Anti-Vaxx 101 Thread

[Darth Executor]

Well, when I got childhood vaccines they basically protected me from those illnesses. That's what a vaccine should do. I never caught chicken pox, measles, polio, small pox (etc.) and I credit the vaccines to that (in part).

You are comparing apples with oranges. Some diseases (like the flu or covid) mutate faster and/or are less accessible to the adaptive immune system in their initial stages. It's why vaccines AND previous infection only offer protection for a limited time. Vaccines are not drugs, they don't interact with pathogens and are out of the body in a couple of weeks at most. It's also why it's silly to worry about "long term effects" from the vaccine. Any negative side effects will be triggered in a short time after vaccination (usually after your second shot).

[NorrinRadd]

Previous mass-vax programs were halted for lower incidence of adverse effects than are documented with the mRNA jabs.

FDA and Pfizer are withholding important data.

[tabibito]

You are comparing apples with oranges. Some diseases (like the flu or covid) mutate faster and/or are less accessible to the adaptive immune system in their initial stages. It's why vaccines AND previous infection only offer protection for a limited time.

True enough - Covid vaccine is more like a tetanus shot. Even vaccines against measles and mumps are not 100% effective for all people.

[TheLurch]

Previous mass-vax programs were halted for lower incidence of adverse effects than are documented with the mRNA jabs.

FDA and Pfizer are withholding important data.

You know, it would be really nice if you summarized the contents of the videos you keep posting, including the evidence in them. Otherwise, you're basically forcing the rest of us to watch every video you post if we want to take part in a conversation, which is pretty rude.

[NorrinRadd]

Interview with immunologist Dr. Robert Clancy.

My lay summary of several points:

-- mRNA vaxes not shown to be more effective than traditional "mushed up antigen" vaxes.

-- No way to control or predict distribution of antigens throughout body.

-- Phospholipid coating of mRNA vaxes mean they can penetrate any cells, and cause any cells to express antigens on their surfaces, making cells throughout the body targets of immune response.

-- No way to predict or control amount of antigens produced, so no way to predict where immune response will fall on the tolerance-immunity-tolerance "bell" distribution curve.

-- No way to ensure reverse transcriptase will convert the mRNA into DNA, potentially leading to new cancers. (That one was only mentioned briefly, so I may have butchered it more than the others).

-- Diminished returns from repeated "boosters."

-- "Mucosal" infections like Covid generate different T-cell response compared to, e.g., measles, so vaxes have to be approached differently.

[Stoic]

You know, it would be really nice if you summarized the contents of the videos you keep posting, including the evidence in them. Otherwise, you're basically forcing the rest of us to watch every video you post if we want to take part in a conversation, which is pretty rude.

I think anti-vaxxers like to use video specifically because it takes more time and effort to debunk it.

That and the fact that it's the main way their preferred audience gets information.

[NorrinRadd]

I think anti-vaxxers like to use video specifically because it takes more time and effort to debunk it.

That and the fact that it's the main way their preferred audience gets information.

If I were in charge, all informational videos posted online would have transcripts or at least time-stamped summaries.

[Seeker]

Sorry, haven't really looked into the flu shot. I started getting them after a combination of things: hitting 50 and having a really unpleasant infection a few years back. But that's anecdote, and I haven't really looked into the data behind the current recommendations.

That's ok, thanks for answering me and being honest about it, too. I guess one person cannot know all the issues...

But it was worth the shot. Thanks again, and sorry for my late response, too. I haven't really been posting on TWeb that much lately; I mostly just "lurk" around here, and now even THAT'S rare.

[Bill the Cat]

I think anti-vaxxers like to use video specifically because it takes more time and effort to debunk it.

That and the fact that it's the main way their preferred audience gets information.

Y'know, the term "anti-vaxxer" used to mean something specific. I'm not anti-vax. I'm anti THIS vax for me. You can feel free to poke away, but I've had COVID twice now and pulled through just fine both times.

[Stoic]

Y'know, the term "anti-vaxxer" used to mean something specific. I'm not anti-vax. I'm anti THIS vax for me. You can feel free to poke away, but I've had COVID twice now and pulled through just fine both times.

As far as I'm concerned, "anti-vaxxers" are people who spread misinformation about vaccines, whether specific vaccines or vaccines in general. The decision on whether to get yourself vaccinated is a separate matter.

[Diogenes]

As far as I'm concerned, "anti-vaxxers" are people who spread misinformation about vaccines, whether specific vaccines or vaccines in general. The decision on whether to get yourself vaccinated is a separate matter.

So everyone who said the COVID jab prevented transmission or asymptomatic spread are "anti-vaxxers"?

[TheLurch]

So everyone who said the COVID jab prevented transmission or asymptomatic spread are "anti-vaxxers"?

Well, the vaccines never prevented transmission; at the time they were introduced, they significantly reduced transmission (presumably both from symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals). So there was a time that stating that was accurate. But the virus has evolved, clear that this effect was either greatly reduced or eliminated. Now, in the complicated landscape where populations have complicated mixtures of vaccines, boosts, and past infections, and multiple strains of virus are rapidly evolving, it's hard to even design studies that could potentially test this.

So, the short version is: whether or not it was misinformation depends when they said it, and their precise phrasing.

[Diogenes]

Well, the vaccines never prevented transmission; at the time they were introduced, they significantly reduced transmission (presumably both from symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals). So there was a time that stating that was accurate. But the virus has evolved, clear that this effect was either greatly reduced or eliminated. Now, in the complicated landscape where populations have complicated mixtures of vaccines, boosts, and past infections, and multiple strains of virus are rapidly evolving, it's hard to even design studies that could potentially test this.

So, the short version is: whether or not it was misinformation depends when they said it, and their precise phrasing.

At best the jabs reduced the severity of symptoms. Even the earliest literature said asymptotic transmission had to be ruled out. As the Texas Dems showed, getting the jab created a false sense of security which lead to them taking the virus on tour in DC. There are reports that multiple boosters are impacting immune systems. If anything, COVID proved modern life is not necessarily healthier than life in Africa.

Iirc, even Pfizer idiots conceded squires immunity was better than the shots. Of course, the CDC and FDA are failed institutions and are captured by Pfizer at this point.

The current strains are relatively mild ( barring idiots trying to make super-COVID by combined the earlier severe strain with less severe but more infections strains).

[Stoic]

At best the jabs reduced the severity of symptoms.

False. When first introduced, the vaccines clearly reduced the chances of infection, and greatly reduced the likelihood of hospitalization or death. And for people who did get infected, the length of time they were contagious was reduced. So the vaccines had a significant impact on the spread of the virus.

When Delta came along, the reduction of the chance of infection was not as great, and it was reduced even more with succeeding variants. And over time, the effectiveness of the vaccine to prevent infection diminishes. But it appears that the protection against hospitalization and death persists.

Even the earliest literature said asymptotic transmission had to be ruled out. As the Texas Dems showed, getting the jab created a false sense of security which lead to them taking the virus on tour in DC. There are reports that multiple boosters are impacting immune systems. If anything, COVID proved modern life is not necessarily healthier than life in Africa.

Iirc, even Pfizer idiots conceded squires immunity was better than the shots. Of course, the CDC and FDA are failed institutions and are captured by Pfizer at this point.

The current strains are relatively mild ( barring idiots trying to make super-COVID by combined the earlier severe strain with less severe but more infections strains).

We don't really know that the current strains are milder. It may be that most people being either vaccinated or previously infected is the difference. And there are still about 500 Americans a day dying of covid.

[shunyadragon]

Y'know, the term "anti-vaxxer" used to mean something specific. I'm not anti-vax. I'm anti THIS vax for me. You can feel free to poke away, but I've had COVID twice now and pulled through just fine both times.

Poke . . . poke . . . Even this is based on misinformation concerning Covid-19 and vaccines.