How concerned are you about adverse events related to the vaccines?

[Gordy327]

Yes... it identified the risk you asked about when deciding to take the vaccine or not.

Well it's 2023 now and the vaccines have been out and administered. So your 2020 citation is irrelevant.

Well the President you voted for told you you wouldn't catch covid if you got vaccinated. Did you believe his lie?

Why would anyone listen to a politician regarding health matters?

 

[Gordy327]

How exactly could it identify a risk about a vaccine that wasn't even been available at the time?

Because anti vaxxers seem to make things up, spread misinformation, or outright lie.

 

[VySky]

How exactly could it identify a risk about a vaccine that wasn't even been available at the time?

Because of the normal protocols associated with vaccine approvals that were not followed.

 

[VySky]

When I got infected after being fully vaccinated it was like a mild cold.

Me too. We both are in the same place but I took less risk than you did getting there.

 

[americanwoman]

Because of the normal protocols associated with vaccine approvals were not used.

Happens when there is a global pandemic, things get 'warp speed'.

 

[VySky]

Happens when there is a global pandemic, things get 'warp speed'.

Which creates risk I wasn't and still am not willing to accept. Now, if it ever become as safe as the flu vaccine then I would consider it. But since it's ineffective like the flu vaccine, at least it will be safe.

 

[Gordy327]

Which creates risk I wasn't and still am not willing to accept. Now, if it ever become as safe as the flu vaccine then I would consider it. But since it's ineffective like the flu vaccine, at least it will be safe.

Prove that it's ineffective! Medical science disagrees with you.

Because of the normal protocols associated with vaccine approvals that were not followed.

It was developed, tested, and approved. What's the problem?

Me too. We both are in the same place but I took less risk than you did getting there.

And now you are at more risk from getting Covid. I am not.

 

[Ethel2]

Me too. We both are in the same place but I took less risk than you did getting there.

I understand the argument that if you are relatively young with no risk factors that it’s a reasonable choice not to get vaccinated-sort of. But these vaccines have been around for a long time now and side effects are few. Even people with no risk factors can further reduce their chances of getting seriously ill from Covid by getting a relatively harmless vaccine. If I was a young woman I wouldn’t be choosing the JJ vaccine. But the mRNA vaccine safety record is striking.
At the end of the day, at this point in the pandemic, everyone has to make the choice that’s best for them and for their families-and live with the consequences of that choice.

 

[Ethel2]

Prove that it's ineffective! Medical science disagrees with you.

It was developed, tested, and approved. What's the problem?

And now you are at more risk from getting Covid. I am not.

He’s at a bit more risk of getting infected, but significantly more risk of getting really sick if he does get infected.

 

[Mika-El]

Simple question asked at Medscape where responses were limited to Health Care Professionals.

It's going to surprise the vax addicts.

====================================

What is a vax addict? The moment you used that term you make it clear what your agenda is and presto that is where I state you are not interested in any debate or discussion you came on here with an agenda to ridicule anyone who took the vaccines. Buh bye now.

 

[rickc]

Well the President you voted for told you you wouldn't catch covid if you got vaccinated. Did you believe his lie?

That is always such a humorous statement to me.

Way I see it is if you have the vaccine covid will be more like a cold or mild flu.

If not you looking at a ventilator and even death.

I have seen it happen both ways in my extended family

I know no one who has had any serious issues with the vaccine.

Your choice!

 

[DrewPaul]

Define “ineffective”.

'not producing any significant or desired effect'

 

[Gordy327]

He’s at a bit more risk of getting infected, but significantly more risk of getting really sick if he does get infected.

Not to mention the change to spread it to others. It's just irresponsible and inconsiderate to say the least.

I understand the argument that if you are relatively young with no risk factors that it’s a reasonable choice not to get vaccinated-sort of.

That's not even an argument. It's an excuse. Even younger people can contract Covid. Even if they do not become seriously ill, they can still spread it yo others who can.

 

[Gordy327]

'not producing any significant or desired effect'

What do you base that on? The vaccines were quite effective, boasting approximately 90% effectiveness give or take a bit and depending on the vaccine used.

 

[Ethel2]

Not to mention the change to spread it to others. It's just irresponsible and inconsiderate to say the least.
That's not even an argument. It's an excuse. Even younger people can contract Covid. Even if they do not become seriously ill, they can still spread it yo others who can.

Yeah, but unfortunately with the Omicron variant the existing vaccines only marginally reduce transmission and infection. There is definitely a benefit-and don't get me wrong, if you are vaccinated regardless of risk you are much less likely to get seriously ill and are slightly less likely to transmit the virus. I believe that the benefit in transmission reduction is because you are contagious for a shorter period of time if you are vaccinated but during the period where you ARE contagious you are just as contagious as an unvaccinated person. Gotta look that up.

From the BMJ:

Vaccines aren’t preventing onward transmission by reducing the viral load—or amount of SARS-CoV-2—in your body. “Most studies show if you got an infection after vaccination, compared with someone who got an infection without a vaccine, you were pretty much shedding roughly the same amount of virus,” says Paul Hunter, professor in medicine at the University of East Anglia. One study,5 sponsored by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), found “no difference in infectious virus titer between groups” who had been vaccinated and had not.

Instead, it’s the principle that the UKHSA identified above: if you don’t get infected in the first place thanks to a vaccine, you can’t spread it. Once you’re infected, you still can—although what we know about the window when you’re most likely to transmit the virus to others has improved.

What do we know about covid vaccines and preventing transmission?

Vaccines that work against SARS-CoV-2 have helped change the course of the pandemic by reducing illness and hospital admissions. But Chris Stokel-Walker asks what we know about their impact on preventing transmission. The range of vaccines developed in record time by pharmaceutical companies...

www.bmj.com

Basically I was right: the viral load you have is the same for vaccinated and unvaccinated people, but the window for shedding is less if you are vaccinated. I imagine you clear the virus faster if you are vaccinated. This study was with delta, but with omicron specific vaccines available its likely to hold true for that variant as well IMO.

 

[Ethel2]

'not producing any significant or desired effect'

Is a tenfold reduction in risk for serious disease a "significant effect"?
Too many people have unrealistic expectations about what the vaccine is designed to do. It was NEVER properly designed to be a "sterilizing vaccine" that prevents infection.

 

[Gordy327]

Is a tenfold reduction in risk for serious disease a "significant effect"?
Too many people have unrealistic expectations about what the vaccine is designed to do. It was NEVER properly designed to be a "sterilizing vaccine" that prevents infection.

I'd say too many people are misinformed or willfully ignorant about the vaccine and covid. They probably get their information from conspiracy sites, social media, or other second hand sources, assuming they get anything at all or otherwise makes something completely irrational up. I've said it before, the pandemic has effectively demonstrated people's collective stupidity and dumbing down, and especially hostility and/or ignorance towards science.

 

[VySky]

Prove that it's ineffective! Medical science disagrees with you.

It was developed, tested, and approved. What's the problem?

And now you are at more risk from getting Covid. I am not.

Actually,no I’m not. You’re misinformed.

 

[Queen Margo]

The vaccine was responsible for the quick end of the pandemic.

Then thank Trump for operation warp speed.

 

[Gordy327]

Actually,no I’m not. You’re misinformed.

An "I know you are but what am I" is not a reply. Provide evidence the vaccines are ineffective! Otherwise you have nothing but misinformation and/or lies.

 

[CrakHoBarbie]

Then thank Trump for operation warp speed.

I give Donald full credit for pulling out all of the regulatory stops, that allowed the vaccine to be brought to market with lightning speed.
Kudos to Donald for that.

 

[Gordy327]

Then thank Trump for operation warp speed.

Actually, I thank the actual scientists and pharmaceutical companies for the vaccine. All Trump did was sign a piece of paper then argue with scientists.

 

[devildavid]

No concern as there is no rational reason to be concerned. I also don’t lend credence to any conspiracy theories.

 

[Queen Margo]

Actually, I thank the actual scientists and pharmaceutical companies for the vaccine. All Trump did was sign a piece of paper then argue with scientists.

Some can never be an iota of fair.

 

[Gordy327]

Some can never be an iota of fair.

More like credit where credit is due.