I'm anti-capitalist-vax. Back in the 80s and 90s, my generation got free vaccination from Cuba. The nurses went house by house and vaccinated every baby. It was free, convenient, reliable and high quality.
Now vaccines are expensive, ineffective, with high risk of complications (quite a few deaths) and a complicated, inconvenient process of administration. The belief that privatization improves the quality of product/service is just delusional.
This is Vietnam by the way.
I get this sentiment, but do you personally know how long it takes to make a vaccine, or how that process can be expedited versus other vaccines that were in the pipe works? Or are you just going to ballpark a length of time that feels right?
Most sources cite that It usually takes 2-5 years to develop a vaccine, some say 10-15. No sources state that it takes less than a year, and a vaccine for a virus that everyone wants magically being ready with less then a year of development time is risky at best.
If you can find a reliable source that gives less then a year development time for a virus similar to COVID, be my guest
a vaccine for a virus that everyone wants magically being ready with less then a year of development time is risky at best.
I think this is the key here. Trump kept blathering about having a vaccine ready to go by the end of this year, but as far as I'm concerned the experts are saying that it won't be ready until Summer at the earliest, if even that. At that point it will have been nearly 1.5 years of R&D, not that far off of that 2 year mark, especially considering that this has been a global all hands on deck effort. And that's at the earliest, it may not even be until late next year. The 10-15 year development cycle is for things that are a lot more complex than just a coronavirus, in terms of virology.
I think what's just rubbing my goat wrong here is that yelling about how skeptical you are of the vaccine well before said vaccine is anywhere even near market is basically just counting your chickens before they hatch. I'm skeptical of a rushed vaccine as well, but I'm going to wait until they actually decide "okay, here is the vaccine we are going to push" before I start looking into the development process it faced.
I know lol. My point was the time it takes varies depending on the type of virus. 2-5 years is another time period thats commonly cited. I think 2 years is fine, it's less then 12 months that makes me go "uuh".
"I don't trust this vaccine which will hypothetically come out sometime in the future because it will be rushed[citation needed]" is covert antivax bullshit
Not gonna look for articles if you call me a dipshit, dipshit.
There was talk from the FDA that they were going to effectively cancel third stage testing, to get vaccines out on time. That didn't happen. If one of the promising vaccines didn't have patients with unexplained illnesses, they might have.
I haven't been keeping track of the vaccines lately, as in, in the last month. If it goes through the trials, I'll take it. But if it looks like they removed some important steps to get it to market faster, I won't.
Knowing we're probably not engaging in good faith is enough for me to not want to put in the effort to engage in good faith. Looking up articles and research studies takes times.
This also creates an unspoken assumption that the vaccine is safe unless proven otherwise. Onus is on me to prove they're, maybe not even skipping steps, I never even said they were, as I won't know until a vaccine hits the market, but considering skipping steps.
Onus isn't on you to prove that an emergency authorization of vaccine use isn't removing any important steps regarding health and safety.
Therefore I get to do the effort and you get to shoot holes in it.
I don't like those terms.
The FDA already floated the idea of bringing vaccines to the market without completing third phase trials. Then, shortly after, patients in two studies, Astra Zeneca and Johnson & Johnson, started developing unexplained symptoms. That's enough for me to be uncomfortable.
That's not evidence anything changed, that's just Trump yelling at the sky demanding that a vaccine rains down. unless you can show any evidence this has actually compromised the process of developing a vaccine, it's just a bullshit excuse to raise distrust about vaccines
thats the thing though, if they wanted to push a "fake" vaccine that just kills people and doesnt work properly, they'd have done it already. why do you think they're going through test trials and stuff in the first place?
it's so they can figure out what works and what doesn't, and what's safe and what isn't
being "skeptical" about it once all that is over and a proper vaccine is figured out is absolutely antivax bullshit
Antivaxxers don’t get vaccinated and advocate for never getting vaccinated. Where did I advocate for that
oh come on
you don't need to specifically, explicitly advocate every part of a specific worldview in order to advance that worldview's agenda. 99% of the people we call fascists on this website aren't advocating the ideology of fascism openly and explicitly, they are advancing one or more aspects conducive to a fascist worldview. just like you're doing with an antivax worldview.
No, they don't -want- to kill people but if it causes complications in few they won't care as long as it cures enough people to keep the gravy train rolling.
I’ll get it once it shows that the majority of people don’t get any threatening side effects.
But isn't that what the vaccine trials are doing though? I don't really understand your thought process in this, and I have a feeling you aren't the only person that thinks this way, hence why I'm interested in the reasoning behind it.
He doesn't trust trials that are motivated to give a specific answer via massive financial and political pressure.
I get the point, idk where I stand on it. I'm a bit wary as well. If the hypothetical trials for the hypothetical vaccine are very transparent and I can somehow be sure it isn't just propaganda then I'd take one lol
Even barring that I'm just wondering what's going to happen when a large portion of the country just flat out refuses to get the vaccine, whether it truly is effective and/or safe or not. Will COVID 19 just continue to bounce around the US? Will it eventually mutate to a form that the vaccine doesn't cover and reinfect the entire world? Or will it go the way of SARS and just kind of disappear?
deleted by creator
i really do not understand this antivax rhetoric going around across the political spectrum lately
they're not going to push a "deadly" vaccine on us lmao good lord
I'm not anti-vax. I'm anti rushed vax. Vaccines take time to get right for a reason.
I'm anti-capitalist-vax. Back in the 80s and 90s, my generation got free vaccination from Cuba. The nurses went house by house and vaccinated every baby. It was free, convenient, reliable and high quality.
Now vaccines are expensive, ineffective, with high risk of complications (quite a few deaths) and a complicated, inconvenient process of administration. The belief that privatization improves the quality of product/service is just delusional.
This is Vietnam by the way.
I get this sentiment, but do you personally know how long it takes to make a vaccine, or how that process can be expedited versus other vaccines that were in the pipe works? Or are you just going to ballpark a length of time that feels right?
https://www.historyofvaccines.org/index.php/content/articles/vaccine-development-testing-and-regulation
Most sources cite that It usually takes 2-5 years to develop a vaccine, some say 10-15. No sources state that it takes less than a year, and a vaccine for a virus that everyone wants magically being ready with less then a year of development time is risky at best.
If you can find a reliable source that gives less then a year development time for a virus similar to COVID, be my guest
I think this is the key here. Trump kept blathering about having a vaccine ready to go by the end of this year, but as far as I'm concerned the experts are saying that it won't be ready until Summer at the earliest, if even that. At that point it will have been nearly 1.5 years of R&D, not that far off of that 2 year mark, especially considering that this has been a global all hands on deck effort. And that's at the earliest, it may not even be until late next year. The 10-15 year development cycle is for things that are a lot more complex than just a coronavirus, in terms of virology.
I think what's just rubbing my goat wrong here is that yelling about how skeptical you are of the vaccine well before said vaccine is anywhere even near market is basically just counting your chickens before they hatch. I'm skeptical of a rushed vaccine as well, but I'm going to wait until they actually decide "okay, here is the vaccine we are going to push" before I start looking into the development process it faced.
deleted by creator
I know lol. My point was the time it takes varies depending on the type of virus. 2-5 years is another time period thats commonly cited. I think 2 years is fine, it's less then 12 months that makes me go "uuh".
"I don't trust this vaccine which will hypothetically come out sometime in the future because it will be rushed[citation needed]" is covert antivax bullshit
Vaccines aren't safe because they're vaccines.
They're safe because the process they went though was rigorous.
If there's evidence that the process has been changed to be less rigorous, it's fair to be uncomfortable about them.
He obviously wasn't, but if Trump was able to get the vaccines out before election day, like he claimed, I wouldn't have taken them.
alright dipshit show the evidence
Not gonna look for articles if you call me a dipshit, dipshit.
There was talk from the FDA that they were going to effectively cancel third stage testing, to get vaccines out on time. That didn't happen. If one of the promising vaccines didn't have patients with unexplained illnesses, they might have.
I haven't been keeping track of the vaccines lately, as in, in the last month. If it goes through the trials, I'll take it. But if it looks like they removed some important steps to get it to market faster, I won't.
Simple as that.
thats a cop-out
Knowing we're probably not engaging in good faith is enough for me to not want to put in the effort to engage in good faith. Looking up articles and research studies takes times.
This also creates an unspoken assumption that the vaccine is safe unless proven otherwise. Onus is on me to prove they're, maybe not even skipping steps, I never even said they were, as I won't know until a vaccine hits the market, but considering skipping steps.
Onus isn't on you to prove that an emergency authorization of vaccine use isn't removing any important steps regarding health and safety.
Therefore I get to do the effort and you get to shoot holes in it.
I don't like those terms.
The FDA already floated the idea of bringing vaccines to the market without completing third phase trials. Then, shortly after, patients in two studies, Astra Zeneca and Johnson & Johnson, started developing unexplained symptoms. That's enough for me to be uncomfortable.
But you do you.
deleted by creator
That's not evidence anything changed, that's just Trump yelling at the sky demanding that a vaccine rains down. unless you can show any evidence this has actually compromised the process of developing a vaccine, it's just a bullshit excuse to raise distrust about vaccines
deleted by creator
I'm not anti-vax, lol I've many in my lifetime. Just none that were rushed for political and economic reasons.
deleted by creator
thats the thing though, if they wanted to push a "fake" vaccine that just kills people and doesnt work properly, they'd have done it already. why do you think they're going through test trials and stuff in the first place?
it's so they can figure out what works and what doesn't, and what's safe and what isn't
being "skeptical" about it once all that is over and a proper vaccine is figured out is absolutely antivax bullshit
deleted by creator
oh come on
you don't need to specifically, explicitly advocate every part of a specific worldview in order to advance that worldview's agenda. 99% of the people we call fascists on this website aren't advocating the ideology of fascism openly and explicitly, they are advancing one or more aspects conducive to a fascist worldview. just like you're doing with an antivax worldview.
deleted by creator
No, they don't -want- to kill people but if it causes complications in few they won't care as long as it cures enough people to keep the gravy train rolling.
True, but
tbf this happens in nearly all vaccine trials. Not exactly the most solid ground to accuse all potential vaccines of being dangerous.
deleted by creator
But isn't that what the vaccine trials are doing though? I don't really understand your thought process in this, and I have a feeling you aren't the only person that thinks this way, hence why I'm interested in the reasoning behind it.
He doesn't trust trials that are motivated to give a specific answer via massive financial and political pressure.
I get the point, idk where I stand on it. I'm a bit wary as well. If the hypothetical trials for the hypothetical vaccine are very transparent and I can somehow be sure it isn't just propaganda then I'd take one lol
deleted by creator
Even barring that I'm just wondering what's going to happen when a large portion of the country just flat out refuses to get the vaccine, whether it truly is effective and/or safe or not. Will COVID 19 just continue to bounce around the US? Will it eventually mutate to a form that the vaccine doesn't cover and reinfect the entire world? Or will it go the way of SARS and just kind of disappear?
deleted by creator