I have a relatively healthy (he has asthma) early-40s friend on an ECMO machine at the University of Minnesota right now. He's a pharmacist, so he's inevitably exposed to sick covid people. I'll be damned if I am going to contribute to the spread of the problem when we know the vaccine works.

Should be distributed to those most at risk of death until we hit heard immunity threshold.

As unlikely as it is that it ends up making a bunch of people critically ill it would a disaster if half our healthcare industry/military ect. fell to faulty vaccines in a few years.

The olds and the fats are the only ones that need it.

Well, I already had it back in March, so chances are very low that I will contribute to the spread (for the time being). There's no real reason why I shouldnt let others go first and play guinea pig for me. It's an esotheric debate anyway since I'll be among the last groups to get access to the vaccines...

Thinking about the timeline: it will take until well into Q2/2021, if not even Q3, until the risk groups, the essential workers and all those in exposed positions (like pharmacists) have been vaccinated. Afterwards, it will take some more time until all the young, healthy, non-at-risk people who actively seek the vaccination have gotten it. Only then will the focus turn to the young, healthy and reluctant segments of the population.

If GWB takes the vaccine on TV, I'll take it. I don't trust Obama or Clinton.

The rate of sudden cardiac death also has not been studied at the 10month time frame

The rate of spontaneous combustion also has not been studied at this time frame

The lack of evidence =\= increased risk.

You already have evidence of pulmonary fibrosis in covid patients, even young healthy, you can bet that will last longer than 9 months if you’re the unfortunate SOB that gets that complication

The science behind this vaccination theoretically should produce an even safer vaccine compared to conventional protein approach

Don’t worry I’ll get it before you so I can be your n=1 case study

This post was edited by Bazi on Dec 5 2020 04:15pm

Bleh. If we could rule out all risks after just 9 months of trials, why are standard approval procedures leading to a timeline of around 5 years before a new vaccine gets greenlighted? Why has there never been a new vaccine which was developed and approved in less than 4 years?

The remaining risks aren't huge, and for people from a risk group, the obvious recommendation is "take the damn vaccine". But that's beside the point. The easy to see truth is that the governments of the world are willingly taking some small tail risk with these rushed vaccines because that's the lesser evil, compared to the death toll and economic damage caused by the pandemic with every passing month. And it's the right call, I agree with it. If I was a world leader, I would do the same. I just think that it would be hugely intellectually dishonest to deny that such a tradeoff exists; and that the tradeoff might not be as clear cut on a personal level as it is on the societal level.



The key question is: how rare are these types of long-term effects in young healthy patients? They can't be common, if they were, the world would have noticed by now.

do we have a guarantee that it causes autism yet? i ain't taking unless i know it works

this is the first vaccine for which you/your family cannot press charges in case you get side effects such as autism or death or anything else.
that's all that was told regarding this topic

This post was edited by SylvesterStallone on Dec 5 2020 05:15pm

loooool