Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why the Covid Vaccines Aren’t Dangerous

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 119 posts

Re: Why the Covid Vaccines Aren’t Dangerous

#71

Post by dham »

redis_mlc wrote: post #52
LurkingPenguin wrote: post #42

> For some people, it’s not so much the known risks that have them worried as the unknown. They ask, What if the mRNA vaccines alter our DNA, threatening our health far in the future? Will they affect our bodies in other, as yet undiscovered, ways? After all, some say, this is brand-new technology, and the F.D.A. has only fully approved the Pfizer vaccine. > As it turns out, though, mRNA technology isn’t especially n…

> not particularly concerned about the risk of undiscovered long-term side effects We don't know the long-term effects of corona or corona vaccines on the female reproductive system, especially eggs. Considering that if eggs are attacked, that's the end of us, so we should learn more and fast.

More than likely Covid-19 will have the same long term side effects of any other Coronavirus or the Flu. None of the long term side effects seem particularly surprising, other than they are publicized more.

More than likely Covid-19 viral vector vaccine's (Johnson and Johnson) or Live-attenuated vaccines will have the same long term side effects of any other vaccine in these categories.

Re: Why the Covid Vaccines Aren’t Dangerous

#72

Post by wintermutestwin »

void_mint wrote: post #4

Those that believe the vaccines are dangerous aren't swayed by rational thinking.

I have been repeating the oft hear line: "you can't change someone's mind with rationality if rationality didn't inform their belief."

But many actually think they are being rational! My anecdote of the day:

I had a friend tell me that some official brit study claims that "vaccinated individuals carry 251 times the load of COVID-19 viruses in their nostrils compared to the unvaccinated. How can anyone believe MSNBC's bullshit when they ignore real science??"

WTF? (I say to myself.) So, I actually get online and try to search for some recent viral load study. I find this link on some ridiculous site: https://adarapress.com/2021/08/26/study-fully-vaccinated-hea...

That lame site says his line verbatim, but when you look at the actual abstract of the study that is linked: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3897733 It says: "Breakthrough Delta variant infections are associated with high viral loads, prolonged PCR positivity, and low levels of vaccine-induced neutralizing antibodies, explaining the transmission between the vaccinated people. Physical distancing measures remain critical to reduce SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant transmission." That is a totally different conclusion!

This friend is totally convinced that the government and media is trying to trick him into getting this vaccine. This is someone who actually has a BS in Science and built a MM$ business in a highly scientific field. He's read Demon Haunted World. I've always considered him to be one of my more intelligent and knowledgeable friends. And now I just do my best to avoid topics like this with him.

I am really coming to the opinion that the internet is yet another technology that our species has the intelligence to build, but lacks the wisdom to use without causing more harm than good.

Re: Why the Covid Vaccines Aren’t Dangerous

#73

Post by mdp2021 »

honkycat wrote: post #63
vldmit wrote: post #28

You can't persuade skeptics by not addressing (simply omitting) some most important concerns, namely: - Role of age, fitness and comorbidities in risk/benefit analysis - Lack of trust in institutions (suppression of alternative views; capture/corruption) Another question is who New Yorker can reach, I won't be surprised that ~95% of their audience are already vaccinated. And remaining 5% holdouts are well-informed an…

"Skeptics" is a very generous portrayal of the anti-vax crowd. They are not skeptics. Their opposition is not based on missing information, it is based on conforming to an ideology. Which is diametrically opposed to skepticism.

The poster was probably - correctly - including hesitants. The article is about hesitants (not about the side you mention).

Re: Why the Covid Vaccines Aren’t Dangerous

#74

Post by boyleingpoint »

honkycat wrote: post #63
vldmit wrote: post #28

You can't persuade skeptics by not addressing (simply omitting) some most important concerns, namely: - Role of age, fitness and comorbidities in risk/benefit analysis - Lack of trust in institutions (suppression of alternative views; capture/corruption) Another question is who New Yorker can reach, I won't be surprised that ~95% of their audience are already vaccinated. And remaining 5% holdouts are well-informed an…

"Skeptics" is a very generous portrayal of the anti-vax crowd. They are not skeptics. Their opposition is not based on missing information, it is based on conforming to an ideology. Which is diametrically opposed to skepticism.

Do you think it's possible that people could be generally pro-vaccine and be sceptical of the covid-19 vaccine?

You're trying to lump people who have legitimate concerns about the covid-19 vaccine in particular with the vaccines cause autism/magnetic vaccines crowd, and it's very dishonest. This is not some monolithic movement, and I disavow the people who are anti-vax in principle.

I'm rooting for the covid vaccines, and I hope they're everything we've been promised and more, but I will be waiting.

Re: Why the Covid Vaccines Aren’t Dangerous

#75

Post by type0 »

dev_tty01 wrote: post #31
hammock wrote: post #16

>It is this weighing of risks and benefits, in all their many facets, that informs the chorus of health-care professionals imploring their families, neighbors, co-workers, and friends, along with everyone else, to please get vaccinated against covid-19. They urge vaccination because they see its ratio of risks to benefits as incredibly, unbelievably good. For someone who has already had Covid and recovered, there is…

Not true. Vaccinated and previously infected people are much less likely to be reinfected than unvaccinated previously infected. Here is a recent study: https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0806-vaccination-pr... Reinfection was twice as likely among unvaccinated previously infected. The more recent data includes the effects of the delta variant. So, the risk of Covid is much higher and the risk of adverse effect…

There's always a risk-benefit calculation, depending on the person and their medical status it might not be worth it (for that person) to get vaccinated if they already had the disease. Of course for the society as a whole there might be big benefits even if some of these people stand to loose their health or even their life as with the Astra vaccine and the atypical blood clots.

Re: Why the Covid Vaccines Aren’t Dangerous

#76

Post by Aachen »

ashtonkem wrote: post #70
Aachen wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does nobody ever reply with numbers while making claims that it's so obvious. Maybe I'm not American enough here in Europe but to me this isn't self-evident and unless my family suddenly turns anti vax (bit late for that now) it won't be so I'm going to need numbers to understand how big this is. How even would I know how many poison control calls there are in the first place? I know roughly you have like 30% (gi…

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.news4jax.com/health/2021/08... Honestly, I think the issue here is that you’re not American, so you don’t understand the current situation here. Vaccines have been free and readily available for a long time, and those who are holding out have an unusually high percentage of cray in them. Last I checked, polling indicated that about half of the people unvaccinated indicated that would…

Nice number, nice amp link. But ok I'll waste some more of my time checking your source for you. (edit: the comment was only a link at first.)

> So far, they’ve treated 27 patients in the month of August.

> The Alabama Poison Information Center at Children’s of Alabama has fielded 24 ivermectin exposure cases so far this year, of which 15 were related to COVID-19 prevention and treatment. It says there have been five other calls seeking information about ivermectin.

Lol, yeah clearly a majority of the millions unvaccinated.

Re: Why the Covid Vaccines Aren’t Dangerous

#77

Post by ashtonkem »

Aachen wrote: post #76
ashtonkem wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.news4jax.com/health/2021/08... Honestly, I think the issue here is that you’re not American, so you don’t understand the current situation here. Vaccines have been free and readily available for a long time, and those who are holding out have an unusually high percentage of cray in them. Last I checked, polling indicated that about half of the people unvaccinated indicated that would…

Nice number, nice amp link. But ok I'll waste some more of my time checking your source for you. (edit: the comment was only a link at first.) > So far, they’ve treated 27 patients in the month of August. > The Alabama Poison Information Center at Children’s of Alabama has fielded 24 ivermectin exposure cases so far this year, of which 15 were related to COVID-19 prevention and treatment. It says there have been five…

Keep reading.

> At least 70% of recent calls to the Mississippi Poison Control Center have been related to ingestion of livestock or animal formulations of ivermectin purchased at livestock supply centers, Mississippi Department of Health officials said.

Again, these are people literally taking horse dewormer. We can debate the precise number, but you cannot reason with someone who decides that they trust tractor supply more than they trust their doctor and any relevant medical authority.

Re: Why the Covid Vaccines Aren’t Dangerous

#78

Post by Izkata »

LurkingPenguin wrote: post #42

> For some people, it’s not so much the known risks that have them worried as the unknown. They ask, What if the mRNA vaccines alter our DNA, threatening our health far in the future? Will they affect our bodies in other, as yet undiscovered, ways? After all, some say, this is brand-new technology, and the F.D.A. has only fully approved the Pfizer vaccine. > As it turns out, though, mRNA technology isn’t especially n…

> Yes, mRNA technology has been in development for decades. So what? We went from having 0 mRNA vaccines in use to injecting hundreds of millions of people around the world with them all at once.

IMO their argument works against them: Three decades of nothing, then two at once from different companies? What's the catch?

Re: Why the Covid Vaccines Aren’t Dangerous

#79

Post by Aachen »

ashtonkem wrote: post #77
Aachen wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nice number, nice amp link. But ok I'll waste some more of my time checking your source for you. (edit: the comment was only a link at first.) > So far, they’ve treated 27 patients in the month of August. > The Alabama Poison Information Center at Children’s of Alabama has fielded 24 ivermectin exposure cases so far this year, of which 15 were related to COVID-19 prevention and treatment. It says there have been five…

Keep reading. > At least 70% of recent calls to the Mississippi Poison Control Center have been related to ingestion of livestock or animal formulations of ivermectin purchased at livestock supply centers, Mississippi Department of Health officials said. Again, these are people literally taking horse dewormer. We can debate the precise number, but you cannot reason with someone who decides that they trust tractor sup…

70% of how many?

Keep reading, it said iirc somewhere "for comparison, last year there were 6 calls".

Re: Why the Covid Vaccines Aren’t Dangerous

#80

Post by boyleingpoint »

dev_tty01 wrote: post #31
hammock wrote: post #16

>It is this weighing of risks and benefits, in all their many facets, that informs the chorus of health-care professionals imploring their families, neighbors, co-workers, and friends, along with everyone else, to please get vaccinated against covid-19. They urge vaccination because they see its ratio of risks to benefits as incredibly, unbelievably good. For someone who has already had Covid and recovered, there is…

Not true. Vaccinated and previously infected people are much less likely to be reinfected than unvaccinated previously infected. Here is a recent study: https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0806-vaccination-pr... Reinfection was twice as likely among unvaccinated previously infected. The more recent data includes the effects of the delta variant. So, the risk of Covid is much higher and the risk of adverse effect…

There's a study out of Israel that say the exact opposite

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-...

This isn't something that can just be hand-waved way

Post reply on HN