You don't say...Maia wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 1:50 pmThey fast-tracked themvegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 10:50 am Vaccines normally takes years to develop and test. I wonder how they managed to do it so quickly this time.
From the Mayo Clinic:
Fact: Because there is an urgent need for COVID-19 vaccines and the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) vaccine approval process can take years, the FDA first gave emergency use authorization to COVID-19 vaccines based on less data than is typically required. The data must show that the vaccines are safe and effective before the FDA can give emergency use authorization or approval.
Seems a bit self-contradictory...
Should I have a fourth jab?
- vegetariantaxidermy
- Posts: 13983
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
- Location: Narniabiznus
Re: Should I have a fourth jab?
- vegetariantaxidermy
- Posts: 13983
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
- Location: Narniabiznus
Re: Should I have a fourth jab?
It's not even a real vaccine. It's a 'McVaccine'. How many other vaccines allow you to catch an illness just as easily (perhaps even MORE easily) and only 'reduce POSSIBLE symptoms'?
How vague is that?
Vaccine: a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.
That's not how this McVaccine works at all...
How vague is that?
Vaccine: a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.
That's not how this McVaccine works at all...
Re: Should I have a fourth jab?
Please provide a quote where I said that no vaccine is 100%.vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:02 pmBecause according to you 'no vaccine is 100%'? A bit thick aren't you?Maia wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 1:48 pmWhy?vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 10:43 am
Tell that to all the people who have small pox...
Re: Should I have a fourth jab?
Anti-vaxxers, it is now clear to me, only think in binary terms. If it's not perfect, it must be useless.vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:07 pm It's not even a real vaccine. It's a 'McVaccine'. How many other vaccines allow you to catch an illness just as easily (perhaps even MORE easily) and only 'reduce POSSIBLE symptoms'?
How vague is that?
Vaccine: a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.
That's not how this McVaccine works at all...
- vegetariantaxidermy
- Posts: 13983
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
- Location: Narniabiznus
Re: Should I have a fourth jab?
''They seem to think that is should be all or nothing. If it's not 100% effective (what is?) it must be 0% effective.''
You are certainly implying as much here.
You are certainly implying as much here.
- vegetariantaxidermy
- Posts: 13983
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
- Location: Narniabiznus
Re: Should I have a fourth jab?
I don't know what app you are using to read comments but it's clealy not particularly efficient. What part of 'I'm not an anti-vaxxer' don't you understand?Maia wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:35 pmAnti-vaxxers, it is now clear to me, only think in binary terms. If it's not perfect, it must be useless.vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:07 pm It's not even a real vaccine. It's a 'McVaccine'. How many other vaccines allow you to catch an illness just as easily (perhaps even MORE easily) and only 'reduce POSSIBLE symptoms'?
How vague is that?
Vaccine: a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.
That's not how this McVaccine works at all...
Re: Should I have a fourth jab?
I'm asking a question. Now answer it.vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:36 pm ''They seem to think that is should be all or nothing. If it's not 100% effective (what is?) it must be 0% effective.''
You are certainly implying as much here.
Re: Should I have a fourth jab?
The part where you promote anti-vaxxer propaganda.vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:37 pmI don't know what app you are using to read comments but it's clealy not particularly efficient. What part of 'I'm not an anti-vaxxer' don't you understand?Maia wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:35 pmAnti-vaxxers, it is now clear to me, only think in binary terms. If it's not perfect, it must be useless.vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:07 pm It's not even a real vaccine. It's a 'McVaccine'. How many other vaccines allow you to catch an illness just as easily (perhaps even MORE easily) and only 'reduce POSSIBLE symptoms'?
How vague is that?
Vaccine: a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.
That's not how this McVaccine works at all...
-
- Posts: 6802
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:55 pm
Re: Should I have a fourth jab?
That was kind of binary in itself. First there are a lot of people against the new injections that are very different from the previous kind of vaccines BUT are still pro the traditional vaccine types. Two the range of concerns are quite broad in relation to the new RNA tech injections with people thinking they are not useful for young people, or like the country of Denmark that decided no one under 50 should get the covid vaccines from now on unless they are in an especially vulnerable group, precisely because they do not stop transmission to ....all sorts of reactions. Perhaps the people in this thread fit your description, the binary one above...but your description hardly matches the wide range of options out there. And notice how anyone who has serious questions about these new kinds of vaccines is generally told they are irrational, anti-science and so on.Maia wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:35 pmAnti-vaxxers, it is now clear to me, only think in binary terms. If it's not perfect, it must be useless.vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:07 pm It's not even a real vaccine. It's a 'McVaccine'. How many other vaccines allow you to catch an illness just as easily (perhaps even MORE easily) and only 'reduce POSSIBLE symptoms'?
How vague is that?
Vaccine: a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.
That's not how this McVaccine works at all...
I mean, pretty much like people who are skeptical about Climate Change get told similar things and are binarily categorized and insulted. I would have thought your experience there might make you hesitate to categorize a different kind of skeptic the way you did.
- vegetariantaxidermy
- Posts: 13983
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
- Location: Narniabiznus
Re: Should I have a fourth jab?
Maia wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:40 pmThe part where you promote anti-vaxxer propaganda.vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:37 pmI don't know what app you are using to read comments but it's clealy not particularly efficient. What part of 'I'm not an anti-vaxxer' don't you understand?
Like what? I've pretty much had it with your idiocy. In case you've forgotten, this is your thread and the title is 'Should I have a fourth jab?' So, you only wanted everyone to post 'yes' and that would have made you happy?
Re: Should I have a fourth jab?
It's ironic that the same people criticising me for my opinions on climate are promoting the anti-vax agenda. In each case, though, I base my opinions on the evidence as I understand it.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:46 pmThat was kind of binary in itself. First there are a lot of people against the new injections that are very different from the previous kind of vaccines BUT are still pro the traditional vaccine types. Two the range of concerns are quite broad in relation to the new RNA tech injections with people thinking they are not useful for young people, or like the country of Denmark that decided no one under 50 should get the covid vaccines from now on unless they are in an especially vulnerable group, precisely because they do not stop transmission to ....all sorts of reactions. Perhaps the people in this thread fit your description, the binary one above...but your description hardly matches the wide range of options out there. And notice how anyone who has serious questions about these new kinds of vaccines is generally told they are irrational, anti-science and so on.Maia wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:35 pmAnti-vaxxers, it is now clear to me, only think in binary terms. If it's not perfect, it must be useless.vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:07 pm It's not even a real vaccine. It's a 'McVaccine'. How many other vaccines allow you to catch an illness just as easily (perhaps even MORE easily) and only 'reduce POSSIBLE symptoms'?
How vague is that?
Vaccine: a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.
That's not how this McVaccine works at all...
I mean, pretty much like people who are skeptical about Climate Change get told similar things and are binarily categorized and insulted. I would have thought your experience there might make you hesitate to categorize a different kind of skeptic the way you did.
You're right about the various degrees of opinion, many of which I share, but none were in evidence on this thread.
- vegetariantaxidermy
- Posts: 13983
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
- Location: Narniabiznus
Re: Should I have a fourth jab?
''Vaccines are not 100% effective.''
Is this one clear enough for you?
- vegetariantaxidermy
- Posts: 13983
- Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
- Location: Narniabiznus
Re: Should I have a fourth jab?
You are using the political term 'anti-vaxxer' to describe anyone who points out anomalies and questions or queries ANYTHING to do with this 'vaccine'. I've never even looked at a single 'anti-vaxxer' website. I'm simply thinking critically and pointing out logical inconsistencies--something everyone should do (about everything).Maia wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:51 pmIt's ironic that the same people criticising me for my opinions on climate are promoting the anti-vax agenda. In each case, though, I base my opinions on the evidence as I understand it.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:46 pmThat was kind of binary in itself. First there are a lot of people against the new injections that are very different from the previous kind of vaccines BUT are still pro the traditional vaccine types. Two the range of concerns are quite broad in relation to the new RNA tech injections with people thinking they are not useful for young people, or like the country of Denmark that decided no one under 50 should get the covid vaccines from now on unless they are in an especially vulnerable group, precisely because they do not stop transmission to ....all sorts of reactions. Perhaps the people in this thread fit your description, the binary one above...but your description hardly matches the wide range of options out there. And notice how anyone who has serious questions about these new kinds of vaccines is generally told they are irrational, anti-science and so on.
I mean, pretty much like people who are skeptical about Climate Change get told similar things and are binarily categorized and insulted. I would have thought your experience there might make you hesitate to categorize a different kind of skeptic the way you did.
You're right about the various degrees of opinion, many of which I share, but none were in evidence on this thread.
Re: Should I have a fourth jab?
Perhaps you can provide an example of a vaccine that is 100% effective.vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 7:01 pm''Vaccines are not 100% effective.''Maia wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:30 pmPlease provide a quote where I said that no vaccine is 100%.vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:02 pm
Because according to you 'no vaccine is 100%'? A bit thick aren't you?
Is this one clear enough for you?
Re: Should I have a fourth jab?
I'm using the term anti-vaxxer to mean someone who is anti vaccine.vegetariantaxidermy wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 7:06 pmYou are using the political term 'anti-vaxxer' to describe anyone who points out anomalies and questions or queries ANYTHING to do with this 'vaccine'. I've never even looked at a single 'anti-vaxxer' website. I'm simply thinking critically and pointing out logical inconsistencies--something everyone should do (about everything).Maia wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:51 pmIt's ironic that the same people criticising me for my opinions on climate are promoting the anti-vax agenda. In each case, though, I base my opinions on the evidence as I understand it.Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Sat Oct 08, 2022 6:46 pm That was kind of binary in itself. First there are a lot of people against the new injections that are very different from the previous kind of vaccines BUT are still pro the traditional vaccine types. Two the range of concerns are quite broad in relation to the new RNA tech injections with people thinking they are not useful for young people, or like the country of Denmark that decided no one under 50 should get the covid vaccines from now on unless they are in an especially vulnerable group, precisely because they do not stop transmission to ....all sorts of reactions. Perhaps the people in this thread fit your description, the binary one above...but your description hardly matches the wide range of options out there. And notice how anyone who has serious questions about these new kinds of vaccines is generally told they are irrational, anti-science and so on.
I mean, pretty much like people who are skeptical about Climate Change get told similar things and are binarily categorized and insulted. I would have thought your experience there might make you hesitate to categorize a different kind of skeptic the way you did.
You're right about the various degrees of opinion, many of which I share, but none were in evidence on this thread.