Pardon my semantics....the mRNA method has been unused until now...how is that?TXTransplant said:BohunkAg said:Yeah, this is actually a pretty groundbreaking vaccine from what I understand. No one seems to want this to end though.TXTransplant said:gougler08 said:Seems to do a pretty good job of preventing infection and transmissioncajunaggie08 said:Because the vaccine doesnt full on stop you from contracting and carrying the virus. It just helps keep you from having really bad symptoms from catching it. I dont see the CDC lifting the negative test guideline until more people are vaccinated locally so the threat of someone bringing in a new variant is minimized.J. Walter Weatherman said:aTm2004 said:I don't think they lied to me. It's been proven they have. I'm just not going to sit back and accept anything else they say again because they shot their credibility.CoachRTM said:I don't hate anyone. I rarely post on this board and don't even know who you are. So far, my impression is that you are an antagonist and defensive, and not prone to meaningful conversation.aTm2004 said:CoachRTM said:Everything was pretty civil around here until you started popping up. Chill out a little bit.aTm2004 said:CoachRTM said:I'm sure they'd answer that it came from the CDC, who is filled with scientists that we should be listening to. They believe science is on their side.aTm2004 said:I'm sure if you ask them where the 6' rule came from, they couldn't tell you. And if you tell them it was pulled out of someone's ass, they wouldn't believe you, even when you show them proof. You'd think that would be enough for people to question what other BS we've been dealing with for the past year that was forced upon us with zero scientific evidence of it actually working.CoachRTM said:Ok, so you are disheartened by others' decisions that they personally make. I can understand that. Can you also understand why they would be disheartened by your decision to not wear one? From their vantage point, wearing a mask is (at worst) a minor inconvenience that could "save lives".Seersucker Ag 2011 said:People absolutely have the right to continue to wear masks or any other silly stuff that they want to wear. Businesses absolutely have the right to require masks or any other silly stuff they want to require.CoachRTM said:
I don't understand the people who are upset with others wearing masks. If you don't want to wear one, don't. If a store requires it, either put it on or go somewhere else. 5 years from now when COVID is just a memory, there will still be some people wearing masks - it was common in Asia even before COVID, and I would imagine something similar will happen now here.
Maybe it's just me, but life's too short to get triggered by every person walking around in a mask when it is a personal/ business choice on whether or not they are wearing it (in Texas anyway).
.... And this is coming from someone who thinks that wearing masks is just emotion theater the way 99% of people wear them.
But many people are sheep and won't ditch the mask until others do as well. I went to a completely outdoor event in a huge, spread out park this past weekend and probably 75% of the 2000+ people there wore masks throughout. There was no requirement, there's no state or local mask mandate in place, and there's honestly no risk since it was outside and completely spread out. Yet, the masks continue.
Is it their right? Sure. Is it good for us as a society? Absolutely not. I'm not "triggered" by others wearing masks. But, especially in outdoor situations, it's disheartening.
Take who is right out of the equation, because they believe you are just as wrong as you believe they are.
Look - I'm not arguing one way or another, I'm trying to reasonably see both sides. There are idiots on both sides of the argument.
Came from the CDC who pulled it out of their ass and had zero scientific proof for it. Do you honestly not see the issue there or are you choosing to be obtuse on purpose?
Translation: He's right, so I need to hop on the "hate aTm2004 bandwagon" in hopes I'll get some support from the argument I can't refute.All I'm doing is questioning it. If the "CDC, who is filled with scientists that we should be listening to" pulled a number out of thin air with zero science supporting it and then pushed it to the masses, I'm wondering why in the hell we should ever trust the CDC again.Quote:
I understand the CDC did (does) not have any scientific data for the 6-foot guidelines and has since reduced it to 3 feet. I understand why you don't trust the CDC. I didn't say I agreed with the people who blindly follow the CDC, because I don't.I don't trust them because they've been proven to lie to us to push their agenda. Because of that, I will forever question anything they say due to their credibility being about as solid as Juicy's. CDC, WHO, US Government...all the same inside with different clothing.Quote:
I CAN at least understand people who do trust them, however. If you don't trust them, who are you supposed to trust and listen to? I'd rather it be the CDC or WHO than the US Government.
And ok, you think the CDC lied to you once and you won't believe them again because of that. At least I understand where you're coming from. Like I said, I'm kind of in the middle on all this and just trying to understand everyone's takes.
The CDC is still requiring a negative test to come in from other countries even if you are vaccinated. Regardless of any other garbage they have put out, that alone is so absurd and non-sensical that they should lose whatever credibility they have left. Wtf is the point of getting vaccinated if you still have to abide by restrictions like that (and others)?
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-29/pfizer-moderna-vaccines-prevent-infections-in-real-world-study
Came here to post this. The data clearly shows the vaccine does more than just prevent "really bad symptoms".
Not to mention, the fact that the CDC went almost a year, during the height of the pandemic, NOT requiring a negative test to enter the country, only to implement this policy after the election/inauguration, is a joke.
Not really - most vaccines prevent infection and transmission. That's what makes them so effective.
The delivery method (mRNA) is "new", but I wouldn't quite call it groundbreaking because it's been researched/known about for the better part of 20 years. We've know it could be a game-changer, there was just no reason/need to utilize it until now.
Tine Coronavirus thread
2,499,715 Views |
20959 Replies |
Last: 2 mo ago by Ciboag96
mRNA technology has been around for years. The COVID vaccines are the first to be mass produced using the technology for use on the general public. There is minimal long term studies on the effects of mRNA vaccines. Technically the COVID vaccines aren't FDA approved. They're being used as under the Emergency Use Authorization.
Once this is FDA approved and not just EUA, I'm sure hesitancy to taking it will be reduced quickly.
aTm '99
A side note about EUA - the program was created after 9/11 EXACTLY for situations like this. They wanted a mechanism to cut through the red tape and government bureaucracy that often delays new drugs/treatments and/or makes them very expensive.
There has been a lot of misinformation out there about the FDA approval process and EUA, too.
In general, there is no set amount of time that any drug, vaccine, or treatment method has to be studied before it is approved. It can be a few years or dozens of years. A lot of it depends on how large the cohort of people needing the treatment is.
In the case of the Covid vaccine, it was subjected to the same rigorous phased trials as any other vaccine. A big difference is that Covid does affect just about anyone and everyone (unlike, say, a treatment for cancer, where you have to find people who have the specific cancer before you can do the studies).
So, they have been able to collect a huge amount of data about the vaccine in a short period of time.
The argument I hear all the time is that there are no "long-term" studies. The problem is, the FDA doesn't even have a definition of "long-term". What is it...5 years, 10, more? In the meantime, how many people have to get sick and die? How long does our way of life have to be disrupted?
Also, there is a huge collection of data on all sorts of vaccines. There was no reason to believe that this vaccine would behave any differently.
The risk that some people could have an adverse reaction to this vaccine is true for ANY vaccine.
There has been a lot of misinformation out there about the FDA approval process and EUA, too.
In general, there is no set amount of time that any drug, vaccine, or treatment method has to be studied before it is approved. It can be a few years or dozens of years. A lot of it depends on how large the cohort of people needing the treatment is.
In the case of the Covid vaccine, it was subjected to the same rigorous phased trials as any other vaccine. A big difference is that Covid does affect just about anyone and everyone (unlike, say, a treatment for cancer, where you have to find people who have the specific cancer before you can do the studies).
So, they have been able to collect a huge amount of data about the vaccine in a short period of time.
The argument I hear all the time is that there are no "long-term" studies. The problem is, the FDA doesn't even have a definition of "long-term". What is it...5 years, 10, more? In the meantime, how many people have to get sick and die? How long does our way of life have to be disrupted?
Also, there is a huge collection of data on all sorts of vaccines. There was no reason to believe that this vaccine would behave any differently.
The risk that some people could have an adverse reaction to this vaccine is true for ANY vaccine.
Not being snarky here, I am genuinely curious because I do not know your background. How do you know this stuff?
Nitro Power said:
Not being snarky here, I am genuinely curious because I do not know your background. How do you know this stuff?
This information is easily found with a little digging. The information just hasn't been dissemintated well because the media morons don't feel it is necessary for the public to be educated on the process.Nitro Power said:
Not being snarky here, I am genuinely curious because I do not know your background. How do you know this stuff?
I've dealt with the FDA many times, albeit with animal health/nutrition, but the stooges there are all the same.
Irish 2.0 said:This information is easily found with a little digging. The information just hasn't been dissemintated well because the media morons don't feel it is necessary for the public to be educated on the process.Nitro Power said:
Not being snarky here, I am genuinely curious because I do not know your background. How do you know this stuff?
I've dealt with the FDA many times, albeit with animal health/nutrition, but the stooges there are all the same.
This, at least when it comes to the info about the FDA.
I'm a PhD chemical engineer by training, and I have a research background that ties into microbiology and biochemistry. So, I know the basics about how mRNA and DNA work, and when I read about the technology it makes sense to me (probably more so than to someone who doesn't have that background).
The garbage being circulated about this vaccine is the same basic garbage that's been circulated for years about GMOs and pesticides and food additives and "clean beauty". And, frankly, I'm sick of it.
Similar feeling here. It is not that I am opposed to getting the vaccine eventually. Hell, I advised both of my parents to get the vaccine because they're in their mid-60s and are at risk due several factors. In a R/R scenario, it is to their benefit to get it.TXTransplant said:Irish 2.0 said:This information is easily found with a little digging. The information just hasn't been dissemintated well because the media morons don't feel it is necessary for the public to be educated on the process.Nitro Power said:
Not being snarky here, I am genuinely curious because I do not know your background. How do you know this stuff?
I've dealt with the FDA many times, albeit with animal health/nutrition, but the stooges there are all the same.
This, at least when it comes to the info about the FDA.
I'm a PhD chemical engineer by training, and I have a research background that ties into microbiology and biochemistry. So, I know the basics about how mRNA and DNA work, and when I read about the technology it makes sense to me (probably more so than to someone who doesn't have that background).
The garbage being circulated about this vaccine is the same basic garbage that's been circulated for years about GMOs and pesticides and food additives and "clean beauty". And, frankly, I'm sick of it.
But myself; I'm 33, good health, exercise 5x/week, and have no underlying issues. Zero reason for me to line up and jump through hoops to get the vaccine now or anytime in the near future. I have the luxury to sit back and wait to see if anything comes of it over the next 5-10yrs. Not expecting there will be anything, but no harm in me wating to see.
I'm not dealing with the government waitlists and mega sites. That being said, my pcp received some and sent out a notification so I signed up, getting it tomorrow.
To your point of zero reason, though. This really isn't true. I mean, it's your choice. But just because you have a 99.97+% survivability rate, that's not the only reason to get the vaccine. I don't know exact numbers, and it's still small, but post infection complications of this virus are significantly higher.
So, yes, while still minuscule, your chances of getting covid and having lasting complications is still higher than having any long lasting issues from the vaccine.
To your point of zero reason, though. This really isn't true. I mean, it's your choice. But just because you have a 99.97+% survivability rate, that's not the only reason to get the vaccine. I don't know exact numbers, and it's still small, but post infection complications of this virus are significantly higher.
So, yes, while still minuscule, your chances of getting covid and having lasting complications is still higher than having any long lasting issues from the vaccine.
To me it is much more subjective than that. I'm essentially at a higher risk of being killed in a car accident driving to get the vaccine than I am of dying from the virus. What lasting complications have been demonstrated amongst my demographic? How can we assess lasting complications when the virus itself has only been around for ~16 months?htxag09 said:
I'm not dealing with the government waitlists and mega sites. That being said, my pcp received some and sent out a notification so I signed up, getting it tomorrow.
To your point of zero reason, though. This really isn't true. I mean, it's your choice. But just because you have a 99.97+% survivability rate, that's not the only reason to get the vaccine. I don't know exact numbers, and it's still small, but post infection complications of this virus are significantly higher.
So, yes, while still minuscule, your chances of getting covid and having lasting complications is still higher than having any long lasting issues from the vaccine.
Mind the hyperbole there, but I think you get my point.
7-day average case numbers are the lowest they have been since June (for TX)
Man...just think how low it would be if we were forced to wear a mask
Lol. Not quite how risks work, but whatever. Also, as I mentioned, dying of a virus isn't the only reason to be vaccinate.
But carry on and you do you. I will agree that you have a very minor risk of dying or developing complications from covid. Minor enough that I support your choice to not get the vaccine. So carry on
But carry on and you do you. I will agree that you have a very minor risk of dying or developing complications from covid. Minor enough that I support your choice to not get the vaccine. So carry on
WTF is up with Delmar vacc site? just drove by and its closed/totally empty.
with the big city strokeoff to get poked, how the hell are they not running that thing all day everyday - inventory issue i suppose?
with the big city strokeoff to get poked, how the hell are they not running that thing all day everyday - inventory issue i suppose?
Irish 2.0 said:To me it is much more subjective than that. I'm essentially at a higher risk of being killed in a car accident driving to get the vaccine than I am of dying from the virus. What lasting complications have been demonstrated amongst my demographic? How can we assess lasting complications when the virus itself has only been around for ~16 months?htxag09 said:
I'm not dealing with the government waitlists and mega sites. That being said, my pcp received some and sent out a notification so I signed up, getting it tomorrow.
To your point of zero reason, though. This really isn't true. I mean, it's your choice. But just because you have a 99.97+% survivability rate, that's not the only reason to get the vaccine. I don't know exact numbers, and it's still small, but post infection complications of this virus are significantly higher.
So, yes, while still minuscule, your chances of getting covid and having lasting complications is still higher than having any long lasting issues from the vaccine.
Mind the hyperbole there, but I think you get my point.
This logic is used by insurance companies to determine eligibility for other vaccines. You have to be 50 to get the shingles vaccine because shingles typically doesn't affect people younger than that. Once a woman is above a certain age, she is no longer eligible for the HPV vaccine because "statistics" say she's already been exposed to the virus.
Uberrito on Shepherd- no requirement
Posts from infection_ag11 on the covid board:
Quote:
Finally, the long terms complication rates from COVID19 are remarkably high for a viral respiratory pathogen. This is true even among young healthy people, where up to 15% of this population is still reporting symptoms or adverse effects months after resolution of infection. The MORBIDITY of the virus is where it dramatically differs from influenza in healthy people (as opposed to the MORTALITY).
Survival isn't the only metric
Quote:
Most people who get polio survive, but potentially living out your days in a wheelchair isn't preferable to a vaccine for most people. I've got previously healthy 30-40 year olds still on home oxygen months after their initial infection. LOTS of relatively young post covid clinic patients who still can't return to any form of exercise or physically demanding hobby months after their infection. A good number of post-COVID pulmonary emboli and DVTs. Every day I see at least 1-2 patients with severe long term complications of covid that have landed them back in the hospital.
Oh no! "LOTS (in all caps for emphasis) of young healthy people struggling for months. Sorry, that is not the experience for most. I'm a "relatively young" post covid patient who never missed anything including workouts even while having covid. With limited exceptions, nearly everyone that I know who has had it had similar experiences. I'm not getting the vaccine because it is simply not necessary for people like me IMO.htxag09 said:
Posts from infection_ag11 on the covid board:Quote:
Finally, the long terms complication rates from COVID19 are remarkably high for a viral respiratory pathogen. This is true even among young healthy people, where up to 15% of this population is still reporting symptoms or adverse effects months after resolution of infection. The MORBIDITY of the virus is where it dramatically differs from influenza in healthy people (as opposed to the MORTALITY).
Survival isn't the only metricQuote:
Most people who get polio survive, but potentially living out your days in a wheelchair isn't preferable to a vaccine for most people. I've got previously healthy 30-40 year olds still on home oxygen months after their initial infection. LOTS of relatively young post covid clinic patients who still can't return to any form of exercise or physically demanding hobby months after their infection. A good number of post-COVID pulmonary emboli and DVTs. Every day I see at least 1-2 patients with severe long term complications of covid that have landed them back in the hospital.
I 100% agree, especially since you've had it already. And myself nor these doctors have never said these are likely side effects. So not why you throw out that most don't experience them. Again, I agree. Nobody every said most will.
I'm just pointing out that, while mortality is really low for you, complications are slightly more likely. Again, never said they're likely, or most experience them, like you're implying. But they are more likely than long term complications from a vaccine. So there absolutely is a fallacy in people stating they aren't getting the vaccine because of unknown long term complications when the virus has a 99.9+% survival rate for their demographic.
I'm just pointing out that, while mortality is really low for you, complications are slightly more likely. Again, never said they're likely, or most experience them, like you're implying. But they are more likely than long term complications from a vaccine. So there absolutely is a fallacy in people stating they aren't getting the vaccine because of unknown long term complications when the virus has a 99.9+% survival rate for their demographic.
I think it is premature to make this assumption given that we don't know if there could be long term complications from the mRNA vaccines because they haven't been distributed in mass quantities up until 4 months ago.htxag09 said:
I 100% agree, especially since you've had it already. And myself nor these doctors have never said these are likely side effects. So not why you throw out that most don't experience them. Again, I agree. Nobody every said most will.
I'm just pointing out that, while mortality is really low for you, complications are slightly more likely. Again, never said they're likely, or most experience them, like you're implying. But they are more likely than long term complications from a vaccine. So there absolutely is a fallacy in people stating they aren't getting the vaccine because of unknown long term complications when the virus has a 99.9+% survival rate for their demographic.
To the point on the mega sites and inconvenience..... I get that. I'm a healthy 37 year old so was willing to wait until things were easier. Sure enough this week I checked on Walgreens. There were tons of appointments all over the city, including the one on 20th and Yale. The hoops are getting easier to jump through in a significant way.
How likely are they?htxag09 said:
I 100% agree, especially since you've had it already. And myself nor these doctors have never said these are likely side effects. So not why you throw out that most don't experience them. Again, I agree. Nobody every said most will.
I'm just pointing out that, while mortality is really low for you, complications are slightly more likely. Again, never said they're likely, or most experience them, like you're implying. But they are more likely than long term complications from a vaccine. So there absolutely is a fallacy in people stating they aren't getting the vaccine because of unknown long term complications when the virus has a 99.9+% survival rate for their demographic.
People wanting to weigh personal risks would like to have these facts quantified apart from anecdotal graphic stories of complications.
I'm serious, I'd like to know for my own judgement without an appeal to emotion on top of an unquantified risk. PH types have been using that tactic for a year to mislead people about risks and I do not trust anyone's judgements anymore, I want to see the data for myself.
I'm pro-vax, looks like it is having outstanding results, but there are complications and risks.
If you genuinely want to know id suggest venturing over to the covid board and asking the doctors who are active there and do this for a living.
Thats all the toxins in your body. You need to align your shockrahs (TM) and clean out those toxins with this new vegan based shake. Join my team and you can be a #boss as well.TXTransplant said:Irish 2.0 said:This information is easily found with a little digging. The information just hasn't been dissemintated well because the media morons don't feel it is necessary for the public to be educated on the process.Nitro Power said:
Not being snarky here, I am genuinely curious because I do not know your background. How do you know this stuff?
I've dealt with the FDA many times, albeit with animal health/nutrition, but the stooges there are all the same.
This, at least when it comes to the info about the FDA.
I'm a PhD chemical engineer by training, and I have a research background that ties into microbiology and biochemistry. So, I know the basics about how mRNA and DNA work, and when I read about the technology it makes sense to me (probably more so than to someone who doesn't have that background).
The garbage being circulated about this vaccine is the same basic garbage that's been circulated for years about GMOs and pesticides and food additives and "clean beauty". And, frankly, I'm sick of it.
htxag09 said:
If you genuinely want to know id suggest venturing over to the covid board and asking the doctors who are active there and do this for a living.
Good folks doing good work, I'm sure, but that place seems to me to be extremely anecdote and emotion heavy.
I don't blame people for being affected by and passionate about something they've seen do so much damage before their own eyes, but no one knows what they don't know.
Second vaccine scheduled for next Tuesday. 33 and never quit doing what I wanted, but will be happy to have one less thing to worry about.
Just get the damn shot and be done with it (said to no one in particular).
Just get the damn shot and be done with it (said to no one in particular).
The post you cited doesn't say likely, but it overstates the risk and is designed to incite fear. That is how I read it.
Bassmaster said:
The post you cited doesn't say likely, but it overstates the risk and is designed to incite fear. That is how I read it.
And I can see that without the context. The doctor was probably exhausted from replying to people saying completely false things such as the vaccine altering your DNA.
Also, is it overstating the risk to incite fear when people say things like they're more likely to die in an accident while driving to get the vaccine than they are from the virus?
Just got my first jab.
I'll let y'all know if I grow an extra horn or start up my own 5G.
I'll let y'all know if I grow an extra horn or start up my own 5G.
Got my 1st last week...arm hurt for a couple days but I'm not glowing or generating any radiation to my knowledgeCDUB98 said:
Just got my first jab.
I'll let y'all know if I grow an extra horn or start up my own 5G.