Missed this one, sorry
@cola79.
But i don't take the Covid-19 medications (technically they are no vaccines, because there is no virus presented to the immune system, just a little fragment), because i simply don't trust the underlying system yet.
They are definitely vaccines. A vaccine does not need to include the full virus, either attenuated or dead, in order to be considered a vaccine.
Subunit vaccines use a small piece of the pathogen have been around for a long time, and include the widely used hepatitis B and acellular pertussis vaccines.
The currently authorised vaccines work by delivering either mRNA or DNA instructions to some of your cells, which causes the ribosomes (like protein printers) within them to produce a small piece of the coronavirus itself called the spike protein. This protein ends up anchored in place sticking out of the cell that made it, at which point your immune system can then see it, and learn to recognise and destroy it, just like it would with a subunit vaccine, only the overwhelming majority of the immune response takes place near the injection site. Note: it is impossible for them to change your DNA as neither mRNA (Pfizer and Moderna) or viral vector vaccines which use DNA (AZ and J&J) have the fancy enzymes to do it, and the mRNA vaccines can't even physically get into the nucleus where your DNA is.
Conventionally made vaccines that have been used didn't show this huge ammount of severe and deadly outcomes if the vaccinated person gets in contact with the virus. I read that daily in the news that though people got double vaccinated, they still get infected and some of them die.
There is no evidence of people being worse off if exposed to the virus after being vaccinated, it's very much the opposite. Unfortunately the COVID vaccines, like all vaccines, aren't perfect, as they're only an immune system training session. They can't magically make the immune system of a 90 year old as good as one of a healthy 20 year old, but they do unambiguously make it much less likely that you'll be infected, and much less likely that you'll get really ill and possibly die. That a small number of people still do, doesn't mean they don't work, it means they aren't perfect, just like how some people still die in car accidents even if they're wearing a seatbelt.
And i see that the outcome is not that much related to the virus, but to the given treatment. It's the same virus everywhere, though there is significant difference who dies and who not depending on their location.
The outcome is massively based on the virus and whether people were previously vaccinated, especially because we still have somewhat limited actual treatments for those who are having serious cases.
In my federal state in 19 months only 4 people below 60 died and zero below 50. Other federal states have from zero to 400 in these age groups. As i wouldn't call the people in my state any healthier than in others, the reasons for death numbers must be to find in the treatments.
While I don't knot where you are to confirm those numbers, I'm pleased to hear that few people have apparently died there. However it's not just that COVID can kill you, it's that it can make you very sick, and many (10-30%) of people are left with persistent symptoms after that (long COVID). I've got multiple friends in their 30s who are still very sick, many months after having COVID. There's increasingly strong evidence that
the virus itself can actually get into the brain, which would also help explain
this study that shows that many people who've previously been infected have lasting cognitive damage.
I am also afraid of attempts to vaccinate children below 18, because getting in contact with respiratory viruses is more or less the only driver for building up an intact immune system.
If those children get vaccinated, it might be that their life expectancy is getting lowered dramatically. It's simply a bad idea to vaccinate against respiratory viruses. It makes a lot of sense against things like measles and such things.
There are very many different things that help children build up their immune systems, but vaccines are actively one of the best ways for them to do so, which is why we vaccine children against a whole range of diseases, rather than risk them catching them and potentially getting very ill. Plus, obviously the COVID vaccines only provide protection against the coronavirus itself, kids can and will still get colds etc. Them getting vaccinated absolutely will not worsen their life expectancy.
For myself i see a bigger personal risk by taking the new mRNA or vector medications. I would take a conventional vaccine, but there is none available yet, they said maybe in December.
I've already gone over why there really isn't anything to worry about there, especially considering the huge trials conducted around the world (the first ones started around 16 months ago), and the massive amount of data we've collected since they were authorised and
billions of doses have been given. I wrote more about this in
this earlier reply as well.
Funnily enough though, I am personally in a clinical trial for new vaccine which
is an inactivated whole virus vaccine, but although I certainly hope that it proves to be safe and effective and gets authorised (in part because G7 countries are being really crap at following through on their commitments to those of us in trials when it comes to counting us as vaccinated for travel purposes), we currently do not know if it will prove to be. Even if our trial reports good results, it has nowhere near the number of participants as the trials for the mRNA/viral vector vaccines that are already available, and nowhere near the duration of testing either. The first people who ever got the vaccine being tested in my trial, got it earlier this year. The mRNA/viral vector vaccine trials started around 16 months ago, and we've now got more than 8 months of real world data with billions of doses given around the world, confirming they're safe and effective.
What scares me a lot is the grotesque stupidity in the discussion about this virus. We have seen (and honestly known before) that masks and lockdowns do not have significant impact on the outcome of the epidemic.
Sorry, but both masks (
1,
2) and lockdowns (
1,
2) have been proven to significantly reduce transmission and overall outcomes.
In my country we had better outcome during the months without masks and lockdowns.
Even if that is true, correlation is not causation.
This year, we have all this plus the vaccinations, but we see higher infection numbers despite the fact that the "flu season" hasn't even arrived.
People don't want to see this and like religious fundamentalists they praise the vaccines, even it is obvious there is no advantage visible. All countries who lead the vaccination numbers have worse outcome than the year before, and the peak of the respiratory season is yet to come.
Firstly I'm assuming that you're talking about
cases rather than hospitalisations and deaths, and this is likely due to the fact that the Delta variant is
much more infectious than previous variants. Studies have shown people with Delta have viral loads
more than 1,000 times higher than with previous variants, and are contagious earlier as well:
Viral load is roughly 1,000 times higher in people infected with the Delta variant than those infected with the original coronavirus strain, according to a study in China.
www.nature.com
Secondly, though we had cases rise here in the UK as Delta took hold and we (stupidly) got rid of other public health measures that constrained the spread, this graph comparing our second and third waves in terms of cases versus deaths, pretty unambiguously shows the huge difference the vaccines have made.
The idea of booster vaccinations every 6 month is completely insane. It clearly shows that there isn't any advantage over placebo and quite frankly, you can't give people two to three vaccinations yearly for years. It's killing people if you do that and it weakens the immune system.
There's currently an active debate about whether booster vaccinations are needed, I haven't seen anyone actually propose "every 6 months", in part because protection tends to builds over time, and my expectation is that they're only going to be actively needed by the most vulnerable, particularly those who are actively immunosuppressed. That said, many commonly used vaccines against other diseases have a third dose, and annual flu vaccines have been a thing for ages, especially because vaccinating against respiratory diseases has always been a challenge.
Finally, there is no evidence whatsoever that doing this will kill people, and in terms of the idea that it weakens the immune system? It literally does the exact opposite, that's the whole point. All vaccines are just a training session for your immune system. It strengthens it by giving it practice destroying something that looks like the real pathogen, causing it to create a load of protective antibodies and t/b-cells which will then roundly kick the arse of the real pathogen if you're exposed to it in future.