geeblock wrote:

we had a case of scarlet fever last month i havent heard that word in years, I had to google it because i didnt believe it was true but apparently is a more rare form of strep throat.

My wife had a terrible immune system growing up and actually had scarlet fever she was also one the rare people to get mono twice. 

Also I would love to see the poll taken again after Covid. I’m all for vaccines that we have proven work over time but a law would scare me after Covid and how quickly that vaccine was introduced. 

sportchampps wrote:

I’m all for vaccines that we have proven work over time but a law would scare me after Covid and how quickly that vaccine was introduced. 

20 years for mRNA vaccine human trials wasn't enough time for you?

gut wrote:

20 years for mRNA vaccine human trials wasn't enough time for you?

https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2021/the-long-history-of-mrna-vaccines

First mRNA vaccine testing in Humans was 2013, so 7 years at best before COVID.

Excuse us for not wanting to take the first one that wasn’t just in a trial, that didn’t go through a full trial itself. 

If mandates had gone through I would have at best got the J&J one that was a typical “dead virus” vaccine and not mRNA, at worst I would have found a way for a fake “religious exemption”

jmog wrote:

https://publichealth.jhu.edu/2021/the-long-history-of-mrna-vaccines

First mRNA vaccine testing in Humans was 2013, so 7 years at best before COVID.

Pardon me.  Human trials of mRNA started around 2001, though for cancer therapies not vaccines. But vaccine trials in mice began back in the 90s.

The question still stands - how many DECADES of research will suffice?  I can paste links too, but ones actually relevant to the point made:  Discovered in 1961 - ohh no I'm scared it's too new and hasn't been studied enough!!!  Been around longer than most posters on this board

https://www.flagshippioneering.com/timelines/mrna-timeline

And correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it the traditional chicken-based Covid vaccine that had problems and had to be pulled from the market?  J&J?

All this hand wringing, yet the traditional vaccines have not proven safer or more effective.

gut wrote:

Pardon me.  Human trials of mRNA started around 2001, though for cancer therapies not vaccines. But vaccine trials in mice began back in the 90s.

The question still stands - how many DECADES of research will suffice?  I can paste links too, but ones actually relevant to the point made:  Discovered in 1961 - ohh no I'm scared it's too new and hasn't been studied enough!!!  Been around longer than most posters on this board

https://www.flagshippioneering.com/timelines/mrna-timeline

The indignation doesn't help your cause.

What did I say that was false? Nothing? You were originally wrong and had to correct your statement yet were still playing the righteous indignant "I don't like anti-vaxxers"?

Come on, get serious.

This was the FIRST vaccine that was not a trial, that was distributed to humans. You acting like people are anti-science for not wanting that first one is asinine. 

Especially when we are talking about COVID. This wasn't Polio where 10% of the people infected died and nearly all had some form of cripling debilitation (wheel chairs, limps, etc). This was a terrible flu, yes far worse than the "right" made it out but also far less than the "left" made it out to be.

If this was a real life or death scenario, like I was elderly, obese, etc (any of the co-morbities that COVID killed a high proportion of the infected) then I would have got it and took that chance. But due to the relative health and age I didn't take that chance. I had COVID twice and never had it worse than a typical cold/flu.

So yes, many people took the newness of the type of vaccine into the calculated risk of the vaccine vs how bad the illness was for their age/health. That's called actually paying attention to the science, not denying it.

Be less pompous next time.

gut wrote:

And correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it the traditional chicken-based Covid vaccine that had problems and had to be pulled from the market?  J&J?

All this hand wringing, yet the traditional vaccines have not proven safer or more effective.

Yes, J&J showed elevated instances of blood clots and was pulled, one or two of the mRNA vaccines showed elevated instances of myocarditis and from what I remember the brand/version of the vaccine was changed to alleviate the side effects.

The myocarditis was somewhat swept under the rug or "accepted" because COVID 19 does that as well so it was easier to lump in with those cases in the news and general public.

If I didn’t have to have it working in a healthcare office I would not have got the first two. 

Speaking about just the covid mRNA vaccine, one of the doctors who "created" it said that it wasn't ready for mass consumption. But he got censored and then banned from most media.  Doctor Malone. He was accused of misinformation.