• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

After Trump promised an October vaccine, a major human trial stops for an ‘unexplained illness’

Carleen said:
The fact that a vaccine may be available by early 2021 sounds more realistic. And given that many vaccines take years to perfect that seems like a pretty good outcome.
Click to expand...

Pfizer says their vaccine may be available sooner than that. Hard to say.
 
washunut said:
Just wondering, shouldn't ALL Americans for that matter all people throughout the world hope for a vaccine sooner rather than later???

I find it perverse folks hope for a delay. I doubt we will have an approved vaccine before the election. Even if we did, I can't see how this would factor into how someone would vote.
Click to expand...

I think most do not want a rushed vaccine that has not been throughly tested as well as can be.

Trump would use the vaccine politically to show how he and he alone was able to get this done. Most Americans have the attention span of a gnat, so this would become an effective tool for Trump's reelection push.
 
Metric Mouse said:
Pfizer thinks there will be, and without cutting corners.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I would trust Pfizer too much. They have a history of fraud.

I'd actually prefer this vaccine to come out of a medical/ college type research facility.
 
SCrider said:
I'm not sure I would trust Pfizer too much. They have a history of fraud.

I'd actually prefer this vaccine to come out of a medical/ college type research facility.
Click to expand...

Maybe. BuiNTech is partnered with them though, no idea on how slimy they are.
 
Metric Mouse said:
Maybe. BuiNTech is partnered with them though, no idea on how slimy they are.
Click to expand...

A quick Google search did not reveal much about them being slimy. They seem to specialize in cancer research.
 
Helix said:
possibly. my main concern is efficacy. on an exceptionally tight timeline, that's tough to ascertain. i don't work in vaccine development; my research area is different, so i'm speculating. either way, a vaccine looks hopeful, at least to me with my limited knowledge.

A SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidate would likely match all currently circulating variants | PNAS
Click to expand...
My main concern is dangerous side-effect, but right up there is efficacy. otherwise, we're going to have some big-time spread by the vaccinated exposing themselves thinking they're impervious!

Actually, even 'effective' vaccines may be only 70 percent effective. They are not a panacea in individual terms. Rather they are saviors in societal terms. They provide an artificial heard effect, but don't guarantee a vaccinated individual will be impervious themselves.
 
Chomsky said:
My main concern is dangerous side-effect, but right up there is efficacy. otherwise, we're going to have some big-time spread by the vaccinated exposing themselves thinking they're impervious!

Actually, even 'effective' vaccines may be only 70 percent effective. They are not a panacea in individual terms. Rather they are saviors in societal terms. They provide an artificial heard effect, but don't guarantee a vaccinated individual will be impervious themselves.
Click to expand...

during some years, the flu vaccine efficacy is in the 60s or lower, but i still get it. as for adverse effects, i think i read somewhere that at least one of the vaccines is based on an already developed SARS vaccine from years back. now i can't find the article, though, or i'd link it. i doubt that i made it up, though. it was something about accelerated or forced evolution. either way, i don't see a major pharmaceutical company going to market with something that everyone is going to want unless they are pretty sure that it's safe. doing that could sink their stock to junk, and then another company could acquire them at fire sale prices. that is a nightmare scenario which only the small fly by night companies risk on purpose.
 
Helix said:
during some years, the flu vaccine efficacy is in the 60s or lower, but i still get it. as for adverse effects, i think i read somewhere that at least one of the vaccines is based on an already developed SARS vaccine from years back. now i can't find the article, though, or i'd link it. i doubt that i made it up, though. it was something about accelerated or forced evolution. either way, i don't see a major pharmaceutical company going to market with something that everyone is going to want unless they are pretty sure that it's safe. doing that could sink their stock to junk, and then another company could acquire them at fire sale prices. that is a nightmare scenario which only the small fly by night companies risk on purpose.
Click to expand...
Agreed. But let's not forget the '76 Swine Flu debacle. Things like that assure I will not be an early adopter - if at all!
 
Carleen said:
The fact that a vaccine may be available by early 2021 sounds more realistic. And given that many vaccines take years to perfect that seems like a pretty good outcome.
Click to expand...

........early in the Biden Administration........
 
washunut said:
You failed to recognize that the person who started this thread and to whom I addressed my response did NOT reply.

So could be I just called out a partisan,while you defend the OP. Clearly your choice.

Just to be clear. I find the political finger pointing by BOTH sides repugnant when talking about a deadly virus.
Click to expand...
The OP replying - or not - has nothing to do with our conversation.

As to the OP being partisan, he accurately published the article in its entirety, with nothing added, nothing changed, nothing removed.

His sole comment consists of one short sentence: This reaction could be as simple as an allergic response to one of the vaccine's components.

There's nothing political in his post, besides that which you portrayed in yours.
 
Chomsky said:
My main concern is dangerous side-effect, but right up there is efficacy. otherwise, we're going to have some big-time spread by the vaccinated exposing themselves thinking they're impervious!
Click to expand...

They already act that way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom