Vaccine Disinformation

JohnDoe38: I see a lot of it around and it goes completely undisputed.

The basics:

- There are three basic types of vaccines: inactivated virus, antigen containing, and RNA (the novel type).

- Covid has not been prevented effectively by inactivated virus vaccines (the Chinese vaccines Sinopharm, Sinovac, and the Indian Covaxin);

- Antigen containing vaccines using an adenovirus vector have proved effective (Johnson & Johnson, AstraZeneca) but they may have some collateral effects (blood clots) in certain groups;

- Modified mRNA vaccines (Moderna, Pfizer) are the most effective, but we don't know 100% the long term effects. There is a tiny, almost negligible chance that they will cause trouble in the long term.

Possible problem with RNA vaccines: they somehow enter the cell nucleus and are retro-transcribed by an active reverse transcriptase produced by a retrovirus sequence in our genome (HERVs). This could cause the RNA to become embedded in the genome without we knowing where that happens.

There is no mechanism known that would allow for that to happen though. However, science has been wrong before. Reverse transcription was thought impossible for decades.

So, is mass vaccination over a virus that has a rather low mortality worth the tiny risk? That's an interesting point. Epidemics and pandemics are one of the few exceptions when we cannot allow personal freedoms, because it can affect us all.

Keeping such a virus widely circulating in the population could well cause eventual adapting of it to our bodies, and make it become as mild as the other coronaviruses that produce common colds.

On the other hand, it could also give it more chances to mutate, by being exposed to other bat populations. We're not even sure there is a mechanism for the virus to go from humans to bats, though.

Deep down, it's a moral conundrum. We could save many lives by complying. But we may get used to giving up personal freedoms. And we run a tiny risk, very very tiny, almost negligible, of making a horrible mistake.

MJ59: Why take a vaccine that:

1 Doesn't kill the virus
2 Doesn't stop you getting the virus (which you have a 99.8% chance of surviving)
3 Doesn't stop you transmitting the virus
4 Is still experimental and screws with your genetic material

JohnDoe38: 1. That's not the job of a vaccine, that's the job of an antiviral.

2. That's not the job of a vaccine. The job of a vaccine is to stop you from getting sick, not stop you from catching the virus.

3. That's not the job of a vaccine. We count that if enough people are vaccinated, then they will have fewer symptoms that allow the virus to be disseminated in droplets (that is, coughing). But those not vaccinated will always be susceptible to catch the virus and get sick and even die.

4. We don't know that. It might, but it's very, very unlikely.

The job of a vaccine is not to prevent you from catching a virus or a germ, it's to stop you from having symptoms, getting sick, and dying. You still get the virus in you, but your system is primed to fight it off, so even the time you remain contagious is greatly reduced. Not to mention lacking symptoms gives you less of a chance to spread it by coughing.

MJ59: MMR vaccines give you a small dose of said disease and "immunise" you from getting it, therefore creating a population "immune" from the disease...none of the covid "vaccines" do this

JohnDoe38: We still have much to learn, and from an ethical perspective, I have issues with things like workplaces mandating all employees to get vaccinated.

MJ59: I have a problem with the Government floating the idea of a "covid passport" and talk of denying access to public venues without proof of vaccination all the while saying it's voluntary

MJ59:
Vaccines Work

Vaccines are very effective — and they’re the best protection against many serious diseases. Most people who get vaccinated will have immunity (protection) against the disease.

But Covid "vaccine" doesn't do that

https://www.hhs.gov/immunization/basics/work/index.html

Wild__: I've never vaccinated any of my children and the one that survived turned out just fine.

WHlSKY:
Good info.

Each has to make their own decision, but it's best to make a decision based on accurate information.

hornchurchmale: not easy getting freedom do do as we want as it will affect others . ergo when such a disease is is capable of causing death by our spreading ..(inadvertently) such .we have a responsibility to others. In same way we do not want other spreading disease to us! so we have rules .laws. these are provided to try and allow all of us freedoms and at asme time keep other safe and ourselves .just like speeding is an offence ..it can kill.maim.etc nobody would say a person exceeding speed safety limits and causing death and injury by doing so was a responsible adult and member of society. so Rules where we may have to have a jab? vaccination to protect others ( if not ourselves) can b e said to be both reasonable and beneficial to all. NOT having a vaccination at thugs moment in time is a personal choice. How about if we traced somebody whom got ill and lost time off work or died? back to you and you was given the bill for such damage as you did Not have immunisation? much like driving a car without insurance ..bill ought to be yours! Not a good comparison maybe but essential it shows those whom refuse to assist us all to avoid disease .death and spreading such ought to be treated as potential idiots and possible terrorists! many working ing care homes with very vulnerable and weak are saying will refuse vaccination and leave jobs. Fine that is their right .what is NOT right is a persons so called 'freedom of choice' to impact heavily on others or risk their lives and good health. we would not want to hurt others normally so why choose this way to even risk such actions? immunisation ought to be mandatory where it is deemed it poses an unacceptable risk to others lives and well being . big difference spreading cold germs .flu is an interesting item as it tends not to be serious to others unless they have health issues . so debate needed with risks.facts shows to all and then voted on. thus democracy has last say!