re: Will people here admit that the vaccines are working?

quote:

---

There is no data out there that suggests that the vaccines aren't having a positive impact

---

So you are just going to ignore natural immunity?

(no message)

From your link:

quote:

---

In a press release on Friday, the MOH said that these 2,000 individuals are those who had developed "anaphylaxis or allergic reactions (hives, face/ eyelid/ lip/ throat swelling, generalised rash within 7 days after vaccination)".

The individuals can consider taking vaccines under the Special Access Route (SAR), such as the Sinovac vaccine, if they cannot wait, the ministry added in its post.

---

Unfortunately, this is yet another example of governments lying about science. Sad, because for the average person out there with little understanding of detailed science, there is no reason or ability to trust anything being promoted. Something which has been emphasized with reason over and over in this thread.

Of course, the irony is, this article is being linked as scientifically relevant.

In fact, there is ZERO REASON for any specific recommendation of the Sinovac vaccine (especially in this instance) other than kickback received by officials recommending it. ZERO! Sinovac is a Chinese manufacturer. The vaccine is simple attenuated Covid-19.

Data from efficacy trials have not been published. Trial details essential for critical review of results have thus far been tightly sealed by the Chinese. Repeat: Trial details essential for critical review of results have thus far been tightly sealed by the Chinese. The only efficacy "data" is through press releases.

Translation: Delayed allergic response to Phizer's vaccine (btw, dubious in the Singapore piece) would occur secondary to the S-protein component. Sinovac's vaccine may or may not be effectively attenuated. Regardless, it includes S-protein IDENTICAL to what the mRNA variations produce in isolation. In other words, it not only includes the presumed allergen, but other potentially allergy provocative proteins as well.

quote:

---

But wouldn't that be one of the main reasons to get it? If it's both effective and safe the reason for many not getting it is purely political.

---

Powerman, for argument's sake let's assume that the vaccines are the most effective and safest vaccines ever developed. Given that, do you seriously not understand why really smart and rational people might take a hard pass on getting one? It seems like you believe everybody's default position on pumping a drug into their body should be a big green flashing YES, and that the drug needs to be proven to be ineffective or unsafe before that sign turns to CAUTION.

I'm not anti-vaxx. Had no problem getting my kids vaccinated. If there's ever a time when a vaccine makes sense for me, I'll jump in line. But I'm not a fan of medicating for no (substantial) reason.

It's unbelievable how many meds the average American is on. It's f'n unbelievable how many meds the average person over 50 is on. In some cases, we are medicating things that don't need treatment - we have a natural immune system for a reason, and unless I'm mistaken, unless you give it a workout now and then, it gets weaker (one of our Docs can comment on that?). It's like all the anti-bacterial soaps and the neverending cycle of needing to develop stronger and stronger anti-bacterials. Right?

quote:

---

So if Covid is mostly benign? What are the effects of basically a flu shot?

---

I'm not quite sure what you're asking, but I'll take a stab. It's not the "mostly" which folks are vaccinated against.

If 200 people are gathered together and a terrorist says one of you will be executed tonight, you're still mostly safe. But the vaccine changes those odds to about 1 in 20,000.

The difference between CV19 vaccinations and the FluVax is the FluVax targets anticipated flu strains. Anticipation doesn't always get it right. With CV19, we know the target.

But my question is...everyone willingly takes flu shots each year that are created on the fly...as you say predicting strains.

If Covid has a flu-like footprint and similar or less rate of death...what is the vitriol over this Vax if it supposedly is made to battle known strains of Flu? But comments on this board are acting like the government is injecting people with Anthrax as some sort of culling of the population.

So what is so different or bad about this common virus strain Vax?

That supposedly doctors won't take it.

quote:

---

So what is so different or bad about this common virus strain Vax?

---

We have traditional CV19 vaccines, but the mRNA model is different. It affords advantages, and will be the basis of novel virus defense going forward. In practical terms of vaccination risk though, there is no significant difference.

Most resistance emanates from Covidians trying to force the issue. E.g., insisting that 12y/o's with infinitesimal CV19 risk be subjected to emergency use vaccination, or be excluded from school.

IDK about the "doctors won't take it" business. I've encountered not a smidgen of a whiff of that.

quote:

---

200 people are gathered together and a terrorist says one of you will be executed tonight, you're still mostly safe. 

---

That means that the terrorists were mostly peaceful in guessing...

Anyways just wanted to add that I don't know a single physician who hasn't gotten the vaccine.

And I know a lot of physicians.

quote:

---

They’d give Trump a blowjob before they got a vaccine

---

Why you being homophobic?

So if you made the mistake because your local Pharmacy treated it as easy to get as a common flu shot, are we fricked...potentially?

What's in this shite that most people probably don't need that makes them scared vs. a common flu Vax? I mean it takes like 5 minutes, no questions asked. Don't need to see a doctor. Rite-Aid and national pharmacies are advertising it like the yearly Flu shot.

Are we rolling out stuff that isn't vetted and taken like candy?