Quote (NetflixAdaptationWidow @ Oct 11 2021 10:44pm)
Speed something was made at has no bearing on its efficacy or safety.
We have hundreds of millions of people with these vaccines for nearly a year and no indication there's any long term effects.
Has been proven to slow spread including in variants, but not as effective in variants.
FDA approval has been given
So don't take the government's advice. The data is out there for you to examine yourself.
Very much necessary to prevent the collapse of the healthcare system and ensure the safety of those at greater risk. By this logic nothing is necessary.
Adverse events are not under-reported or unadvertised. They are taken incredibly seriously. The J&J vaccine was paused because of 6 events in over 6 million doses.
This one can be legitimate, but you should consult your doctor about it. I don't think there's any evidence that the vaccine exascerbates blood clots or stroke, and you aren't more likely to have a vaccine reaction unless you've had reactions in the past.
Natural immunity is inferior to natural immunity plus vaccination. More exposures = more effective immunity.
"Unfamiliar ingredients" applies to literally every piece of food you've ever eaten.
You are given informed consent. If you want the documentation you will have it.
The safe and effective preventatives are the vaccines. This one is just too rich. The only treatments are to support symptoms. Not great if you have a serious issue.
Basically no medicine manufacturer can be sued for injury or death. The safety data is always available.
So don't get a Moderna or J&J vaccine. There's like half a dozen available. Regardless, the history of making vaccines is irrelevant since, as supported above, side effects data is taken incredibly seriously.
The "criminal reputation" of a company is irrelevant to the safety or efficacy of the vaccine. Something they don't have a history of is just making up data to fabricate a treatment. That would get found out immediately.
Dozens of vaccines over the past thirty years haven't "fit the traditional definition of vaccine". This is just "new technology scary".
No vaccine optimizes for age, weight, or gender. It is not necessary.
So find one that doesn't have a conflict of interest. There's thousands of experts to choose from and all of them agree. The ones who don't agree tend to actually have conflicts of interests.
"Marketing too intense" has got to be the most brain dead argument I've ever heard.
There is no media censorship of opposing medical experts.
No suppression of social media reports either.
The "fetal cells" used in vaccine testing were taken 50 years ago and are used in the development of literally everything. Seriously, HEK293 cells are available in every lab for every treatment because they are such a robust cell line.
"I prayed about it" can justify literally any decision
The last one is literally the only one that is a legitimate argument. But nobody is forcing you to do anything so far.
The CDC has flip-flopped about COVID dozens of times since it has come to pass. As far as the people having a vaccine for "a year" and nothing bad happening, that is not enough time for a standard vaccine to begin showing side effects. For NORMAL creation of vaccines, 10-15 years is needed to actually know wtf will be impacted.
Quote (MrSK @ Oct 11 2021 10:45pm)
Always lol @ this argument. You’d think a logical person would be more worried about the long term effects of a virus instead of modern medicine :rofl:. Can’t wait for the next goalpost because y’all are getting real boring with this stale copypasta. Vaccinated individuals have lower viral load which equates to less transmission and far less severe symptoms. Is it a 100% cure? No but neither are the flu shots and some other vaccines that have mandates on them.
One would have to actually get the virus to deal with the long term effects.
This post was edited by net on Oct 11 2021 08:46pm
Guests cannot view or vote in polls. Please register or login.