Vacci-Nation [CLOSED DUE TO DISRESPECTFUL, INSULTING, POLITICAL POSTS

[p1l0t]

Originally Posted by cjd

They're testing things and monitoring. Does a booster work? (Seems they do). Is a booster needed? Don't know yet.

Originally Posted by spike021

I mean, that's common sense to most of us, I'd imagine.

Does a car, plane, train, etc. ever get built once? Not really, you have prototypes and revisions, components have prototypes and revisions, safety concerns come up which require more prototypes and revisions, emissions concerns require updating components like cats, etc. And on and on.

Any modern, developed product undergoes this process.

Anyone who doesn't realize this applies to modern medicine is in for a rude awakening, to be honest.

Again, just like in that article from a few pages back when all those doses had to get scrapped, there was a Quality Assurance system that uncovered the issue with those doses, and got them scrapped before they'd ever get even close to being administered.

So then, yes, probably becoming dependent on some kind of annual/biannual injections... you guys have fun with that.



Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Sapphireho]

Originally Posted by spike021

Does a car, plane, train, etc. ever get built once? Not really, you have prototypes and revisions, components have prototypes and revisions, safety concerns come up which require more prototypes and revisions, emissions concerns require updating components like cats, etc. And on and on.

When a system on a car, plane, or train fails, it's not as big a deal as in a human body.

[Capt Spaulding]

Originally Posted by p1l0t

Uhhhhhh.... yes gentlemen, the part about the booster shots every 6 months....

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

Is this what you're basing your statement on?

Ongoing studies are monitoring immune responses beyond 6 months as well as determining the effect of a booster dose to extend the duration and breadth of activity against emerging viral variants.

What does it say? It says "ongoing studies are monitoring immune responses beyond 6 months [emphasis added] ... [and attempting to] determin[e] the effect of booster dose...against emerging viral variants." It says nothing about recommending a booster, nor does it say anything abut the timing, if any, of the booster dose.

The booster every six months is something you are reading into the paper that is not there. Slow down a little and use a 2lb instead of a 2oz trigger. It just does not say what you say it said. Full Stop.

Edit: If you don't want to get vaccinated, no one on this board is going force you. But, in my considered opinion, it would be best for you (and those with whom you come into contact) if you made that decision on the basis of what the research actually says.

The efficacy of a vaccine against those emerging variants is likely to be very important because vaccine hesitancy is still around 25%. If a quarter of the adult population refuses to be vaccinated the virus will have a good sized population in which it can mutate into more virulent forms. Thus it is likely that to be protected against a mutating pathogen we will all need booster doses at some time. So, in effect, your (and the rest of the 25%) concern and subsequent refusal to be vaccinated becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

[p1l0t]

Originally Posted by Capt Spaulding

Is this what you're basing your statement on?



Ongoing studies are monitoring immune responses beyond 6 months as well as determining the effect of a booster dose to extend the duration and breadth of activity against emerging viral variants.



What does it say? It says "ongoing studies are monitoring immune responses beyond 6 months [emphasis added] ... [and attempting to] determin[e] the effect of booster dose..." It says nothing about recommending a booster, nor does it say anything abut the timing, if any, of the booster dose.



The booster ever six months is something you are reading into the paper that is not there. Slow down a little and use a 2lb instead of a 2oz trigger.

Yes let's ignore the part about "as well as determining the effect of a booster dose to extend the duration and breadth of activity against emerging viral variants."

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[Captain Snooze]

Ad hominem (Latin for 'to the person'), short for argumentum ad hominem, refers to several types of arguments, some but not all of which are fallacious. Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. This avoids genuine debate by creating a diversion to some irrelevant but often highly charged issue. The most common form of this fallacy is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".

Wiki

[Clipdat]

Originally Posted by Capt Spaulding

That parallels my experience with the Moderna product. I think you're the first person I've heard relate a reaction to the Phizer vaccine. So you're several weeks away from the second dose?

Yep, scheduled for the 27th.

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by Sapphireho

When a system on a car, plane, or train fails, it's not as big a deal as in a human body.

Yeah, when those fail only a couple hundred people are put at risk, and they aren't 'you' (not ho specifically). Usually.

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by cjd

Seems a lot of people find alternative interpretations more appealing than a straight read. I get being unsure about the mess we've had thrown at us and wanting to exert a little control somewhere. I'm sad it plays out this way and will only prolong so much of this.

I think the general philosophical question here is should one take on a very small deliberate risk (and inconvenience?) to themselves now in order to mitigate some amount of a larger, but still small inherent risk to themselves and the people around them?

At this point, I think it's a matter of visibility and acceptance that the inherent risk is realizable regardless of what decisions one makes. If you don't accept that the current situation imposes a risk on you or those around you for some reason (I am different than the general population because...), then it seems silly to intentionally increase your personal risk by any amount. If you instead recognize the risky situation you are already in, then the intentionally added risk to yourself is seen as an opportunity cost to reduce the overall risk level.

The concept that others level of risk depends on an individual's decision brings another bit of complexity to the matter. Is it an individual's responsibility to manage risk for others? Should an individual take on some level of risk to reduce the overall risk level to society?

That last bit brings up an interesting theory that any society involves individuals accepting some amount of personal risk in order reduce the risk on the whole, thus reducing overall risk to all individuals...

[Capt Spaulding]

Originally Posted by p1l0t

Yes let's ignore the part about "as well as determining the effect of a booster dose to extend the duration and breadth of activity against emerging viral variants."

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

I'm not ignoring that part.

The key in that sentence is what? "... determining the impact..."

What does that mean? It means this particular team is looking into the impact of boosters both on extending the efficacy of the vaccine over time, and on new variants.

What does it NOT do? Make a concrete recommendation or argument in favor of a booster. Now, the reality is a booster will probably be necessary - if for no other reason than that vaccine rejecters such as yourself are going to prolong the pandemic by providing the virus with unvaccinated hosts in which it will be able to mutate into variants that are able to bypass the protections the current vaccines provide.

As I said before, yours is a self fulfilling prophecy. By using the potential need of a booster dose as an excuse to not get vaccinated, you and other rejecters are making it more likely that booster doses will be needed.

So, in reality, if I have to get a booster it could be your fault.

[p1l0t]

Exactly all about risk vs reward.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-...lout/100058440

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[wbradley]

I am a very pro-vaccination individual and I have probably prosthetized here regards to this on more than one occasion now. Unfortunately I might also tend to repeat myself.

I just want to point out to everyone (unless advised otherwise by their physician), if you are opposed to being vaccinated, YOU are the problem right now.

[Spankopotomous]

For what it is worth, I work in transportation and finally secured a vaccination appointment. In a matter of 24 hours I was able to get the Johnson & Johnson one shot dose. Process was streamlined, fast, and easy. (Thanks Pierce College)

FYI the shot definitely registers on the pain/soreness scale. I am glad I chose my non-dominant arm. It's now 24 hours later and I admit I am feeling

Soreness at injection site
Body soreness
Headache
Slightly Nauseous

So it must be working? My 5G is better than ever! /jk

[Capt Spaulding]

Originally Posted by p1l0t

Exactly all about risk vs reward.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-...lout/100058440

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

It seems to me you are changing the subject and, I'm sorry but I have no idea what Freddy Mercury has to do with this. The fact, and I submit that it is an immutable fact, is that in complex societies, very few to none of the decisions we as individuals make affect only us as isolated individuals. Everything I do has some impact on others. No decision I make has an effect that is limited to me alone. Whatever you think cost benefit analysis has to do with this, in the end it is not all about you. Is just isn't.

I find myself skeptical of the anti-vaccine arguments you make. They seem illogical and flimsy and virtually every explanation you offer muddies the water further. At some point, I'd appreciate it if you'd do some soul searching and confront the real reasons for your opposition. If you'd care to share it, we could perhaps, have a productive dialog.

[spike021]

My sister is fully vaccinated, my parents are getting their first Moderna doses today, and my brother is getting a dose of one of them today.

I'm the odd man out since I'm not super high-risk but also not an essential worker.