vaccine in 99.999% of cases.
Big logic time. Between the people who question everything and the others who believe science is a religion I would hope most people find a middle ground
Where do people access those numbers through most frequently?
>The media.
Who has been caught having issues with cherry-picking narratives and having issues with the truth lately?
>The media.
Who is generating those numbers?
>Scientists and for profit businesses.
Who has had a track record of poor reproducibility in research, publish or perish paper mills and citation rings, and pushing treatments that harm patients in the long run to fill the coffers (opioids)?
>Scientists and for-profit businesses.
Ya know, in a way, all the arguments I've had with people over radiocarbon dating has finally taught me something precious about science, and the cutting edge.
It's too important to leave locked behind private entities. All the hyperadvamced analysis and techniques doesn't do squat to keep you credible with the masses. You have to make it something people can actually get close enough to see and absorb/experience for themselves.
Without trust, not for all the good faith in Christendom will anyone get anything out of or over me. -apologies to J.P. Morgan
I can't really argue over the conclusions common sense leads to. I don't personally buy it, but I can unfortunately understand it. A lot of uncommon sense, unfortunately, tends to find it's way to making people who rely on common sense miserable.
> Rather than play roulette with variants over the next several years, we can safely end this crisis by accepting an increased yet still exceedingly small risk of side effects that have not been seen to cause medium-term problems, let alone long-term ones.
Whats the relationship between vaccinated population and variants? Articles like this have an underlying claim that vaccines prevent variants from being created and spreading, but I've also heard that vaccines can select for variants as more innocuous strands aren't spread.
The relationship is whatever it's convenient for the relationship to be next time some public expert or journalist is explaining why they're still important.
The variants to really worry about are the ones that come from other mammals. The more isolated and different a group of hosts are from the rest of the population, the more evolution is able to work its magic.
Related reading: reservoir populations and Malthusian population dynamics.
However, there’s zero chance of eradicating the virus. It readily crosses species barriers, so we’d have to vaccinate all mammals to wipe it out. (The same can be said for COVID’s closest relative, the common cold.)
the more the virus spreads, the higher the possibility of variants. Since vaccination reduces the spread of virus, it helps (tremendously) to reduce the chances of variants.
A (preprint) study published today by researchers at nference and the Mayo Clinic looked at the genetic variation of breakthrough infections versus infections in unvaccinated patients and found that the viruses in breakthrough cases had significantly lower diversity. Per the abstract, this suggests that COVID-19 vaccines also restrict the evolutionary and antigenic escape pathways available to SARS-CoV-2.[0]
Nice to see the NYTimes backing big pharma. No mention of ivermectin, a non-patented and well-tested anti-viral drug, for preparation treatment of or treatment of COVID.
Anyone who is genuinely interested in the experimental origins and implementation of mRNA vaccines should review Bret Weinstein's podcast [1].
I would think objectively it really doesn't matter that much either way.
As someone who is fully vaccinated, I think we are at the point of many people just have a form of Stockholm syndrome and have formed a psychological bond with the captor that they do not want to let go of.
If these stories comfort you in some way then enjoy. To pretend this is some giant deal though is just not reality.
> To understand why, it’s important to realize the choice is not “vaccinate or do nothing.” It’s “vaccinate or eventually contract the coronavirus,” and the risks that come with it
Hmmmm. I'm not so sure about this. You can choose to continue self-isolating indefinitely. In this case the risk of exposure to covid is low. Sure, on an infinite timeline, you will catch it. But the longer you wait, the more data we will have. That includes data on "known unknowns," like long-term vaccine side effects, effects of long covid, and vaccine efficacy against new variants. But it also includes more data on "unknown unknowns," like potential long-term risks of the mRNA delivery mechanism, or new vaccines that have yet to be developed. Also, the longer you wait, the more other people get vaccinated and the more you benefit by leeching off herd immunity.
On an individual level, the choice is generally far more complicated than "get vaccine" or "get covid." Personally, as an under-30 with a low-exposure lifestyle, I'm waiting as long as possible to get the vaccine. I want to see more data on mRNA side effects – specifically, I'm worried that we're observing vascular inflammation, but doctors are unable to explain the mechanism causing it. To me, that means we don't understand the vaccines enough to eliminate sufficient "unknown unknowns." With that much uncertainty, combined with my very low exposure coefficient, I don't agree that the benefits of a vaccine outweigh the risks for me personally at this time. And an NYT columnist is not going to change my mind on that without a more rigorous analysis that allows adjusting for exposure risk and unknown unknowns.
I agree the choice is slightly more complicated if you want to continue self-isolating forever. However, I've seen no data that suggests that the side effects of the vaccine are anything other than a less severe reaction of the immune response to COVID-19.
If people want to self-isolate, I hope we can start enforcing that via limitations on going out without being vaccinated. If you stay in your own home and get food delivered, and never leave, I don't really care. I just don't want you going to stores/offices/events/restaurants with everyone else.
> I just don't want you going to stores/offices/events/restaurants with everyone else.
Especially without a mask, as has started happening ever since CDC declared that vaccinated people don’t need to wear masks.
In my case the choice was basically known risk vs unknown risk. With vaccines there is a known risk. So get the vaccine and listen to your body carefully over the next week or so and get medical help in needed. In the case of COVID-19 with the symptoms and long-COVID it’s just not clear where one will end up.
Moreover it takes at least 5 weeks to develop immunity. So if schools/offices open and decide in-person instruction you need at least 5 week lead time which further complicates the decision.
I got Pfizer, I am 47, and severe palpitations for 3 days after the first shot, and non-stop after the second one - for two months already. I am sorry I got the shot as I have low exposure and always wear an N95 mask anyway.
It only depends on what's the status of the pandemic. At this time, with the delta variant raging, I'm not gonna stop wearing in closed spaces or when speaking to people in close proximity for more than a minute. My kids are not vaccinated and I don't wanna give it to them. At this time, I'm NOT gonna vaccinate them as no option seems safe.
My wife had bad palpitations and tachycardia after both shots for a week, too. So, I'm not sure why these are not listed among common side effects. Other people I know had high blood pressure (without having a history of such), and many other things they haven't experienced before. I suddenly got severe skin dryness on my knees - something I've never ever had, so, again, this is not like the tetanus shot or any other vaccine I've had before - even the BCG was less noticeable. Not to mention the extreme pain in the are of the shot - both couldn't sleep during first and second shots due to waking up from pain in the arm. I'm waiting for Novavax or others for my kids or newer variants. I'm not doing an mRNA again, sorry. I am not doing an adenovirus vector one either - the virus is well-known for causing blood cell issues leading to blood clots. And those giving the shots should learn to pull first, and if they don't see blood, then inject it - it's the old forgotten practice for giving shots in the muscle tissue, and avoid the blood stream!
35 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 94.2 ms ] threadThis creates a situation where now the only ones still taking a risk against their will is children.
I have no idea how the idea of vaccine bans is still a "thing" after it failing in every way possible over the last 1.5 years. We need to learn a lesson and stop doing this.
(2) They’re rushing through the approvals for ages 2-12 as quickly as they can. They don’t even know what the correct (safe but effective) dose is for that age group yet.
[0] Actually, many more than 1 as there was no federal plan, so each state came up with its own.
Public health is not an excuse to force things on people against their will. No one is hurt by continuing with mask culture, and until a child cohort study of sufficient size is completed, with no red flags we should continue to wait and see as the numbers roll in.
I have no desire to see the mistakes of Thalidomide repeated. Do not fuck around recklessly with biology. It is more complex and unintuitive than your wildest imaginings. Given the Yolo approach applied with recent questionable approvals, FDA has some quality work to do.
Most parents brains are going to think: what happens if my kid is vaccinated and something bad happens, if I do nothing then I have "no remorse".
Of course, this quite normal way of thinking misses the future you with a sick kid thinking why the hell you didn't do anything. The To overcome the otherwise rational decision of postponing to take action what is needed is education. In this situation, trust in the authorities, media and medical profession also help to reduce the fear to vaccination.
I hope that most people sees the need to vaccinate their children, and thus the children can avoid future consequences of a lapse in their parents reasoning.
By “genetic drug” I’m assuming you mean either the mRNA vaccines developed by Pfizer/Moderna or the viral vector vaccines developed by AstraZeneca/Johnson & Johnson.
The claim that either technology is “experimental” is false. Both have undergone the same rigorous trials and testing as other vaccines before being rolled out to the public: https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-covid-vaccines-idU...
Your “natural immunity” also doesn’t protect other people around you from contracting the disease and suffering from a very severe illness, whereas there is growing evidence that the vaccines available also cut transmission risk: https://khub.net/documents/135939561/390853656/Impact+of+vac...
Would you feel the same way if you were to come across a child drowning in a shallow pond and had an opportunity to save them with the only “cost” to you being the inconvenience of being cold and wet?
Welcome to a low trust society.
Where collective action is nigh impossible by virtue of the near constant degree to which people can be found to have ulterior motives.
Big logic time. Between the people who question everything and the others who believe science is a religion I would hope most people find a middle ground
>The media.
Who has been caught having issues with cherry-picking narratives and having issues with the truth lately?
>The media.
Who is generating those numbers?
>Scientists and for profit businesses.
Who has had a track record of poor reproducibility in research, publish or perish paper mills and citation rings, and pushing treatments that harm patients in the long run to fill the coffers (opioids)?
>Scientists and for-profit businesses.
Ya know, in a way, all the arguments I've had with people over radiocarbon dating has finally taught me something precious about science, and the cutting edge.
It's too important to leave locked behind private entities. All the hyperadvamced analysis and techniques doesn't do squat to keep you credible with the masses. You have to make it something people can actually get close enough to see and absorb/experience for themselves.
Without trust, not for all the good faith in Christendom will anyone get anything out of or over me. -apologies to J.P. Morgan
I can't really argue over the conclusions common sense leads to. I don't personally buy it, but I can unfortunately understand it. A lot of uncommon sense, unfortunately, tends to find it's way to making people who rely on common sense miserable.
This is why we can't have nice things.
Whats the relationship between vaccinated population and variants? Articles like this have an underlying claim that vaccines prevent variants from being created and spreading, but I've also heard that vaccines can select for variants as more innocuous strands aren't spread.
Related reading: reservoir populations and Malthusian population dynamics.
However, there’s zero chance of eradicating the virus. It readily crosses species barriers, so we’d have to vaccinate all mammals to wipe it out. (The same can be said for COVID’s closest relative, the common cold.)
This is no reason to avoid getting vaccinated.
[0] https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.01.21259833v...
Anyone who is genuinely interested in the experimental origins and implementation of mRNA vaccines should review Bret Weinstein's podcast [1].
1 - https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCi5N_uAqApEUIlg32QzkPlg
As someone who is fully vaccinated, I think we are at the point of many people just have a form of Stockholm syndrome and have formed a psychological bond with the captor that they do not want to let go of.
If these stories comfort you in some way then enjoy. To pretend this is some giant deal though is just not reality.
Hmmmm. I'm not so sure about this. You can choose to continue self-isolating indefinitely. In this case the risk of exposure to covid is low. Sure, on an infinite timeline, you will catch it. But the longer you wait, the more data we will have. That includes data on "known unknowns," like long-term vaccine side effects, effects of long covid, and vaccine efficacy against new variants. But it also includes more data on "unknown unknowns," like potential long-term risks of the mRNA delivery mechanism, or new vaccines that have yet to be developed. Also, the longer you wait, the more other people get vaccinated and the more you benefit by leeching off herd immunity.
On an individual level, the choice is generally far more complicated than "get vaccine" or "get covid." Personally, as an under-30 with a low-exposure lifestyle, I'm waiting as long as possible to get the vaccine. I want to see more data on mRNA side effects – specifically, I'm worried that we're observing vascular inflammation, but doctors are unable to explain the mechanism causing it. To me, that means we don't understand the vaccines enough to eliminate sufficient "unknown unknowns." With that much uncertainty, combined with my very low exposure coefficient, I don't agree that the benefits of a vaccine outweigh the risks for me personally at this time. And an NYT columnist is not going to change my mind on that without a more rigorous analysis that allows adjusting for exposure risk and unknown unknowns.
If people want to self-isolate, I hope we can start enforcing that via limitations on going out without being vaccinated. If you stay in your own home and get food delivered, and never leave, I don't really care. I just don't want you going to stores/offices/events/restaurants with everyone else.
Especially without a mask, as has started happening ever since CDC declared that vaccinated people don’t need to wear masks.
In my case the choice was basically known risk vs unknown risk. With vaccines there is a known risk. So get the vaccine and listen to your body carefully over the next week or so and get medical help in needed. In the case of COVID-19 with the symptoms and long-COVID it’s just not clear where one will end up.
Moreover it takes at least 5 weeks to develop immunity. So if schools/offices open and decide in-person instruction you need at least 5 week lead time which further complicates the decision.