• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics

FlyGuy said:
Oh so they had to wait for long term data on natural immunity but not for dangerous effects of the vaccine. Makes sense.

It wasn't about herd immunity. It was about it not being a dangerous disease. The danger was in comorbidities and existing conditions.

See, there's the "means to an end" argument I referenced the other day. I don't buy it and it's such a slippery slope. Threatening to prevent people from working and making money via requirements of the employers (OSHA) was pure coercion. If you can't convince people through normal means, them seeing the proof of your statements, etc then go back to the drawing board.

I am not convinced the vaccine saved millions of lives. The implementation coincided with the virus's strength lessening for starters. The fact it disrupted women's periods, proving the spike proteins did not stay in the injection site as intended, is a tragedy. If you didn't get heart inflammation from covid then it's quite possible you got it from the vaccine. The technology did not work as they intended.
Click to expand...
It was a new disease. Therefore they had to wait until some data had been collected, in order to analyze said data and make recommendations. That's how this works. And any disease that is causing massive hospitalization and death is by definition pretty fucking serious. A virus that can damage multiple organs including the lungs, heart and brain, even in young and/or healthy people, is not a scary disease only due to "comorbidities and existing conditions".

And they absolutely were trying to convince people through normal means. It's just that nobody at the time could have foreseen how the American right wing would lose their minds and start spreading misinformation like its own man-made virus, yet here we are.

And yes, a person could get heart arrhythmia from the vaccine, and from covid. But again, it's a simple math problem. The likelihood of getting it from covid was much higher than it was getting it from a vaccine.

Myocarditis in SARS-CoV-2 infection vs. COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review and meta-analysis - PMC

This study aimed to compare the incidence of myocarditis in COVID-19 vaccines and in severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection groups. Electronic databases (MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Conclusion​

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we found that the risk of myocarditis is more than seven fold higher in persons who were infected with the SARS-CoV-2 than in those who received the vaccine. These findings support the continued use of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines among all eligible persons per CDC and WHO recommendations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top