pouët.net

INSTEAD OF AGREEING WITH ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER I JUST WANT TO GET RID OF THIS FABLE THAT THIS VACCINE WAS DEVELOPED TOO QUICKLY AND/OR POSSIBLE LONG TERM SIDE EFFECTS SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.

NORMALLY WHEN A VACCINE GET'S DEVELOPED AND CHECKED FOR DEFAULTS THEY DO EVERY TEST ONE, BY ONE.
THIS IS TO SAVE MONEY, AFTER ALL YOU ONLY NEED 1 TEST TO FAIL TO KNOW THE ENTIRE VACCINE CAN'T BE USED.
WITH CORONA QUICKLY SPREADING WORLD WIDE COMPANIES JUST WANTED TO BE FAST, NOT JUST TO HELP THE WORLD BUT ALSO TO MAKE A LOT OF MONEY.
THIS CAUSED NEARLY ALL VACCINE DEVELOPERS TO RUN ALL TEST SIMULTANOUSLY
HENCE THE VACCIN WAS DEVELOPED A LOT FASTER THAN OTHER ONES, BUT THEY WERE TESTED IN EXACTLY THE SAME WAY AND HELD UP TO THE SAME STANDARD.

NOW LET'S LOOK AT THE LONG TERM EFFECT'S
A VACCIN CONSISTS OF CERTAIN PARTS OF THE VIRUS OR THE VIRUS IN A DILUTED OR DEACTIVATED STATE. THIS WAY YOUR OWN IMUNE SYSTEM CAN HAVE A PRACTICE RUN ON BEATING THE VIRUS, IT REMEMBERS WHAT PROTEINS TO ATTACK. AFTER ABOUT 4~14 DAYS THE STUFF THAT GOT INJECTED IN YOUR ARM IS GONE, IT'S NO LONGER THERE.
WHAT DOES REMAIN IS SMALL AMOUNT OF ANTIBODIES THAT YOUR BODY KEEPS JUST IN CASE IT NEEDS TO COPY THEM TO BEAT ANOTHER ATTACK.

WHAT MIGHT BE THE LONG TERM EFFECT OF HAVING SPECIFIC ANTIBODIES IN EXTREMELY SMALL QUANTITIES STORED INSIDE YOUR BODY IN A PLACE SPECIFICLY MADE TO STORE ANTIBODIES LONG TERM?

NOT GETTING SICK.

IF YOU DO NOT GET A TERRIBLE AUTO IMMUNE RESPONSE WITHIN THE FIRST 3 DAYS, YOU'RE GOING TO BE FINE.


I'M NOT TRYING TO SAY WHAT RULES A PARTY CAN OR CAN'T MAKE, BUT FOR PEOPLE THAT LIKE TO SHOUT "DO YOUR RESEARCH" THIS IS ME AFTER DOING SOME RESEARCH.

You have shouted your research loudly and clearly.

The current vaccines wear off quickly, and you're in for frequent updates.
German political-industrial complex is deeply invested in corona as part of its standortpolitik.
Besides Biontech Germany also has/had Curevac and some other irons in the fire.
Now Germany has a multibillion global player in the game, with a market capitalization of €86bn (only, but rapidly growing).
Also the PCR test pays off, it's straight from Berlin, and it comes with an adjustment screw that allows to deliver more or less positives.
Not trying to imply anything of that is bad or getting abused.
However I see some effort to prolong the state of emergency, to keep the population in a state of fear, and to get it vaccinated at all cost.
That may ring alarm bells and pose the question for some if it's not especially altruistic to be in a control group, against all odds and complications.

Gabbie: https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2019/media-resources/science-in-5/episode-23---i-am-vaccinated-what-next

CERTAIN VACCINES MIGHT NEED A SECOND JAB, ESPECIALLY WHEN NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE ARE VACCINATED, THERE HAS INDEED BEEN A RESEARCH PAPER ABOUT IT, HAVE YOU READ IT?

https://assets.researchsquare.com/files/rs-310773/v1_stamped.pdf?c=1615336792

a) the 'wear off' is incorrect. b) the correct point you COULD make would be that current vaccines are less effective against new strains c) new strains (e.g. delta) emerge sadly. that's not a marketing scheme from Pfizer and the likes to sell booster shots but rather that the virus has complete free roam in very crowded areas amongst unvaccinated people and mutates whenever it pleases into strains that current vaccines aren't accounted for.

that's another reason why being vaccinated helps. gives the virus less playground.

THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE ON 2 SIDES, BUT LETS TRY TO KEEP IT WIH ACTUAL FACT'S THERE IS WEAR OFF (read the research paper i posted) THAT IS ONE OF THE REASONS MOST COUNTRIES GIVE PEOPLE 2 SHOTS ALREADY, AND A BOOSTER MIGHT BE NESCESARY IF THIS WHOLE THING TAKES LONGER THAN 2~5 YEARS FOR PEOPLE WITH CERTAIN VACCINES OR IF CERTAIN MUTATIONS HAPPEN.

again there's no 'wear off'. if that was a thing. how come you never had to boost those shots against measles, parotitis, etc when you got those as a toddler?

this virus mutates. we call it corona or covid, but microbiologists nickname them by strains and well, every strain is slightly different. so there's like ~5 "coronas" out there already now. when Pfizer was made there were only 2 or 3... How the vaccine performs against new strains is relatively unpredictable.

Also, for example to explain my point of vaccines: people who take the annual prophylactic flu shot every year will get a slightly different cocktail each year because microbiologists try to anticipate the dominant flu strains (some of them are coronaviruses too because the common flu is a coronavirus as well) for that year. And well, you can still get sick if it's one they havent anticipated or a new one. Same shit happens but in a massive, massive scale.

THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DECLINE IN ANTIGEN YOU EXPERIENCE DEPENDING ON WHAT VACCINE YOU RECEIVED. YOU CAN'T COMPARE OTHER VACCINES TO EACH OTHER. ALL THE OTHER STUFF YOU SAID IS CORRECT, AND MUTATIONS SHOULD BE TAKEN WAY MORE SERIOUSLY THAN THE DECLINE RATE OF CERTAIN ANTIGEN'S IN YOUR BODY.

yes there is a decline in antigen eventually after the shots (thank god, otherwise you'll have fever for months)... however, your immune system is trained _ESPECIALLY_ after two shots to quickly produce new antigen whenever it notices 'foreign bodies' as 'uhoh, that's covid!'. that's the whole fucking point of having an immune system, you dumbwit. it's a vaccine, not a cure :D

I AM SO SORRY I INSULTED YOU, I SAID ANTIGEN INSTEAD OF ANTIBODIES. YOU MUST BE FEELING SO MUCH BETTER THAN ME TO IMMEDIATLY ESCALATE AND START CALLING ME NAMES. I'M ON YOUR SIDE MATE ABOUT EVERYTHING YOU SAID, EXCEPT THE WEAR OFF THAT IS SIGNIFICANT IN CASE OF 2 SPECIFIC VACCINES. WITH SIGNIFICANT I MEAN IT COULD BE SIGNIFICANT IF NOT ENOUGH PEOPLE GET VACCINATED WITHING 2~5 YEARS.

no because antibodies is still the same thing and you're still wrong :D

but ok, if you treat 'wear off' analogous with 'less effective against new strains' then you say it wrong but that is the same point i was making. but the bottom line there is that it's not that the quality drops from the original vaccine, but the quality ups from the new virus :P

Afaik (after a websearch on "antigen vs antibody"), antibodies are part of the immune response to combat foreign antigens. Not quite the same thing.

@Klandox



This is just not true. Yes you can fast track some aspects, but it's impossible to know what the effects are in 5 or 10 years time. Which is why (safe) vaccines usually take 10 years or more to develop. Also the current vaccines are still in phase 3 and under Emergency Use Authorization, so not the same standard as other vaccines.



This is also not true, these new vaccines do not contain a part of the virus but rather a genetic sequence which instructs your cells to start producing the spike protein. The spike protein which might be toxic and cause the (rare) side effects of bleeding and clotting.



Or they could cause what's know as "Antibody-dependent Enhancement (ADE)", or some other yet unknown long term side effects (such as cancer). We just don't know because there hasn't been enough time to study the long term effects.

And based on what do the spike protein stay "safely in one place"? According to data from Pfizer it looks like the mRNA does not stay localised but spreads throughout the body into bone marrow, the brain, ovaries etc. Whether the spike-protein are also produced there is still unknown because the research has not been done.



This is just wishful thinking as we have no idea what the long term effects are, maybe you are right, maybe you are not.


@Havamal



According to a pre-print study, the Pfizer vaccine was only 42% effective against infections in July (Moderna down to 76%). That's a very sharp decline from the initial effectiveness. Now maybe this is just horseshit in order to sell more boosters, but either way it's not a great situation.

Also it's starting to look like herd-immunity is not possible thanks to variants which still infect vaccinated individuals.

I think this is the fine point by which you cannot equate refusing to get a COVID vaccine with refusing to get any traditional vaccine.

They're not that effective against symptomatic infections, unfortunately, but they're still very effective against serious disease and death.

Based on what data though? The initial Pfizer trial excluded people over 60 and people with risk factors, so we have no idea how effective the vaccines truly are for those groups

And then there is the risk of "what doesn't kill the virus makes it stronger". In other words, because the virus can circulate in vaccinated groups there is the risk of creating variants which are highly vaccine resistant and potentially more dangerous.

Meanwhile, 808 people died yesterday in Russia from Covid-19 related illness (source: Swedish SVT Teletext).

Meanwhile, it's still summer. Or "summer". Use your chance to meet and party with other sceners outdoors. In that case having non-vaccinated people around is less of an issue.

A little hint (and fun fact), why it is so difficult arguing with anti-vaxxers (or flat earthers, global-warming-deniers, autocrats and so forth):

Building a world view based on scientific method & empirical evidence is a brand new concept in the culture of mankind (journalistic standards or human rights are a derivation from this), only a couple hundred years old. Before that, literally hundred thousands of years mankind did build their world view entirely based on anecdotal evidence (a result of this: the world is a disc with a dome around it and sun and moon the same size on the surface of that dome, simply because it literally looks like it to the human eye -> anecdotal evidence). Only in the context of the age of enlightenment during the 18th century the shift happened, when it slowly became more and more accepted that a world view based on anecdotal evidence is entirely filtered through the subjective filter of interests of individuals and they social environment, and that you need scientific methods, empirical evidence to try to remove this subjective filter to come to a more objective description of the world. Fully dominant it probably has become during the second half of the last century (1950ff), varying from each country more or less (hence the explosion of scientific findings/inventions during the last decades).

The current cultural conflicts go along these lines: People who build their world view mostly based on anecdotal evidence (because it allows them to stay in a fully subjective viewpoint, and not to invest energy/time in empathizing or self-doubt) and those who build their worldview based on empirical evidence, because they accept the advantage of having a more objective description of the world around them, even if that means it goes against their personal interest and it forces them to invest energy into empathizing and self-doubt.

These are two different rule sets to build your own world view. And they are mostly not compatible with each other.

The current state just shows, that the old way of a world view based on anecdotal evidence is still going very strong and mankind has still not fully accepted the age of enlightenment - large portion of the population have, but a significant portion has not (I personally would guess globally around 20% to 40%). And it is explainable: Every human being is born able to build their world based on anecdotal evidence. The concept of scientific method, empirical evidence is mostly taught (if you never heard of it, you only have an idea when your personality tends to self-doubt and empathize).

Being skeptical of this new mRNA technology is not the same thing as being "anti-vax" or "anti-science", quite the opposite. Besides, there are plenty of great vaccines out there (The tetanus vaccine just to name one.)

And people have known for a long time that the earth is not flat, it's a bit of myth that people in the past thought the planet was flat. The Egyptians figured this out thousands of years ago, just look at the Pyramids.

Oh and to add to that and maybe a little bit off-topic, if you want your mind blown look into the Antikythera mechanism, "the oldest analogue computer".



This suggest a very advanced knowledge of our Solar System.

It's futile to try to point this out, the propaganda machine has been successful with most people.

Where exactly could i purchase one of these propaganda machines?

You already do... :)