ADVERTISEMENT

Live feed

Forum list Trending threads

Live feed

 Posts

COVID data

G
Merge said:
Right. I don’t disagree with you.
Everyone should have compared the risks for themselves.

Did some people get vaccinated without understanding the risk to reward? Absolutely.
Did some people skip getting vaccinated because they understood the risk to reward? Absolutely.
Did some people who were at risk of severe illness from Covid skip getting vaccinated because they did not understand the risk to reward? Absolutely.

You and I can have a rational discussion here, even though we won’t agree on everything.

Others here, not so much.

The FDA not being infallible does not mean that every study on this topic from all around the world is lying to us as gohall is suggesting.




Nothing is certain, but at what point do you start to believe the data is relatively accurate? We’re 3 years out now from a gigantic vaccinated population with real world data. The typical safety review period for a vaccine does not last that long and would have hundreds of people as opposed to the billions that we have vaccinated. At some point, a reasonable person would look at a study from today compared to one three years ago having similar results as a sign that yes, there are risks, but the risk profile is likely fairly accurate and adverse events are very rare.
Click to expand...
2 points:

1. Don’t say that people should have weighed the risks… 80% of Americans who make under 100k per year had no choice but to get vaccinated or lose their source of income. There was no choice for weighing risk for teachers, cops, front line workers, etc.

2. All of the studies are incredibly preliminary and have data less than 2/3 years old. The data of mRNA vaccines (outside of Covid) do in fact cause structural and anatomical anomalies which take time to present. 10 years post vaccine if there’s no evidence that the mRNA vaccine caused any anatomical changes within heart structures, blood vessels, pattern clots, etc. then we can say it was safe and the risk balanced out. But to proclaim at this point that the vaccine was Universally safe is just not correct
Click to expand...
  • Like
Reactions: shu09

Bubble watch

sami
shu09 said:
Florida losing to Alabama in OT - good for SH. On a side note, tuned in just as Tyrese Samuel stepped to the free throw line and missed the front end of a one-and-one. The more things change, the more they stay the same.
Click to expand...
Not sure why that’s good, Florida is pretty safely in. Though agree not quite a lock, but I think if they slip to real bubble talk they’re above us regardless.

Of course, win tomorrow and these discussions are easier and easier.
Click to expand...
  • Like
Reactions: silkcitypirate

COVID data

M
HALL85 said:
This isn’t a conversation about “significant harm” or “nefarious intent”. The early data (yes, it’s still early) is showing some anomalies. We will learn more over time. Most every drug has a risk profile and it’s up to the patient (with advice from their physician) to make a choice for themselves.

The FDA is not infallible as evidenced by how they were complicit in OxyContin being abused. They knew it was a problem and failed to act on it. And that was a pain med. The pressure to fast track and release the vaccine was unprecedented. I don’t judge anyone for being cautious about taking the vaccine if they felt concerned about the unknown risks at the time and evaluating their own risk factors.
Click to expand...

Right. I don’t disagree with you.
Everyone should have compared the risks for themselves.

Did some people get vaccinated without understanding the risk to reward? Absolutely.
Did some people skip getting vaccinated because they understood the risk to reward? Absolutely.
Did some people who were at risk of severe illness from Covid skip getting vaccinated because they did not understand the risk to reward? Absolutely.

You and I can have a rational discussion here, even though we won’t agree on everything.

Others here, not so much.

The FDA not being infallible does not mean that every study on this topic from all around the world is lying to us as gohall is suggesting.

HALL85 said:
It’s a small percentage right now, but that can change.
Click to expand...


Nothing is certain, but at what point do you start to believe the data is relatively accurate? We’re 3 years out now from a gigantic vaccinated population with real world data. The typical safety review period for a vaccine does not last that long and would have hundreds of people as opposed to the billions that we have vaccinated. At some point, a reasonable person would look at a study from today compared to one three years ago having similar results as a sign that yes, there are risks, but the risk profile is likely fairly accurate and adverse events are very rare.
Click to expand...
ADVERTISEMENT

Filter

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back