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

Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise

news.ubc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 532 posts

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#331

Post by qsera »

RandomLensman wrote: post #318
qsera wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First step would be to collect data that is trust worthy regarding potential adverse reactions. And for that the barriers that stigmatize such reporting should be removed. Basically, for starters, doctors should be free to report the events they see without getting labeled "Anti-vaccine doctor" or fear of getting their licence revoked. When such barriers exist, no one could/should trust the product.

What don't you like about current reporting such as VAERS? Where do you see the barriers there specifically? Do you have examples of doctors getting their licenses revoked for reporting something?

>VAERS

When you got your vaccine, were you told to report at VAERS if you have any problems? Most people does not even know such a thing exists.

Even then the reports from that database is not really considered trust worthy. It is often dismissed with a statement that "anyone can report anything there!"

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#332

Post by logifail »

teamonkey wrote: post #328
logifail wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A reduction is still a reduction, even if is not a 100% total and full stop The advice I was given from our family doctor was that having had an utterly mild case of (actual) Covid, as I had (two separate times!), during the pandemic, was significantly better in protecting against both future infection - and subsequent transmission - than any protection I could have gained by vaccination. YMMV. I suspect this is do…

If you’ve had Covid twice then you’ll have had the antibodies in your system, however there were several strains and getting boosters to maximise resistance was important. Remember that you caught Covid twice , because your body’s immune system was still not strong enough to make you asymptomatic the second time. You likely caught Covid several times but several of those times you were asymptomatic. It’s incorrect to…

> It’s incorrect to say that catching the virus gives you “better” protection than a vaccine.

An expert in the field would appear to disagree:

Dr F: "the best vaccination is to get infected"

https://www.c-span.org/clip/washington-journal/user-clip-pre...

(00:50)

> however there were several strains and getting boosters to maximise resistance was important

Our family doctor said the opposite: "your antibody count is so high [from recent infection] there is no point you having a vaccine/booster".

I listened to Dr F (2004) and to our family doctor. YMMV.

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#333

Post by watwut »

qsera wrote: post #330
watwut wrote: post #319

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There wad that kid that died of measles in America and later there was interview with parents. They said basically that. They would change nothing and rather have kid die then get vaccines. At some point, you have to start believing what people say about themselves and their believes. And second, yes that is attitude of political actors who spread fear of vaccines to get votes. Overall impact is exactly that and they…

>They would change nothing.. But by this logic, this is exactly what pro-vax people advocate as well. If a child die right after vaccination, they will still advice people to vaccinate their other kids, because this was just an anomaly? So are all the pro-vax people maintaining the attitude that they would rather have their kid die or suffer life long than NOT getting the vaccine? The fallacy in your logic is that yo…

They did not said they were unlucky. They said that if they knew their kid will die without vaccine, they would still skip vaccine to protect the kid from bigger harm. They said that, not me. That is the problem here, you ignore what they are actually saying while twisting their position into much different and more palatable. It is consistent problem with right wing - insistence on ignoring what they say, push for and advocate, just so that we can pretend they are harmless.

> The fallacy in your logic is that you think people reject vaccines because they think the diseases does not have the potential to be dangerous. They do not think that.

They literally openly say that. Again and again and again. The above couple was saying something else in the interview, because the kid actually died. But if you actually listen to what anti-vaccine politicians and advocates say, they literally say that diseases don't have potential to be dangerous.

> But by this logic, this is exactly what pro-vax people advocate as well. If a child die right after vaccination, they will still advice people to vaccinate their other kids, because this was just an anomaly?

You can do that only if you are intent on twisting conversations and meanings into unrecognizable.

> Does not mean that taking the chance was wrong. In the same way you are not wrong if you go out for a pleasure trip in a car and get in a fatal accident.

You know what, sometimes it IS wrong to take the chance. Just like, if you race in a car in a place where you can kill bystanders and then die off it. Funny, people are quick to blame parents when 12 years old walk to school for not doing full surveillance, people blame parents for not having perfect control of kids socials, but somehow, blaming parents for refusing vaccination is a bridge too far.

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#334

Post by electrotype »

thiht wrote: post #323
Markoff wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Except COVID "vaccines" did not prevent infecting yourself or someone else, are there still people believing this nonsense? This "vaccine" at best protects you if you are old at risk and it's not good even at doing that comparable with those flu "vaccines".

Not sure why you're using quotes, it IS a legitimate vaccine. Care to elaborate?

The definition of the word "vaccine" was literally changed during the pandemic so the mRNA injections could fit in : https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/word-of-the-year-20...

Some people don't agree they should be called "vaccine", in the traditional sense.

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#335

Post by optionalsquid »

willmadden wrote: post #111

The link in the article does not show the study, just a list of references, a summary and the researchers who published it. How many of the researchers who published this study have conflicts of interest? Where is the full study for review?

The first link in the article goes straight to the study:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#336

Post by jasonvorhe »

koonsolo wrote: post #324
cedws wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The polio vaccine is much older and as far as I could find has never had a death attributed to it. COVID vaccines are newer, and their safety profile was not fully understood when they were rolled out.

Therefore the COVID vaccines were also not mandatory.

Unless you wanted to keep your job in the medical field or education or had to do lots of travel.

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#337

Post by xboxnolifes »

estearum wrote: post #179
mchusma wrote: post #160

I really feel that many of the issues with mRNA vaccines and health studies in general are generalizations like “safe and effective”. Everything has statistical risks and benefits, and we should just share those front and center with people. Eg test results for X mean you have a Y% chance of having X, given your history and symptoms and other results. Here are low cost low risk marginal things you can do to improve s…

> Similar for vaccines, just give us the numbers clearly and upfront. You are aware that literally anyone can go and literally find exactly these numbers, correct? The trial results are published!

Yes, but the point of science/health communication sources is to communicate. People aren't going to spend an afternoon figuring out where to find medical trial results, learn how to read them with a bunch of unknown terms, and form a risk tolerance analysis. I know this. You know this. Everyone know this.

The health and science communicators must improve how they communicate with the public.

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#338

Post by xboxnolifes »

Markoff wrote: post #296
nesarkvechnep wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did they die?

would they die if they didn't take the vaxx? plenty people who got vaxx died anyway, plenty people who got COVID died as well, some of them from COVID, most of them were just infected while dying and COVID had really nothing to do with their death, but it was needed to pump those numbers about scary dangerous COVID so govs can go on powertrips while taking pocket money from pharma lobby

At a population level, people who were vaccinated died at lower rates. We have numbers on this stuff. It was pretty easy to find during covid and I imagine you could find it with a quick Google search now if you'd like.

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#339

Post by jasonvorhe »

swingboy wrote: post #67

Serious question in good faith: what was the deal with the “calamari” (clots?) the anti-vax crowd kept talking about being found in the veins/arteries of folks who took the Covid vaccine?

[flagged]

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#340

Post by jasonvorhe »

electrotype wrote: post #334
thiht wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure why you're using quotes, it IS a legitimate vaccine. Care to elaborate?

The definition of the word "vaccine" was literally changed during the pandemic so the mRNA injections could fit in : https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/word-of-the-year-20... Some people don't agree they should be called "vaccine", in the traditional sense.

It's gene therapy. Straight from the mouth of a member of the board of directors of Bayer: https://rumble.com/v210gyq-executive-big-pharma-bayer-stefan...?
Post reply on HN