Vaccine that has not existed 6 months is "thought" to convey longer lasting immunity. This has to be one of the least scientific statements ever made. Are you certain you're a medical professional? Why is it that unlike you, the CDC says they have no idea how long the vaccine provides immunity? Why is it that unlike you, the CDC states that they have no knowledge or evidence of long term side effects, but have no way to know whether there will or will not be? Why is it that unlike you, the CDC has actively advised to wait for results prior to seeking a vaccine if you've already had Covid?

You've jumped the shark in a huge way, friend. My reading comprehension is just fine. Most of what you're claiming to know as fact that nobody else but idiot "journalists" are all regurgitating on twitter. The CDC is cautiously optimistic, and given the data we DO have, it's very clear the high risk (elderly, cormorbidity) patients should absolutely vaccinate. But at this point in time, you have no factual, scientific data, nor does anyone else, to start talking about those who've had it taking the vaccine, immunity length of the vaccine, long term effects, boosters, or anything else.

Follow the science. Stop trying to lead it.

Edit: Just for fun, another long term effect: IPV giving polio. That was fun.

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Dec 22 2020 04:30pm

The word “thought” is purposeful because I’m not making assumptions. This should be obvious. Vaccine immunity is usually superior to natural immunity, as shown by a number of different vaccinations. Furthermore this vaccine utilized antigens found in a number of different covid19 strains, over 15 strains actually. Of course we will have to wait and see the effects of longterm immunity, which is why I used the word thought.



-Did I say I have knowledge of longterm side effects? Please quote me

-did I say if you have covid you should immediately take the vaccine?



Do you understand what these words mean?

Please also don’t deflect and respond to your diabetes claim as it is just as bad and on par election delusion if you truly believe it. Yeah, jumped into the shark tank alright. A very special one

No no, don't you understand? He has special knowledge that the research scientists, physicians, and healthcare administrators he's talking to don't. Since he lives in a trailer park he has access to super top secret Covid research!

Yea thats a weak correlation

Soy milk on the other hand increases diabetes risk by 17x

You're projecting AND deflecting. Everything I said to Bazi is also directed at you. Do you believe in science or not? If so, why are you making unscientific assertions?

Ask yourself why you think you know science better than somebody managing a research lab (me) and an ICU physician (Bazi).

Perhaps when two people with specific expertise in the area you are talking about both agree that you are wrong you should slow down and listen.

Ask yourself why you're making unfounded claims about both a virus and a vaccine that are not knowable with current data that even the CDC which includes a host of doctorates who specialize in infectious disease deny there being current scientific data on.

Go on, show us your brilliance!

popcorn.gif

Oh so you will dodge from replying to me again for the 3rd time this week. Do you run away from the lies you make in real life also or just online

I already gave you the reasoning. We have health and safety data on similar treatments using mRNA, we have similar data on vaccines, and we have similar data on long term complications from Covid.

If you think a basic extrapolation from that very relevant data isn't warranted then give me the specific biological reason why it's not, because otherwise you're playing the "what is knowledge" game, where you just say "but what if" over and over.

You do not. Outright lie. There are no similar vaccines, there are no similar mRNA treatments, and there is no "long term complication" data from Covid, as Covid does not preexist December 2019 and nearly all data on Covid prior to April 2020 is considered suspect, as testing wasn't widespread or reliable, treatment and handling methods were comprable to throwing spaghetti at a wall and seeing what stuck.

You have directly contradicted both the information and the recommendations provided by the CDC, the premiere disease specialist organization in the US, packed with more specialists at a higher rate of education than you will EVER be. And you seek to condescend with your false information?





The word "thought" directly implicates lack of empirical evidence (aka science). You ARE making assumptions. Vaccine immunity is "usually" nothing. This is an entirely new form of vaccine. It has never been used before. There is no precedent. The vaccine has not existed long enough to determine whether it even prevents people from being contagious, let alone immunity. Literally everything you're saying is horse shit. I don't need to dodge you because you're using mindpuke and more and more doubtful sounding credentials to try to pass off your pipe dreams as "science".

Bring in the facts brother, or stop presenting yourself as an expert.