Wait, what are you saying?

That there are no good or simple answers here. The actual problems COVID causes are nasty and hard to measure. The vaccines are unproven and no doubt dangerous, at least compared to other vaccines we commonly get. The virus however is certainly worse. And while the vaccines do work, for now, but they'll eventually be defeated by a mutation we won't be able to stop. And most of the things you'd like to know in order to make a decision, either as an individual or a policy decision in government, are not currently knowable, while the risks of inaction are pretty real.

It's just a mess.

"The Vaccines are unproven and no doubt dangerous" Are you a Doctor, or just getting your info from the Internet? What Medical Science are you basing that from?

I dont think/know if the virus is worse.

What of the virus is dangerous to the extent that we know it, but find out later that 60percent of the people that got the vaccine get alzheimers 30 years later or develop strange heart rhythm problems in 20years. What if it causes impotency in over half its users?

We know NOTHING about this vaccine other than it has the amazing ability to make billions of dollars with NO liability attached.

Period.

I dont know enough to convict.

The one thing I agree with is the lack of accountability written into the emergency orders.


The irony is a bunch of senators got the jab, but HIPPA keeps them safe from being discovered they took the shot but say publicly they did not.

You're right, there are lots of things we don't know, and any answer is going to be a gamble.

What we know is that within the first year you're about a thousand times more likely to suffer serious side effects from the virus versus the vaccine.

Does that change in the long term? Are there no serious side effects of the virus that show up years later, but lots for the vaccine?

I'd bet on no, but it's a bet. It seems to me the virus is equally likely to turn out to cause things like you describe--but no one knows.

The vaccine is under an emergency use approval precisely because, one year after the appearance of this disease, it's logically impossible to have done a years long study on either the virus or the vaccine.

That's just reality.

I would bet on the vaccine over the virus and you can look at the public data on the number of people with various types of "long covid" and compare it for yourself with the number of reported side effects from the vaccine.

But none of that is proof, the ultimate point here is that it's a gamble EITHER WAY.

Not getting the vaccine also means you're taking your chances with the virus, and we have lots of reasons to think that's a bad idea

But proof?

No one has proof. This thing just hasn't been around long enough for proof.

I may NEVER encounter the virus at all in my lifetime.

So even if both have risks, I may never be exposed to either.

Now the decision would be much more equal if the choice was, get the virus or get the shot?

Yeah and you can't know the answer.

We might reach herd immunity next week and then this recedes into history and you never have to worry. Or that might not happen until 90% have some immunity in which case your odds aren't good.

Or it might even turn out it mutates fast enough that herd immunity is impossible and not only does everyone get it, but everyone gets it several times.

No one can tell you your odds.

Which is a decision.

My big issue with the vaccine as i've stated before, is if we vaccinated the people most at risk, then why is the death vs new case numbers still at 1.5ish percent? Also to add to this, since the day you were born you have a 1.3% chance of death yearly(not accounting for age) which kinda matches with the cases vs deaths number. We still dont have a real good description of what a covid related death looks like in this state, so anyone who had covid and died counts then?

Actually here in King County you can see that cases have been spiking up, but deaths have NOT. I think that's precisely because the high risk people got vaccinated, and it's working. We're down to an average of a death every other day or so despite the surge in cases.

https://public.tableau.com/views/PHSKCO ... wVizHome=n

You can see that while deaths were 1.6% of cases in the whole of the last year, recently it's only 0.2%, and I think that's because high risk people are no longer dying thanks to the vaccine.

That's out of a hundred millions of people who were mostly older?

Ok. Looks like the vaccine is pretty safe from that data.

You gotta understand data in context. When Pfizer did their original study 55% of people reported side effects from the vaccine. However, 40% of those who got the placebo ALSO reported side effects.

You need to know how that data compares to the age and health adjusted unvaccinated population.

Understanding that the denominator is likely 100 million people over 50 though, that looks pretty good.

Need some long term studies. You know, some of the studies, like animal that were largely skipped.


What data? Where?
Where is the animal testing data? If it was ever done?
What about the long term studies? Not performed.


Where is the data you speak of?
So what? Where are the long term studies?


What data? From where? How does it compare with health adjusted unvaccinated?


Again, need data, where are you getting this information from?

A note of clarification, except for the J&J vaccine, the experimental mRNA shots that are not FDA approved but allowed under emergency order are NOT vaccines, but they fall under vaccine protections for liability purposes, so you cannot sue the manufacturer in case something goes awry.