The Vaccine Discussion Thread

[Trera]

It seems many on here are against the vaccine for whatever reason and they should have the choice to become vaccinated or not.................but know that not getting it may at some point limit the availability of activities that you may want to participate in due to the increased risk the unvaccinated may pose to being in close contact with others.

 

[wideeyedwonder]

I do think there will be continuous shots for quite some time, as there will always be new variants in the near future.

I believe that the current thought is that it will be an ongoing thing, like the yearly influenza shot. I don't believe that most scientists and policy makers are expecting that COVID-19 will be eradicated, as pretty much happened with Smallpox and polio.

 

[wideeyedwonder]

It seems many on here are against the vaccine for whatever reason and they should have the choice to become vaccinated or not.................but know that not getting it may at some point limit the availability of activities that you may want to participate in due to the increased risk the unvaccinated may pose to being in close contact with others.

I'm sure that most know that by now.

 

[PrincessShmoo]

It seems many on here are against the vaccine

I don't see that. But it's quite likely that those who are choosing not to vaccinate (for the time being or ever) may be seem to be more in numbers than those of us who have already had the shot, or are planning to.

 

[TestingH2O]

I'm sure that most know that by now.

They do, but they continue to fight against it.

 

[sabrecmc]

CDC votes to recommend Pfizer for 12-15 year olds. NY Times Article

 

[tink2424]

It seems many on here are against the vaccine for whatever reason and they should have the choice to become vaccinated or not.................but know that not getting it may at some point limit the availability of activities that you may want to participate in due to the increased risk the unvaccinated may pose to being in close contact with others.

I really don't think there will be much that will be limited at all or even for long. Even international travel is looking like you can travel with a negative test if you haven't been vaccinated. The only thing that will most likely be limited is cruising and even that I don't think will be for too long.

The numbers are dropping quickly and when the numbers are low there will be no reason to require a vaccination for anything. Maybe for travel to a hotspot but otherwise no need.

 

[Mousequake]

CDC votes to recommend Pfizer for 12-15 year olds. NY Times Article

I'm a total nerd but I had to listen to the ACIP vote live.

 

[Intr3pid]

I really don't think there will be much that will be limited at all or even for long. Even international travel is looking like you can travel with a negative test if you haven't been vaccinated. The only thing that will most likely be limited is cruising and even that I don't think will be for too long.

The numbers are dropping quickly and when the numbers are low there will be no reason to require a vaccination for anything. Maybe for travel to a hotspot but otherwise no need.

On the contrary, the differences in entry requirements based on your vaccination status are already starting to emerge. Here is Iceland's example:

https://www.icelandair.com/blog/iceland-is-open-faq/
As more countries complete vaccinations, I expect to see more of these rules come into play.

 

[sabrecmc]

I'm a total nerd but I had to listen to the ACIP vote live.

I couldn't listen live, but watched someone live tweet it! It was fascinating. Lots of information that was actually surprisingly easy to understand. Now, I'm just obsessively checking the CVS and Walgreens websites, lol.

ETA: On negative tests, I wonder how that would work if you are visiting multiple countries like we typically do when we travel to Europe or even for cruises with multiple ports. I assume each border would want a test with X hours of entry, so if you are moving from Germany to France, would you have to go find a place in Germany to test? Then a final test before flying back to the US? I guess these things will get figured out as we go.

 

[tink2424]

On the contrary, the differences in entry requirements based on your vaccination status are already starting to emerge. Here is Iceland's example:

https://www.icelandair.com/blog/iceland-is-open-faq/
As more countries complete vaccinations, I expect to see more of these rules come into play.

Funny enough I went to check this out and if you have had COVID then you also don't need to quarantine like those who are vaccinated. Additionally the vaccination requirement is only for high risk countries and if our numbers continue to decline like they are we are likely not going to be a high risk country so you are just further making my point.

Furthermore I am keeping an eye on Europe as I have a trip planned in early October and everything there seems to be you would need to either - be vaccinated, have evidence of a prior infection or a negative test for COVID right before you travel. Again that is only supposed to last for at most 12 months and I think as soon as they can drop the requirements they will.

I know some people are so concerned and think that the unvaccinated are going to be shunned from society but I really don't see that happening, especially in the long term. We are going to beat this back between the people who have had the infection naturally and those who are vaccinated. There will be no need for anyone to worry about someone else's vaccination status.

 

[tink2424]

ETA: On negative tests, I wonder how that would work if you are visiting multiple countries like we typically do when we travel to Europe or even for cruises with multiple ports. I assume each border would want a test with X hours of entry, so if you are moving from Germany to France, would you have to go find a place in Germany to test? Then a final test before flying back to the US? I guess these things will get figured out as we go.

I do wonder this as well but I know so many of the crossings between countries in Europe aren't manned so there wouldn't be anyone to check. I don't think this is going to be as much of an issue if the transmission rates are low but I'm keeping an eye out as my vacation plans to go through several countries.

One way they may manage this is with rapid tests as you go from one country to the next. I guess we will see when the final guidance comes out.

 

[mevelandry]

I really don't think there will be much that will be limited at all or even for long. Even international travel is looking like you can travel with a negative test if you haven't been vaccinated. The only thing that will most likely be limited is cruising and even that I don't think will be for too long.

The numbers are dropping quickly and when the numbers are low there will be no reason to require a vaccination for anything. Maybe for travel to a hotspot but otherwise no need.

Or maybe they'll require them for a long time to make sure the numbers stay low.

 

[sabrecmc]

CVS is allowing appointments for 12+ for anyone interested.

 

[we"reofftoneverland]

I agree with Kathi, but I’ll just take a moment to point out that the group you are referring to is not a professional organization. It is a political one. This group is also known for perpetuating information not supported by data regarding all sorts of things like HIV, breast cancer, and now COVID.

A geologist could self publish a paper that the Earth is flat. Others in the same field would denounce the paper as being false because there is much more evidence that the Earth is not flat, and we should all continue to act accordingly. In much the same way, when people self publish information about COVID that is not supported by data, scientists and doctors are going to come out and speak plainly that the information is false. It’s not an agenda or a vendetta, it is ensuring that people have information that is accurate.

This organization?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_American_Physicians_and_Surgeons

"The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) is a conservative non-profit association founded in 1944. The group was reported to have about 5,000 members in 2014. The association has promoted a range of scientifically discredited hypotheses, including the belief that HIV does not cause AIDS, that being gay reduces life expectancy, that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer, and that there is a causal relationship between vaccines and autism. It is opposed to the Affordable Care Act and other forms of universal health insurance. "

I can see why...

I'm sorry you feel that people are discrediting him without watching the video. With a headline of '"vaccine" deaths' and a unsubstantiated claim that the vaccine has killed a lot of people I can see why they have not. In the first minute he claims tens of thousands have had to go to the hospital due to the vaccine... where is he getting this number? Do you not think the families would be clamoring to the news stations? We hear from all kinds of news sources, both liberal and conservative and everything between and on either side bring forth every case where the vaccine has caused issues, such as the several issues of blood clots from the J&J which completely halted administering them for a time.

Regenron, pulmicort and favipiravir are still in trials for treatment of covid... he names a few others as well that I didn't catch, but really what it comes down to is him saying 'hey, we have these medicines that treat these issues, so we're giving them to people who have covid but arent yet in the hospital. I don't think anyone is arguing with prescribing approved medicines for an off label use while we figure this out. (PS he also mentions hydroxychloroquin but that has, AFAIK, been proven ineffective https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12879-021-05773-w )

He then goes on to say participants in the trials were 'unblinded' because they would get sore arms from the shots or have side effects. Wouldn't that be true of ALL clinical studies? I've gotten a sore arm from every shot I've ever had, and whenever I give blood, or have an IV, etc. I'm sure clinical trials allow for that. I find it VERY unlikely that participants in the trial would NOT come forward if they started feeling ill because they 'knew they got an actual vaccine' as he insists. You don't come forward if you are in a trial; you are checked in with constantly and the entire point is you tell them how you're feeling that day. So this Doctor insists than en masse everyone in the trial hid how they truly felt if and only if they "knew" they had the vaccine? Hard no.

"I wouldn't want anyone who had the vaccine to think they were protected from covid-19" No worries. That's why we're being told to still mask and do other things in addition, to account for that % below 100% until we hit herd immunity (if it occurs).

I mean.. I did listen to the whole thing because I'm stubborn and I do try to have an open mind on things but it just comes across as a conspiracy theory. The hosts 'oh wow! how does that make you feel!' every time he spits out a number doesn't help.

Now that you have gotten a response I hope we can move on... the official stance of our country, our government, the vast majority of our doctors and millions of our fellow citizens is that the vaccines are safe and effective. We anticipate the FDA will give full approval to Pfizer shortly and the other vaccines will follow suit. Just as we would not allow controversial topics on other matters I am going to have to draw a line on links and articles that have been pulled from other sources for being dubious and will be deleting that link.

Guys, you do know that Wikipedia is not a real encyclopedia and that it is edited by anyone who has an axe to grind and wants to edit it. One of the founders of Wikipedia has also lamented that it has been hijacked by Leftists. Not my language but his. I don’t have any personal feelings on Wikipedia except that it is not a serious source. I can tell you that my teenage son edits Wikipedia all the time. Lol.
But what you have both done here is the problem with our world today. People just label people and their ideas in order to dismiss them. I’ve just said that there are other ideas out there and that we might want to give those ideas a full hearing. And what happens? People very aggressively try to shut me down. Believe me, as I’ve said, I pray that those vaccines work and do not have any long term side effects. But for now, I’m exercising caution. What’s the rush? And there is no way I will vaccinate my kids. And my kids are currently vaccinated for everything else. But more people have died from these vaccines in the last few months than have died from all combined vaccines in the last 20 years. That is actual data from VARES. And yet if you google it, you will find many msm articles about how it is not true. Why would the news report that when the data is right there? It is truly bizarre. It is all very strange.

 

[Intr3pid]

Additionally the vaccination requirement is only for high risk countries and if our numbers continue to decline like they are we are likely not going to be a high risk country so you are just further making my point.

Not quite.

For travelers from high-risk countries, there is an outright ban on non-essential travel.

If you are unvaccinated/"unrecovered" and traveling from low-risk countries, you are still subject to a 5- to 6-day quarantine along with double testing. You can quarantine at your hotel - yes - though when you check the hotel prices for Iceland in the summer, the sticker shock might take you out before the virus will !

 

[wideeyedwonder]

Guys, you do know that Wikipedia is not a real encyclopedia and that it is edited by anyone who has an axe to grind and wants to edit it.

A simplification, but yes, basically this. In an age when many (most?) media outlets need to be independently fact checked (even the commercial fact checkers), Wikipedia is NOT where you want to be going to get "facts", any more than FB or that bird-sound social media app.

People just label people and their ideas in order to dismiss them.

Off topic, but totally agree. I've actually been told that its because it's easier to do this, and you don't have to "waste time refuting ridiculous arguments". My response is, if it's a ridiculous argument, then it should be very easy to refute.

 

[Sykes]

A simplification, but yes, basically this. In an age when many (most?) media outlets need to be independently fact checked (even the commercial fact checkers), Wikipedia is NOT where you want to be going to get "facts", any more than FB or that bird-sound social media app

Fortunately, unlike most media outlets, a good Wikipedia article will cite sources for any even remotely controversial claims that are on the page. The article in question has 51 distinct citations to back up the claims that are made on the page, so while the article itself is not a reliable source, it is a good jumping-off point where someone can learn more about a subject. For example, they link to the journal articles published by the group in question claiming absolutely atrocious things like that HIV doesn't cause AIDS and that the "gay male lifestyle" shortens life expectancy by 20 years.

 

[TestingH2O]

Guys, you do know that Wikipedia is not a real encyclopedia and that it is edited by anyone who has an axe to grind and wants to edit it.

Yes, the Wikipedia source is the first hit if you Google the organization, but, in case you are wondering, I actually went to their page. I looked at their site, including their Elections page that only regurgitates Fox News talking points, looked at their "publications," etc and was easily able to determine that it is a political group. That is what happens when you read for comprehension. Compare that to the America Association of Pediatrics for instance, and you can immediately see the difference.

 

[mevelandry]

(...) But more people have died from these vaccines in the last few months than have died from all combined vaccines in the last 20 years. That is actual data from VARES.

Do you have a link?