Covid-19 vaccines: excitement or fear?

  • Context: COVID 
  • Thread starter Thread starter waternohitter
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Covid-19 Vaccines
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of mandatory Covid-19 vaccinations, exploring participants' feelings of excitement or fear regarding the vaccines. It touches on personal experiences, societal expectations, and the balance of risks and benefits associated with vaccination.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Exploratory
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants express feelings of paranoia and worry about mandatory vaccination, questioning if others share similar sentiments.
  • Others argue that mandatory vaccinations have historically contributed to public health and well-being.
  • Concerns are raised about the reliability of information regarding the mandatory nature of the vaccines, with some participants citing sources that suggest it may not be mandatory for most people.
  • One participant mentions the Phase-3 trial results as empirical data supporting vaccine safety, while another emphasizes the need for caution regarding potential adverse reactions.
  • Some participants discuss the implications of vaccine-related adverse events, such as Bell's Palsy, and the importance of understanding the context of these occurrences.
  • There are discussions about the long-term effects of the vaccine, with some participants expressing uncertainty and concern about the lack of data on this aspect.
  • Participants also consider the societal implications of vaccination, including potential mandates for employment and travel, and the balance of individual choice versus public health needs.
  • Some express that the risks of not getting vaccinated may outweigh the concerns about the vaccine itself, while others highlight personal reasons for hesitance, such as fear of needles or inconvenience.
  • The discussion includes speculation about the biological implications of the vaccine's spike protein and its potential effects on human biology.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally do not reach a consensus, with multiple competing views on the necessity and implications of mandatory vaccination, as well as differing opinions on the safety and long-term effects of the vaccines.

Contextual Notes

Participants express varying levels of concern regarding the long-term effects of the vaccine, highlighting the uncertainty surrounding this topic. There is also a discussion about the reliability of information sources and the need for critical evaluation of claims made about vaccine safety.

  • #121
Mayhem said:
You're right. I guess it's pretty arbitrary where we draw the line. I suppose the logical place to draw it is where the vaccines are not more dangerous than the virus (which it doesn't seem to be on AVERAGE).
It's much better than that, and you do know that, right? I just want to make sure this isn't just another of your honesty loopholes.
 
Biology news on Phys.org
  • #122
Mayhem said:
Nothing I said was purposely misleading. If you were misled by it, that's on you. Anyway I'll stop it here because you're just making dang up now.
Nobody could have payed attention during the pandemic and believe that what you do constitutes low risk behavior. It's not the 'spending most of my time alone' that makes it low risk, it's 'I spend 8hrs a day in a lab with other people' that makes it high risk. You HAVE to know that. So deflecting could only be intentionally misleading.
 
  • Like
  • Skeptical
Likes   Reactions: Vanadium 50, Mayhem, Evo and 1 other person
  • #123
Mayhem said:
No, the majority of my hours are still spent alone.
I realize that others have responded to this, but still...what the...?

I have a friend who spends 128 hours a week alone. The other 40 she spends working as a customer service rep. At the airport. In the international terminal.

This is low risk? Because the majority of her hours are alone? I don't think so. And I think you don't really think so either.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK and russ_watters
  • #124
Vanadium 50 said:
I realize that others have responded to this, but still...what the...?

I have a friend who spends 128 hours a week alone. The other 40 she spends working as a customer service rep. At the airport. In the international terminal.

This is low risk? Because the majority of her hours are alone? I don't think so. And I think you don't really think so either.
I work in an organic chemistry lab where we:

* All get tested frequently
* Wear visors or masks
* Wear gloves 95% of the time and change them regularly.
* Work in an extremely well ventilated area
* Wash hands all the time thoroughly.
* 95% of our time is also spent looking directly into a fume hood and we work with chemicals that could kill you, me, your dog, and most definitely corona virus.

And I'm not even in 8 hours a day lol. Most weeks I'm only in a few days a week and as such my tests are also completely fresh, meaning I literally tested negative on the day.

My behavior with regards to COVID-19 is extremely low risk.
 
  • #125
Mayhem said:
I work in an organic chemistry lab where we:

* All get tested frequently
* Wear visors or masks
* Wear gloves 95% of the time and change them regularly.
* Work in an extremely well ventilated area
* Wash hands all the time thoroughly.
* 95% of our time is also spent looking directly into a fume hood and we work with chemicals that could kill you, me, your dog, and most definitely corona virus.

And I'm not even in 8 hours a day lol. Most weeks I'm only in a few days a week and as such my tests are also completely fresh, meaning I literally tested negative on the day.

My behavior with regards to COVID-19 is extremely low risk.
All sounds good, a vaccine would reduce your risk considerably further.
On the age/risk question this was on another thread.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/kansas-ci...italizations-rise-135-young/story?id=77436780
Perhaps all the older people are vaccinated now or perhaps something else.
 
  • #126
User Mayhem will not be contributing further to this thread and I've deleted the last post in order to avoid responses to it. Thanks.
 
  • #127
pinball1970 said:
All sounds good

Not to me:

* All get tested frequently --> good, but testing doesn't prevent contraction
* Wear visors or masks --> sometimes don't wear masks
* Wear gloves 95% of the time and change them regularly --> sometimes don't wear gloves
* Work in an extremely well ventilated area --> is it? Or is the HVAC blowing a lot of air from person to person
* Wash hands all the time thoroughly --> good
* 95% of our time is also spent looking directly into a fume hood and we work with chemicals that could kill you, me, your dog, and most definitely corona virus. --> not really relevant how nasty the chemicals are if a co-worker comes in infected.

To me, this looks like average risk. Maybe a little bit better than an office, maybe a little worse.

My estimate is Mayhem's risk is a few times 10-5. That's about the risk of a severe allergic reaction to a vaccine ingredient. Which is why they ask you if you are allergic to any of them. And of course, this isn't Covid-specific. His next tetanus booster would have the same risk.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
10K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
26
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K