Would you consider getting the Novavax vaccine if its approved by then? We should know by next month here in the US I believe.
Tine Coronavirus thread
2,601,972 Views |
20959 Replies |
Last: 7 mo ago by Ciboag96
CDUB98 said:
I don't recall ever seeing TXTransplant advocating for forced/mandate vaxx.
I haven't. I'm totally against it. Had to bite my tongue yesterday at lunch when a coworker all of a sudden said the Supreme Court made the wrong decision.
But, you can be against vaccine mandates and also understand that the vaccines are safe and effective (to a degree) for the vast majority of people. And, I can't stand the amount of garbage information that's been spread the last two years.
My ire doesn't stop with the vaccine. I unfollowed an acquaintance who is posting on IG about turning off the 5G on your phone and advocates for "detoxing" your body.
CDUB98 said:
I may be squeezed into a corner come the end of April.
I have a trip to Portugal planned the second week of May. The EU is updating their requirements on entry. Before, you had to test no matter what, now, if you can prove you're "up to date" within the last 270 days, no testing requirement and more liberty in the region.
Guess who has two thumbs and doesn't want a booster....this guy. This would be a pleasure trip and my first time to Portugal. I really don't want to cancel and no telling how many thousands I'd lose, even with trip insurance. I can get in the country, but I don't know if I'll be barred from certain activities.
Are they going forward with the booster requirement? I don't want the booster at this time. If they change the definition of fully vaxxed, that would take a trip to the Azores off the table (I was looking to go there in June since it's highly unlikely we will be going on the Japan trip I booked last year).
Last I read, they were still debating it, and there was talk that the booster would only be required for people over a certain age (60 or 65, IIRC).
98Ag99Grad said:
Would you consider getting the Novavax vaccine if its approved by then? We should know by next month here in the US I believe.
I absolutely would.
TXTransplant said:CDUB98 said:
I may be squeezed into a corner come the end of April.
I have a trip to Portugal planned the second week of May. The EU is updating their requirements on entry. Before, you had to test no matter what, now, if you can prove you're "up to date" within the last 270 days, no testing requirement and more liberty in the region.
Guess who has two thumbs and doesn't want a booster....this guy. This would be a pleasure trip and my first time to Portugal. I really don't want to cancel and no telling how many thousands I'd lose, even with trip insurance. I can get in the country, but I don't know if I'll be barred from certain activities.
Are they going forward with the booster requirement? I don't want the booster at this time. If they change the definition of fully vaxxed, that would take a trip to the Azores off the table (I was looking to go there in June since it's highly unlikely we will be going on the Japan trip I booked last year).
Last I read, they were still debating it, and there was talk that the booster would only be required for people over a certain age (60 or 65, IIRC).
Language from the article that was shared by a fellow traveler in other sandboxes:
Quote:
In addition, on the same day, February 1, the Member States will shorten the validity of vaccination documents to 270 days.
Yeah, I read an article with similar language. Problem is when I go to the Azores official website, the only info is related to entry. If it's an international flight, you get in with a negative test. The only people exempt are those flying from Portugal and have a valid EU certificate.
I haven't read anything about restrictions upon arrival, but maybe I haven't looked hard enough.
Edited: visitportugal website does say you need proof of vax or a negative test when entering certain establishments (including restaurants), but it doesn't say how recent the test has to be.
Official Azores website and the My Safe Azores portal says nothing about proof on anything beyond the negative test.
I haven't read anything about restrictions upon arrival, but maybe I haven't looked hard enough.
Edited: visitportugal website does say you need proof of vax or a negative test when entering certain establishments (including restaurants), but it doesn't say how recent the test has to be.
Official Azores website and the My Safe Azores portal says nothing about proof on anything beyond the negative test.
The restrictions upon arrival probably get very gray.
As the wife of that traveler is Italian, he noted that there were varying levels of the Green Pass in Italy. Same could be the case in Portugal, or elsewhere.
Can't have any of us unclean shmucks running around all free and stuff.
As the wife of that traveler is Italian, he noted that there were varying levels of the Green Pass in Italy. Same could be the case in Portugal, or elsewhere.
Can't have any of us unclean shmucks running around all free and stuff.
Fair enough, I suppose, but the vaccines aren't stopping anyone from getting COVID. So why double your risk of unknown harm when you can just risk whatever long term harm may come with catching COVID?
Because you're not doubling your risks. The risks of long-term complications from Covid are much greater. And no one can predict if they will have a mild, moderate, or severe case.
The risk of complications from the vaccine are much lower. Much of the discussion about vaccine "risk" has been speculation, anecdotal, and straight up lies.
Again, I am not for vaccine mandates. I just hate hearing all the garbage that gets spewed. Everything from the vaccine changes your DNA to it "very likely" causes cancer. It's just fear-mongering.
The risk of complications from the vaccine are much lower. Much of the discussion about vaccine "risk" has been speculation, anecdotal, and straight up lies.
Again, I am not for vaccine mandates. I just hate hearing all the garbage that gets spewed. Everything from the vaccine changes your DNA to it "very likely" causes cancer. It's just fear-mongering.
YOU DON'T KNOW THIS.TXTransplant said:
Because you're not doubling your risks. The risks of long-term complications from Covid are much greater. And no one can predict if they will have a mild, moderate, or severe case.
The risk of complications from the vaccine are much lower. Much of the discussion about vaccine "risk" has been speculation, anecdotal, and straight up lies.
Again, I am not for vaccine mandates. I just hate hearing all the garbage that gets spewed. Everything from the vaccine changes your DNA to it "very likely" causes cancer. It's just fear-mongering.
You just saying the vaccines have no long term risks doesn't make it true. Nor does the other side saying they do make it true. At the end of the day there is insufficient data to be definitive one way or the other. Your certainty is based on your need to believe it to be true.
Also if you catch covid even with a vaccine why wouldn't you expect similar long term complications?
We are two years into this. Billions of people have had covid and billions have been vaccinated. There are multiple studies of both Covid patients and vaccinated patients that have shown the rates of complications from Covid (myocarditis, heart attack, lung problems, and many other issues) are much higher in Covid patients, particularly those who were hospitalized.texagbeliever said:YOU DON'T KNOW THIS.TXTransplant said:
Because you're not doubling your risks. The risks of long-term complications from Covid are much greater. And no one can predict if they will have a mild, moderate, or severe case.
The risk of complications from the vaccine are much lower. Much of the discussion about vaccine "risk" has been speculation, anecdotal, and straight up lies.
Again, I am not for vaccine mandates. I just hate hearing all the garbage that gets spewed. Everything from the vaccine changes your DNA to it "very likely" causes cancer. It's just fear-mongering.
You just saying the vaccines have no long term risks doesn't make it true. Nor does the other side saying they do make it true. At the end of the day there is insufficient data to be definitive one way or the other. Your certainty is based on your need to believe it to be true.
Also if you catch covid even with a vaccine why wouldn't you expect similar long term complications?
The studies are very easy to find if you care to look. I'm guessing you don't.
As far as vaccines are concerned (and this doesn't just apply to mRNA vaccines) the issue of "long-term" complications is moot. Any complication attributed to a vaccine is going to show up within days or weeks of being vaccinated. This is a baseline understanding for all vaccines. From a biological and physiological standpoint, there is no reason why a vaccine alone cause some "long-term effect" that shows up years from now, and there is pretty much no way science could even prove it. Way too many other variables after that much time has elapsed. Not to mention, the vaccine itself and it's components are pretty much destroyed by the human body within a matter of days.
The vaccines that have come to marked in recent years (for example, the shingles vaccine) took longer to approve because they were being studied for EFFICACY over the long term.
Any "long-term" effects someone might have from the vaccine would be a secondary result due to an unusual immune response that might trigger other complications, and this is a possibility for all vaccines. Again, this immune response would happen within days of vaccination.
Our immune system is tested every minute of every day - by viruses, bacteria, pollen, toxins, chemicals, and sometimes even the food we eat. The further removed you are from the time of contact, the less likely one specific exposure is the trigger for said immune response.
The idea of worrying about the 'long-term effects" of an mRNA vaccine is comparable to worrying about the "long-term effects" of GMO food. Neither are a risk, but there is a section of the population who want to believe that they are.
The "long-term" risk comes from viruses themselves (not just Covid), as they can and do change your DNA, as I explained in a previous post.
Also, the "YOU DON'T KNOW THIS" arguments are ridiculous. This isn't stuff I'm making up. Do the research. Read the articles. Try your best to understand the science that affects your personal health. In some ways, medicine is an art, especially since every human is unique. But data tells a story, and the overwhelming evidence for vaccines and this vaccine is that it is safe for the vast majority of people.
I didn't read your entire post, but here is one thing you and everyone else needs to understand. NO ONE knows the long term effects of the virus, or the vaccines. This technology has never been used, so any thoughts about long term safety are based solely on models and projections. Things life infertility could be an issue, which we won't know for years. The body has a remarkable way of healing itself, and I think long term the effects of the virus will be less than with these shots. Pure speculation on my part, but my guess is probably about as good as anyone else's.
From a purely literal standpoint, sure no one knows the long term effects of the virus or the vaccine with absolute certainty.Nitro Power said:
I didn't read your entire post, but here is one thing you and everyone else needs to understand. NO ONE knows the long term effects of the virus, or the vaccines. This technology has never been used, so any thoughts about long term safety are based solely on models and projections. Things life infertility could be an issue, which we won't know for years. The body has a remarkable way of healing itself, and I think long term the effects of the virus will be less than with these shots. Pure speculation on my part, but my guess is probably about as good as anyone else's.
However, there is plenty of biological, physiological, biochemical, and medical expertise in the world as well as actual data to make (highly) educated, evidence-based guesses/hypotheses. This is how science and medicine works since very few things are known with absolute certainty. If it weren't for these evidence-based hypotheses, we would never have new drugs, vaccines, and treatments and we'd be treating illness like we did in the 1800's.
If you believe that the vaccine can cause infertility, then logically, you have to believe that the virus also causes infertility.
Now, there is no evidence that the vaccine (ie, the mRNA particles or the spike protein) causes infertility, and there is no scientific basis for this concern/fear based on our understanding of mRNA and the human body (which goes well beyond the specific development of this vaccine).
But, if you want to believe that, you can't just attribute it to the vaccine because the virus has even more significant effects on the body than the vaccine does.
Look at it another way - one of the vaccine complications you hear about a lot (for other vaccines) is Guillain Barre Syndrome. But, this isn't a complication solely caused by vaccines. GBS is can be triggered by gastroenteritis, a respiratory infection that can be caused by either a bacteria or a virus. It can also occur after influenza infection. What actually happens with GBS is it causes your immune system to damage your nervous system - so it's more of a secondary complication of infection due to your immune system response.
It makes sense, then that GBS can also be triggered by some vaccines - because vaccines trigger your immune system.
GBS has also been identified as a side-effect of the covid vaccine, but rates of GBS in covid invected patients are HIGHER than those who are vaccinated.
I get it, though...there is a lot of junk information out there, not just related to the vaccines. I referenced it before, but just look at the arguments around GMO foods and organic vs. non-organic foods. Then there is the stupidest trend of all - that "natural" chemicals are better than synthetic (ummm…lead and arsenic are "natural" chemicals".
Much of the information presented is absolute garbage, but people believe it because they want to be able to attribute their cancer or heart disease or migraines or "inflammation" to a specific thing they did or a specific thing in the environment. But, in reality, most often that is just not possible (and to do so is misguided and inaccurate).
Yeah, I got the vaccine back when it was just two shots and then got COVID anyway. I didn't have any apparent short-term issues with either COVID or the vaccine. I don't see a reason to take a risk again by getting another shot, no matter how safe I'm promised it is long-term by people that have been wrong about both COVID and the vaccine every step of the way. Just pointing to "the science" is no longer a credible argument to me.
Now if I was 80 or fat, that would likely change things as I calculated risk.
Now if I was 80 or fat, that would likely change things as I calculated risk.
Just for clarity, I'm not an anti-vac we, but I do not typically take any sort of vaccine. It's a simple risk benefit analysis for me. I was blessed with an extremely strong immune system (probably from all the **** we did as kids, but I digress). I'm also typically against medication. I'm speaking for myself not others here, which has been the problem for the last two years. A number of "experts" think that they know what is best for people. That is simply not the case.
For me, the overreaching push by government to force this on people is a big concern for me. I have to question...why? Everyone should be able to have their own opinions and make their own decisions, but somehow along the way we as a society lost that outlook. I don't necessarily agree with everything you have said, but I certainly respect your right to state your opinion. Perhaps if this philosophy was taking place across both sides, we would be much better off as a society. We were already divided, but this just created more of a divide.
The condescending nature with which these "experts" have approached the message is off putting. If you (not you specifically, in general) want to be condescending to people you better damn well be right, or prepared to be apologetic when you are wrong. We have seen a number of times people have been wrong, but instead of being humble, they double down.
Perhaps I got off topic, but those were the thoughts that came to mind.
For me, the overreaching push by government to force this on people is a big concern for me. I have to question...why? Everyone should be able to have their own opinions and make their own decisions, but somehow along the way we as a society lost that outlook. I don't necessarily agree with everything you have said, but I certainly respect your right to state your opinion. Perhaps if this philosophy was taking place across both sides, we would be much better off as a society. We were already divided, but this just created more of a divide.
The condescending nature with which these "experts" have approached the message is off putting. If you (not you specifically, in general) want to be condescending to people you better damn well be right, or prepared to be apologetic when you are wrong. We have seen a number of times people have been wrong, but instead of being humble, they double down.
Perhaps I got off topic, but those were the thoughts that came to mind.
Not talking about you here either, but any time I see the "science changes" I want to go nuts. No the science has not, does not, and will not change. Ever. Our understanding of the science is what changes.
Again not directed at you or anyone specifically.
Again not directed at you or anyone specifically.
Didn't quote your post because things are getting long, but I agree with much of this. The answer lies somewhere in the middle.
I also don't agree with vaccinating young kids - they simply aren't at risk of severe complications or death from covid. Much like we don't give the shingles vaccine to young people, I don't think kids need this one.
I'm not on board with boosters at this time, either, unless you have not been infected and have a co-morbidity. I've had Covid and I had the initial two dose vaccine. Until there are boosters available that can address variants that evade the vaccine, like you, I don't want to keep triggering my immune system (especially since I know it handled Covid quite well).
I expect that in the long term, it will be like a flu shot, where you get one on a recurring basis. What is unknown at this point is how often that recurring basis should be. You've got people/governments saying the vaccines are only "good" for 2 months up to 9 months, but those are completely arbitrary numbers that are not supported by data, and I have a real problem with them being used to define "fully vaccinated".
We know immunity against other infections, whether achieved through infection or vaccination, can fade over time. But until I see improvements in what's administered and more studies on how long immunity lasts,, I would prefer to hold off.
I also don't agree with vaccinating young kids - they simply aren't at risk of severe complications or death from covid. Much like we don't give the shingles vaccine to young people, I don't think kids need this one.
I'm not on board with boosters at this time, either, unless you have not been infected and have a co-morbidity. I've had Covid and I had the initial two dose vaccine. Until there are boosters available that can address variants that evade the vaccine, like you, I don't want to keep triggering my immune system (especially since I know it handled Covid quite well).
I expect that in the long term, it will be like a flu shot, where you get one on a recurring basis. What is unknown at this point is how often that recurring basis should be. You've got people/governments saying the vaccines are only "good" for 2 months up to 9 months, but those are completely arbitrary numbers that are not supported by data, and I have a real problem with them being used to define "fully vaccinated".
We know immunity against other infections, whether achieved through infection or vaccination, can fade over time. But until I see improvements in what's administered and more studies on how long immunity lasts,, I would prefer to hold off.
Nitro Power said:
Just for clarity, I'm not an anti-vac we, but I do not typically take any sort of vaccine. It's a simple risk benefit analysis for me. I was blessed with an extremely strong immune system (probably from all the **** we did as kids, but I digress). I'm also typically against medication. I'm speaking for myself not others here, which has been the problem for the last two years. A number of "experts" think that they know what is best for people. That is simply not the case.
For me, the overreaching push by government to force this on people is a big concern for me. I have to question...why? Everyone should be able to have their own opinions and make their own decisions, but somehow along the way we as a society lost that outlook. I don't necessarily agree with everything you have said, but I certainly respect your right to state your opinion. Perhaps if this philosophy was taking place across both sides, we would be much better off as a society. We were already divided, but this just created more of a divide.
The condescending nature with which these "experts" have approached the message is off putting. If you (not you specifically, in general) want to be condescending to people you better damn well be right, or prepared to be apologetic when you are wrong. We have seen a number of times people have been wrong, but instead of being humble, they double down.
Perhaps I got off topic, but those were the thoughts that came to mind.
I've mentioned this in my posts before, but the cognitive dissonance between the vaccine and other health-related issues has just blown my mind.
I've said before - I've lost count of the number of women I know who have breast implants, Botox, fillers, fake nails, etc, who are anti-vax (and not just for this vaccine).
I had a convo with one acquaintance a while back who was convinced her morbidly obese and un-vaxxed husband got Covid from their son, not because the son had Covid but because the son had just been vaxxed. She insisted vaxxed people exhale the spike protein and infect others. I also believe this person identifies as a health car professional (I think she might have been a mid-wife).
Even in the medical community, there is so much focus on treating symptoms but not the actual root cause. I'm over 40 and female and have been looking into hormone replacement therapy. There is similar fear-mongering an misinformation out there about that. And VERY few OB/Gyns even treat older women because the money is in delivering babies.
I like to think I'm pretty consistent in doing my preventative care and maintenance. I, too, try to avoid recurring drugs. I exercise and eat healthy. My goal is to do everything I can to not NEED a doctor or hospital, because I know once things get to that point, you may not get the best care. As a result, I'm not scared of getting Covid, or anything else for that matter.
Geriatric and end-of-life care in this country is a mess, too. So many doctors (and often patients and their families) just focus on keeping the patient alive with no consideration of the harm that can be done by performing "heroic" procedures on a terminal patient.
I'm getting side-tracked, but if you have time, I highly recommend reading That Good Night by Surita Puri.
You can not want to get the vaccine and not be antivax. The fact that anyone who doesn't want to get it is now labeled an antivaxxer is absurd. What I assume a large portion of those people are are pro personal decision making, not antivaxxer. I see absolutely no reason for someone who is young and healthy, legitimately healthy and not the new American meaning of healthy, to get the shot now, nor get boosted, ESPECIALLY if they have already recovered from COVID. There is just no point. Thst doesn't make someone antivaxxer, but those people are absolutely labeled antivaxxers and lumped in with the loonies like the people you mentioned who thought you would exhale spike proteins.
Eta- this isn't necessarily calling you out, you have always been level headed. Again, just talking about the larger conversation here.
Eta- this isn't necessarily calling you out, you have always been level headed. Again, just talking about the larger conversation here.
This is where we are. I too am surprised at the wildly varying reactions to people over this. But I guess I shouldn't be as polarized as society is about everything now.TXTransplant said:
Didn't quote your post because things are getting long, but I agree with much of this. The answer lies somewhere in the middle.
I also don't agree with vaccinating young kids - they simply aren't at risk of severe complications or death from covid. Much like we don't give the shingles vaccine to young people, I don't think kids need this one.
I'm not on board with boosters at this time, either, unless you have not been infected and have a co-morbidity. I've had Covid and I had the initial two dose vaccine. Until there are boosters available that can address variants that evade the vaccine, like you, I don't want to keep triggering my immune system (especially since I know it handled Covid quite well).
I expect that in the long term, it will be like a flu shot, where you get one on a recurring basis. What is unknown at this point is how often that recurring basis should be. You've got people/governments saying the vaccines are only "good" for 2 months up to 9 months, but those are completely arbitrary numbers that are not supported by data, and I have a real problem with them being used to define "fully vaccinated".
We know immunity against other infections, whether achieved through infection or vaccination, can fade over time. But until I see improvements in what's administered and more studies on how long immunity lasts,, I would prefer to hold off.
No one technically knows the long term data of either. I would logically tend to side on the side of the vaccine being safer, and potentially reducing your risk of complications should you contract covid post vaccine rather than pre-vaccine. No one knows how this is going to affect people's long term immunity. We are still in the trial phases of that. I tend to think there's little chance it goes sideways, but I can also never say never.
still vacation posting from America's hat
TXTransplant said:
Alright, I'll bite:
Here is the thing I don't get about this argument - if you believe the vaccine wasn't evaluated long enough and could have significant side effects, whether short or long term, then you also have to believe that contracting the virus has the same unknown side effects. COVID doesn't cause the myocarditis, stroke, droopy face syndrome that a small percentage of the vaccines have presented. .2% chance is still higher than 0% chance, so there's no need to get a vaccine for a virus with a 99%, and climbing, survivability rate.
Vaccines have been around a long time. not in the grand scheme of thingsOur understanding of how they work and what side effects they may cause is as good as our understanding of the human immune system. Because it's not really a specific vaccine that causes the side effects -false it's the body's immune response to it.the vaccine causes the response; no vaccine, no response
And our understanding of immune responses is just like every other health condition or health treatment - we have data that represents a large section of the population but there are ALWAYS outliers. at this current point in time, dying due to COVID is the outlier
Just like a Covid infection causes variable symptoms in infected people, the vaccine (and other viruses, for that matter) also causes variable reactions. so why take the risk and infect yourself with a vaccine for a virus with a 99%, and climbing, survivability rate
Viruses, not just Covid, are complicated vectors for infection that can cause all sorts of other problems in the human body. It's known that viral infections can cause heart inflammation (the flu), cancer (HPV), liver disease, and diabetes. A recent study just suggested that Epstein Barr virus (a form of herpes that lies dormant in the body after infection) causes MS in some people. k
One might argue that some of these conditions aren't always a direct result of the virus itself, but an indirect consequence of the body's response to the virus. When your immune system is weakened, it can affect all sorts of other things. the flue, cancer, liver disease and diabetes are all more fatal than COVID, so those 'viruses' are on a different level; there's no need to get a vaccine for a virus with a 99%, and climbing, survivability rate
There is nothing inherently unsafe about the use of mRNA vaccine.maybe, but it's too early to tell The mechanism for protein formation via the mRNA vaccine is the same as the mechanism that would occur if you were infected with the virus. The vaccine is just a much lower, controlled dose. a lower dose of a virus with a 99%, and climbing, survivability rate
If you have a bad response to the vaccine, that's a function of your immune system. And it stands to reason that you would have an even worse reaction of you were to contract the virus. lots of teenage and 20 year old men and boys died after the vaccine, but may have had the virus with zero symptoms, so you this statement cannot be proven true
But you can't logically argue that the vaccine has the risk of long-term side effects and not conclude the same for the virus. either way, there's no need to get a vaccine for a virus with a 99%, and climbing, survivability rate
Sea Speed said:
You can not want to get the vaccine and not be antivax. The fact that anyone who doesn't want to get it is now labeled an antivaxxer is absurd. What I assume a large portion of those people are are pro personal decision making, not antivaxxer. I see absolutely no reason for someone who is young and healthy, legitimately healthy and not the new American meaning of healthy, to get the shot now, nor get boosted, ESPECIALLY if they have already recovered from COVID. There is just no point. Thst doesn't make someone antivaxxer, but those people are absolutely labeled antivaxxers and lumped in with the loonies like the people you mentioned who thought you would exhale spike proteins.
Eta- this isn't necessarily calling you out, you have always been level headed. Again, just talking about the larger conversation here.
I agree with your first statement. The problem I have is people spreading false information and people using that false information as reason to avoid the vax.
Personally, I think everyone I know who has chosen to not get vaxxed is also strongly anti-vaxx. And they are super eager to tell you all the false information about the vaccine that has been perpetuated. But I can certainly see how someone someone could take their age and health data along with the stats for Covid in their age group and choose to not get it. I do think most people are too lazy to do that, though, and instead just base their decision on the scary anecdotes that they hear.
And really it's the former that bugs me the most. Although, I will privately judge your intelligence and sanity if you tell me something crazy like vaxxed people exhale spike protein and infect others.
XpressAg09 said:TXTransplant said:
Alright, I'll bite:
Here is the thing I don't get about this argument - if you believe the vaccine wasn't evaluated long enough and could have significant side effects, whether short or long term, then you also have to believe that contracting the virus has the same unknown side effects. COVID doesn't cause the myocarditis, stroke, droopy face syndrome that a small percentage of the vaccines have presented. .2% chance is still higher than 0% chance, so there's no need to get a vaccine for a virus with a 99%, and climbing, survivability rate.
Vaccines have been around a long time. not in the grand scheme of thingsOur understanding of how they work and what side effects they may cause is as good as our understanding of the human immune system. Because it's not really a specific vaccine that causes the side effects -false it's the body's immune response to it.the vaccine causes the response; no vaccine, no response
And our understanding of immune responses is just like every other health condition or health treatment - we have data that represents a large section of the population but there are ALWAYS outliers. at this current point in time, dying due to COVID is the outlier
Just like a Covid infection causes variable symptoms in infected people, the vaccine (and other viruses, for that matter) also causes variable reactions. so why take the risk and infect yourself with a vaccine for a virus with a 99%, and climbing, survivability rate
Viruses, not just Covid, are complicated vectors for infection that can cause all sorts of other problems in the human body. It's known that viral infections can cause heart inflammation (the flu), cancer (HPV), liver disease, and diabetes. A recent study just suggested that Epstein Barr virus (a form of herpes that lies dormant in the body after infection) causes MS in some people. k
One might argue that some of these conditions aren't always a direct result of the virus itself, but an indirect consequence of the body's response to the virus. When your immune system is weakened, it can affect all sorts of other things. the flue, cancer, liver disease and diabetes are all more fatal than COVID, so those 'viruses' are on a different level; there's no need to get a vaccine for a virus with a 99%, and climbing, survivability rate
There is nothing inherently unsafe about the use of mRNA vaccine.maybe, but it's too early to tell The mechanism for protein formation via the mRNA vaccine is the same as the mechanism that would occur if you were infected with the virus. The vaccine is just a much lower, controlled dose. a lower dose of a virus with a 99%, and climbing, survivability rate
If you have a bad response to the vaccine, that's a function of your immune system. And it stands to reason that you would have an even worse reaction of you were to contract the virus. lots of teenage and 20 year old men and boys died after the vaccine, but may have had the virus with zero symptoms, so you this statement cannot be proven true
But you can't logically argue that the vaccine has the risk of long-term side effects and not conclude the same for the virus. either way, there's no need to get a vaccine for a virus with a 99%, and climbing, survivability rate
So much false and exaggerated information here.
Covid DOES cause myocarditis and GBS (which causes "droopy face"). As do many other viruses, including the flu and herpes. Bacterial infections also cause GBS. These viruses have all been shown to cause these events at a higher rate in patients who are infected vs those who are only vaccinated. To say otherwise is simply false.
The vaccine causes the immune response and the virus does, too. If you want to take your chances and get exposed to a virus that replicates uncontrollably in your body vs a vaccine with a known dose, fine. But to imply that these reactions are only caused by the vaccine and not the virus itself is not correct.
The survivability rate is not the same among all age groups. It is also not the same among groups with certain pre-existing conditions. To say that the survivability rate is 99% across the population is dangerously misleading.
It's also not just about surviving Covid. Diabetes has been shown to be triggered after people have severe infections/immune responses. The exact mechanism is not known but it's an identified risk. If diabetes is more fatal than Covid, and a severe reaction to Covid can cause an immune response that triggers diabetes, then the vaccine could help mitigate that (because the vaccine does lesson the severity of infection).
You can say the same thing about other Covid-related illnesses, like pneumonia.
The same thing applies to the HPV vaccine. It wasn't developed to prevent deaths from HPV. It was developed because the HPV virus can cause cancer in the long-term.
Show me the studies where "list of teenage and 20 year old men and boys died after the vaccine." Where is the data? Reported by a reputable source, not a fringe, anti-vax website. Or even VAERS, that is known to contain false reports. Claims like that are straight up fear-mongering that should be called out.
TXTransplant, I really appreciate your efforts and knowledge. Based on what you've said about your background, I'd wager you know more about vaccines than every other poster on this thread combined. But, people will still argue with you until they're blue in the face. I just don't think it's worth your effort.....
This thread is for updates on HEB, making fun of those wearing masks, and of course talking about our favorite localheroes politicians.
This thread is for updates on HEB, making fun of those wearing masks, and of course talking about our favorite local
Welp daughter gets to stay home from preschool for a week.
Was she sick? Nope. Just a single kid popped positive, which when you have a small class counts as an outbreak and the county forces you to shut the class down.
Dear parents everywhere: STOP TESTING YOUR ****ING CHILDREN.
Was she sick? Nope. Just a single kid popped positive, which when you have a small class counts as an outbreak and the county forces you to shut the class down.
Dear parents everywhere: STOP TESTING YOUR ****ING CHILDREN.
That's ***** A few weeks ago 5 kids in my 1 year old's daycare class of 12 tested positive. They didn't make anyone who wasn't sick stay home. They advised us to monitor our kids for any symptoms. He never had any symptoms but still managed to give it to my wife and I the next few days.aggietony2010 said:
Welp daughter gets to stay home from preschool for a week.
Was she sick? Nope. Just a single kid popped positive, which when you have a small class counts as an outbreak and the county forces you to shut the class down.
Dear parents everywhere: STOP TESTING YOUR ****ING CHILDREN.
Edit: don't think this is a county decision, that's on the daycare
Are you sure it is the county closing them down? That seems weird because there are kids testing positive every day at public schools and nobody is talking about closing them down?aggietony2010 said:
Welp daughter gets to stay home from preschool for a week.
Was she sick? Nope. Just a single kid popped positive, which when you have a small class counts as an outbreak and the county forces you to shut the class down.
Dear parents everywhere: STOP TESTING YOUR ****ING CHILDREN.
Dude, she can post whatever the hell she wants in relation to Covid.
No need to reveal any details but:
Was this in Harris County?
Was this a typical preschool/daycare? (Not a home one)
And the last question (I'm pretty sure I know the answer), did they mention communicating with the health dept at all?
Was this in Harris County?
Was this a typical preschool/daycare? (Not a home one)
And the last question (I'm pretty sure I know the answer), did they mention communicating with the health dept at all?
htxag09 said:
TXTransplant, I really appreciate your efforts and knowledge. Based on what you've said about your background, I'd wager you know more about vaccines than every other poster on this thread combined. But, people will still argue with you until they're blue in the face. I just don't think it's worth your effort.....
This thread is for updates on HEB, making fun of those wearing masks, and of course talking about our favorite localheroespoliticians.
I know you're right. Although, I will say I'm no vaccine expert specifically, I just have a background in biochemistry and know how to read and interpret scientific data and publications. Which is probably why I'm in this weird place where I support the initial vaccine but not the booster (unless you're old and/or sick).
I don't post very often, but I have to admit, when I do it's usually an outlet for something that's happened in real life. And for whatever reason, I can't call that person out for their ridiculousness and/or stupidity.
So, I kind of use my posts to vent and get it out of my system. Then I go back to normal - until the next time I have to bite my tongue because someone says something stupid to me.
I've sort of gotten into following people who are trying to debunk all the myths around food (organic and GMO), beauty products, chemicals, plastics, energy, etc. Some have practically dedicated themselves to calling out all the false information that's out there - especially on Tik Tok. And you're right - it's a losing battle. One gal with a background similar to mine but who works in the food industry called out some false info in a Tik Tok video by making one of her own. She never disparaged the author of the first video, she just explained why the statements in it were wrong. And her video refuting the incorrect science was flagged for bullying. She complained and was able to post it, but the idea that you can be flagged for bullying for calling out blatantly false information is very frustrating and disturbing to me.
Was this in Harris County? Yes
Was this a typical preschool/daycare? (Not a home one) It's a converted house but a completely licensed daycare with around 90 total kids
And the last question (I'm pretty sure I know the answer), did they mention communicating with the health dept at all? No, but our kid never had symptoms so we never tested him so we never spoke to them specifically about it
Was this a typical preschool/daycare? (Not a home one) It's a converted house but a completely licensed daycare with around 90 total kids
And the last question (I'm pretty sure I know the answer), did they mention communicating with the health dept at all? No, but our kid never had symptoms so we never tested him so we never spoke to them specifically about it
aggietony2010 said:
Dear parents everywhere: STOP TESTING YOUR ****ING CHILDREN.
This is the dumb hyperbole that drives people nuts. Most parents are going to test their kid if they're sick no different than we used to be able to take them to the doctor to make sure it wasn't the early stages of strep or croop or any other sickness that can be bad if not treated correctly.
You don't know those other kids or teacher's health status and hell most likely neither do the parents know about some underlying condition a toddler might have at that point. At least knowing what you are or aren't dealing with can drastically help a parent take care of the kid.
It's inconvenient. We're all beyond tired of dealing with it at this point. But saying dumb things in frustration isn't a solution.
Featured Stories
See All
Post Game Review: No. 24 Texas A&M 21, Arkansas 17
by Kay Naegeli
Pieces in place for another hard-fought Texas A&M-Arkansas battle
by Olin Buchanan
7:16
1d ago
3.7k
50:14
1d ago
11k
DenverAg91
What other college team(s) do you have a soft spot for?
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
75