Thats actually pretty cool 
1 Like
You can have mine, I want less 
7 Likes
2 Likes
Haha, I just wanted to see people’s replies. The arguments are rarely scientific… Anyway, I’m not overly enthusiastic about injecting myself some drug, even less so since I have the fields. Definitely wouldn’t get the vaccine
7 Likes
I figured as much 
Does citing a YouTube video to back my argument count as scientific?
Always hated needles lol, probably a reason for that. I’m not getting it unless I’m held down and injected, but if that happened I got Dream’s fields to save my ass
3 Likes
Conspiracy theories aside, I am just not too enthusiastic about getting injected with a drug that just came into existence less than year ago, and I dont care what the FDA or other large organizations say. Its impossible to know longterm effects regardless of the testing they did.
Maybe if it was Ebola or the bubonic plague I would be more concerned. But being a strong, healthy, young adult, I see no reason to take a risk on a mystery drug cocktail over my own immune system.
If I’m going to die, then its going to happen one way or another. I am not expecting a vaccine to save my life. I have got vaccines my whole life but I dont plan to get one again unless it was for good reason (Like Malaria if I am traveling, or if a new more dangerous virus/disease develops).
My gut just gives me a bad feeling about most vaccines, and I trust my gut (intuition) first and foremost.
27 Likes
Nobody seems to care about the long term effects of anything nowadays. I’m not too knowledgeable about the vaccine-making process, but I heard it takes 5-10 years of testing before it’s put out on the market. I’m supposed to be expected to inject something into me that’s been made and tested for less than a year? No way.
14 Likes
Yeah it takes time to develope a vaccine. Many countries gave the covid vaccine authorization as an emergency use maybe because people can’t wait that long.
I have a history of allergic reactions, so I think I can get away with the vaccine program.
3 Likes
I’m not saying that the vaccine is dangerous, but these reports get brushed off. Over a thousand post-vaccine deaths in the US alone. Correlation=/=Causation, but this seems worth looking into.
“In the case of COVID-19 vaccines, all data suggest both the Moderna and Pfizer-BioNTech vaccines are safe — despite the 27 deaths reported among Michiganders and 1,170 reports of post-vaccine deaths nationally from Dec. 14-Feb. 7, said Lynn Sutfin, a spokesperson for the state health department.”
This 2nd one is from January but I just found it. Even if the numbers are still in an acceptable margin of safety, it seems that the media and politician/doctors, haven’t been fully transparent about the vaccine.
I’m hopeful it is safe, I wont get it but I have family that have. It looks like most adverse reactions occur within the first 30-min of administration, but there are odd-ball reports that occur a day or more after administration.
It looks like if you recover from the side-effects you should be okay, but there isnt much data on 2nd administration yet since it is so new.
I’m hoping for the best for everyone. I honestly think this was pretty obvious especially in food/healthcare in regards to mandatory vaccines. I really recommend you find an employer that respects your right to medical privacy and bodily autonomy if you work in these industries and dont wish to get the vaccine.
7 Likes
I agree it shouldn’t be washed off… but it’s hard to have a feeling for these numbers.
I’m going to run a little thought exercise here.
We would need a statiscical base model which calculates the probability of dying withing 2.5 months (dec-mid Feb), with factors such as:
gender, age, financial situation, living alone,
needing caretaker yes/no,
yes/no for maybe the 10 most common age-related pre-existing conditions…
then yes/no for existing conditions that have been identified as risk factors for covid
And maybe some more factors.
Then we need large enough data to calibrate the model and work until results are reliable… you need a model that works for yearly statistics for each year AND works also when you run it for data of several years.
Then
- Check what the dying probability % would have been for the people who did die
- Check what the probability would have been for the entire population who got the vaccine on average, then compare it with the number of people who died.
With large enough sample you’ll see if it is significantly skewed.
Now that I am thinking about it, if I was still at uni, I could make this my final project :D
But this shows how hard it is to really give unbiased context to the numbers, also because there is no publicly available data which lists all this information about people who die in each year.
I’m sure certain govt institutions and pharma companies have more, but it’s not easy for an independent person to verify.
7 Likes
My question would be why give vaccine that is still considered in experimental phase to people who are not considered physically fit though.
I was working with chemicals in the past which I doubted its safety for use. But with chemicals, the general guideline is that it is safe until proven otherwise. I believe this is applied to vaccines/ drugs as well.
1 Like
Because they are the most vulnerable.
It’s not about giving the meds to the healthiest because they can take the side effect. It’s about giving them to the weakest so that they can survive an even worst disease.
A flu is not enough to justify some risky meds right ?
Unless you have no immune system and a flu would 100% kill you.
2 Likes
I can understand that some people are most vulnerable. My point is that the vaccines are still not fully developed, and we don’t really know how it behaves. I got the impression that some people who get the vaccine first (the most vulnerable) are just in the same position with those who participate in the trial back in mid 2020.
I followed the news of how a doctor who had no pre-existing condition died after taking the vaccine. That really raised a question for me.
4 Likes
Same for a lot of things, but down in the real world with only the minimum information about anything, cursed by nature and saved by the scientist working hard to create new pills, machines or whatever to save your life…
Fear and panic inside you day and night, would you do nothing ?
There’s not enough information on any side, sure some people got better from the vaccin. I mean, we don’t stop a lot of meds that work on thousands just because they set off allergic reactions in a few hundreds ?
The best case scenario sucks. Last stand before dying.
PS: people with grave I’ll ses are used to popping pills all day long and side effects. A vaccine doesn’t seem so crazy…
We’re not afraid to die, they are. If nothing the vaccine serves a psychological function, they need to offer at least one semi-functioning solution
Everybody know about the dangers, it’s consensual. You can chose not to. We’re still learning about it, that’s how we learn even. More people take it, more data. It’s not like they lied, theses people are not that smart too, organizing data between thoussands or millions of people leads to some dumb answers some time. It’s a fast, large scale operation 
I’m not saying it’s good.
Anyway, 
2 Likes
True, when there is minimum information and in a situation when we need to make a decision, we have to decide (or do) something anyway. What the poster above shared was not consensual Philip .
No, it won’t stop to be produced. Catering that niche as well might increase the R&D and production cost, and that might result in the selling price to be too high to be affordable for most of the population.
1 Like
Trickling down (+ insurances)
(Anyway, if you want to change that build you own foundation and labs with your own money. Me I got a field)
1 Like
Almost forgot you are in Europe 
It interests me to cater a niche market, but this field is not something I am interested in.
1 Like
In addition, most countries are trying to balance economy and the state of their healthcare system with covid restrictions.
Islands, including big ones like NZ and Australia are is a good situation to handle this, you can even go to most places and live a more or less normal life and a beach holiday if you’re okay with the 2 weeks quarantine and added costs. Just have to wear a mask which is not a big deal honestly lol
The US is a special case as always…
I can talk for Europe - a lot of medical resource has been redirected to deal with covid patients. You need an EKG in Easter Europe? Tough luck honey, wait for 3 months since resource has been redirected and a lot of people are in front of you. You have a totally avoidable heart attack in the meantime? Oh, well…
Grandma fell and hit her head and has to go for some tests? Straight to the covid area of the hospital since they have to avoid contact unless proven negative, so she will have to spend the night there with people who are positive until results are back. They are wearing masks so surely it’s fine…
Ah you need to see a dentist? Nah, you can’t in this state of emergency, please wait 6 months so that instead of a filling you have to get a root canal.
etc etc
There area lot of other hidden costs of the current situation.
A friend of mine put it this way - even if the vaccine had only a little lower death rate than the virus itself, on the grand scheme of things it’s worth it to vaccinate everybody… because roughly the same amount of people (a bit less) die, the rest will be immune and we can reopen. Sure, the people who die will probably be different vs if everyone got infected, but in the end, who cares, it’s just numbers.
I do not agree with the above (I don’T want to get this vaccine if there is a way to avoid it), I am quite pragmatic but not this much :D
4 Likes
I still have this opinion that it would have been better to vaccinate the productive age group first. So factory for example can run at full capacity. But the case could be different everywhere of course. At the same time, possible reactions to the vaccine can be observed.
Aren’t you the one with eczema? I think you can get away with it 
.
2 Likes