General Question

crazyguy's avatar

Should choosing to vaccinate against covid be a personal decision?

Asked by crazyguy (3189points) 1 month ago
68 responses
“Great Question” (2points)

From my personal perspective, vaccinate or not is a no-brainer: VACCINATE AS FAST AS POSSIBLE!

However, should government be allowed to, or even try to, interfere in such a personal health decision? So far, Biden and Company have not; however, the federal government has issued guidelines: “Per recent federal employment law guidance, private employers can generally require employees to get vaccinated for COVID-19 as long as they comply with federal employment laws that prohibit discrimination on the basis of religion and disability.” This is taken from

https://www.huschblackwell.com/newsandinsights/50-state-update-on-pending-legislation-pertaining-to-employer-mandated-vaccinations

‘An employee with a religious objection or a disability may need to be excused from the mandate or otherwise accommodated,’ noted John Lomax, an attorney with Snell & Wilmer in Phoenix. “Additionally, if an objecting employee is a union-represented employee, the employer may need to bargain and reach an agreement with the union before mandating vaccines.” This quote is taken from

https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/if-workers-refuse-a-covid-19-vaccination.aspx

In addition, many colleges have already made vaccination mandatory for enrollment. In California, the list of colleges requiring vaccination includes the UC system.

However, Medical exemptions are guaranteed by law in all states, and religious exemptions, which are relatively easy to receive, are permitted by most. To reinforce the mandate, colleges could push unvaccinated students to enroll online instead. This is taken from

https://www.bestcolleges.com/blog/list-of-colleges-that-require-covid-19-vaccine/

In some ways vaccination should be treated like abortion; both are violations of a person’s body. It could be argued that vaccination affects a larger segment of the population while an abortion is restricted to one person. However, by forcing a woman to have a child does affect a significant chunk of the population. Therefore, if abortions are guaranteed by Roe v Wade, vaccinations could also be required. The law is extremely murky here, and I am not a lawyer. So I’ll stop pursuing this particular argument any further.

What do you guys think? Keep in mind that there are many intelligent, rational human beings on both sides of this issue.

Observing members: 0
Composing members: 0

Answers

elbanditoroso's avatar

Ultimately, it’s a personal decision. But it’s also transactional.

An agency, business, office, corporation, or whatever can refuse to provide you with services if you refuse to abide by their rules. (think: a restaurant can put up a sign = No shirt, no shoes – no service. A store can put up a rule: no firearms in this store, even if they are legal in this state)

Ultimately the person decides for him or herself whether to be vaccinated. But there may be consequences based on that decision.

Are you asking: should or shouldn’t there be consequences for personal decisions? That’s a whole different discussion that goes way beyond Covid.

crazyguy's avatar

@elbanditoroso Thanks for your answer. I am very aware of consequences for personal decisions, and am perfectly fine with individual enterprises making their own decisions. What I am really asking is whether government, directly or indirectly, should interfere.

zenvelo's avatar

Nope you can’t be forced. But then you also can’t force anyone else to have you in proximity or use public facilities.

LostInParadise's avatar

You have the Roe V Wade analogy backwards. Roe V Wade prevents state governments from forcing a woman to give birth. The decision is with the woman, just as vaccination is currently up to the individual.

If there was a serious threat to the general population from people not being vaccinated then the government would be justified in requiring it. At present I don’t think that the number of people refusing vaccinations is sufficiently large to pose much of a threat;

crazyguy's avatar

@LostInParadise I am not sure about your contention that I have Roe v Wade backwards.

I fully agree with your comment that not enough people are resisting vaccination to justify forcible vaccination. However, vaccination is being indirectly forced already. I personally do take a rather dim view of an unvaccinated person. However, I do recognize that the risk/reward calculation is personal and cannot be dictated. Just like abortion cannot be denied.

crazyguy's avatar

@zenvelo I agree 100% as I think I made clear in my question. I would not mind individual enterprises deciding their stances independent of government interference. However, just like cancel culture, the government does not require an explicit role; moral support may be sufficient.

JLeslie's avatar

For now, I’m inclined to let marketing, advertising, peer pressure, and private business, put the pressure on people to vaccinate. I’m ok letting people have some time to make their own decisions. My timeline goes through July 15th. Then I will reevaluate.

KRD's avatar

It is up to the people to decide weather or not to get the vaccine.

Demosthenes's avatar

I support the current long-time of mandatory vaccination to attend public schools, but I think the vaccines that are required need to be carefully determined. We don’t, for example, require yearly vaccines that regularly change like the flu vaccine. We don’t know if the COVID vaccine is like that or not. It’s simply too early to know. If COVID is a one-time permanent vaccine that will prevent this disease forever like the smallpox vaccine, then maybe I could see adding it to the list of mandatory vaccinations to attend public schools or travel to certain countries (as we already do). But I certainly don’t think the government should mandate the vaccine for everyone nor do I think we should have to show proof of vaccination to do things like attend a museum or travel within the country.

JLeslie's avatar

^^It’s not like smallpox and polio. This virus moved from an animal, and we can’t kill or vaccinate all the animals that harbor it. Then the added problem of covid mutating, but so far the mutations seem to not have overcome the vaccines ability to recognize it.

Inspired_2write's avatar

A person can choose to get the vaccine or not but they take the full consequences of that decision.
Governments may curtail travelling by giving vaccine passports to those who were vaccinated only.

Demosthenes's avatar

@JLeslie And in that case I will probably never support making this one mandatory. We just have to work to convince people to get it.

Inspired_2write's avatar

@Demosthenes
Saw a post on Face book about an antivaxxer who ONLY changed his stance when HIS relative died of Covid recently who was himself an antivaxxer.

LuckyGuy's avatar

Would a non-vaccinated person protest if a facility was listed for vaccinated only?
Would a non-vaccinated person sign a waiver that any COVID medical expenses incurred will be paid in full by them?

If my grandchild gets sick from a COVID denying, anti-vaxxer relative would I be charged if I swung a baseball bat where said relative was spouting his bile?

KNOWITALL's avatar

In my personal opinion, if hospitals don’t require it for employees nationwide, then it cannot be required of the general public.
I’ve said it a few times already but it bears repeating, ‘my body my choice’ seems to be the rule of the law in several serious issues with long-term consequences, so forcing a vaccine at this point, or picking and choosing when it applies, is illogical.

Smashley's avatar

I support the current model, in place for years, where the government may compell vaccination, but must also create a compensation fund for people who are harmed, as well as require rigurous and ongoing study of the vaccines effects and side effects.

I don’t see it as different than the government’s right to tax or draft an army. They are allowed to subject citizens to reasonable risk of harm, if there is a damn good reason.

Religious exemption just seems like an unhelpful but necessary quirk of the system.

JLeslie's avatar

@Demosthenes If we stay away from those wild animals we should be ok, and little risk of transmission.

stanleybmanly's avatar

It’s always been a personal decision and will remain so. But by the same token, those choosing not to be vaccinated don’t have jack shit to say when and if proof off vaccination is insisted on by airlines, cruise ships, movie theaters, etc. Just as surely as you cannot enter a public business in this city without a mask, if enough dummies reject vaccination, you can expect any venue depending on an assemblage of people to resort to proof of vaccination as routine requirement for admission.

elbanditoroso's avatar

I have a feeling that @crazyguy ‘s question was designed to elicit outrage at the big bad government traipsing over his perception of peoples’ rights.

What I see is most of the people answering are saying “do what you want, non-vaccinators, but prepare to see consequences”. Which is not a glowingly supportive stance for anti-government supporters.

I think that most people in this world have a more nuanced view.

ucancallme_Al's avatar

Of course, unequivocally so!

KNOWITALL's avatar

@stanleybmanly But getting the vaccine doesn’t really prove anything, since you can still get it, pass it and die from it.
As case numbers rise again in several areas, I’m more concerned about the vaccines giving people a false sense of security. And a bit of a superiority complex. :)

—————————————————————————
About 5,800 people who have been vaccinated against coronavirus have become infected anyway, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tells CNN.

Some became seriously ill and 74 people died, the CDC said. It said 396—7%—of those who got infected after they were vaccinated required hospitalization.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/14/health/breakthrough-infections-covid-vaccines-cdc/index.html

stanleybmanly's avatar

@KNOWITALL There’s plenty to be cynical about regarding this disease, and I’ve come to accept the great likelihood that we’re in for a new definition of “normal”.

JLeslie's avatar

@elbanditoroso I didn’t read it that way. I figured he was curious to see what the opinions are. Does the OP get any credit for usually being lock step with the Trumpers, but on vaccination he is right on board with telling everyone to get the shot? I know Trump got his shot, but many of his most loyal blind followers won’t. Republicans out there telling them they are being wrong headed deserves some credit I think. They don’t often depart from the party line, and don’t often take the risk of ruffling the feathers of the most extreme in the party.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@stanleybmanly Agreed.

If you read the bbc, the Coronavirus update has several areas showing rising case counts, again. And even Seychelles, which is over 60% vaccinated is going back to restrictions.

Frankly, San Francisco possibly achieving herd immunity is very interesting, keep us updated please, since you’re there.

@JLeslie As always, you’re lack of political bias is a breath of fresh air. :)

seawulf575's avatar

I saw an advertisement the other day for some miracle drug they are trying to sell. It was not for Covid or anything like that. But I noticed that one of the multitude of cautions they blasted through on this commercial was to not take the drug if you have recently gotten a vaccine. I started thinking about that and noticed it on a couple other medical advertisements as well. So now people are being left with a choice…get vaccinated and suffer through whatever else might be wrong with them, or to bypass the vaccine and be treated as a second-class citizen.

Huh. Should it be a personal choice? Why do we even have to ask these questions?

JLeslie's avatar

@seawulf575 Because it makes people sick just by breathing, and a fairly high percentage of people get severely ill or die. It’s not Tetanus, Hep C, or HPV. I just need to stand next to you on line at the bank and I can get sick.

lastexit's avatar

@seawulf575 if someone cannot be vaccinated due to its interference with certain medications they may be taking, I would think that would fall under medical exemption.

seawulf575's avatar

@JLeslie Yes, I understand. But let’s be honest about the “fairly high percentage” you are discussing. 80% of the people that get this disease show either no symptoms or very mild symptoms. It’s actually a fairly small percentage that get severely ill and an even smaller percentage that die. You could stand next to someone on line at the bank and catch the flu from them as well. Has that ever stopped you from standing in line at the bank? You can get severe symptoms and die from the flu as well.

seawulf575's avatar

@lastexit But the question also becomes…which treatment takes precedence? If you are getting treated for something that is not life threatening or is even cosmetic in nature, does that take precedence over the Covid-19 vaccine? You know that will be the next discussion…what medical procedures actually meet the criteria for “medical exemption”.

lastexit's avatar

@seawulf575 the answer to that question would have to be determined through consultation between the person and his or her doctor.

seawulf575's avatar

@lastexit You’d think so, wouldn’t you? But it appears our government wants to eliminate that tie. They want to entirely do away with HIPAA laws by releasing your vaccination status to one an all. Things that SHOULD be are not always the way they are done. Especially these days.

crazyguy's avatar

All, thanks for a spirited discussion. I am writing out individual responses below in a FIFO (first in, first out) order.

@JLeslie I agree with what you said about peer pressure, marketing and advertising. However, I am a little uneasy about including private business. My reasoning is that private businesses can be manipulated by majority opinion. For instance examine the stances of MLB, Delta Airlines and Coke on the Georgia election law reform. Two of the three require IDs to enter their businesses; yet they oppose the use of IDs in a citizen’s most sacred duty.

The last part of your response includes a deadline – July 15. Any idea of what you may decide then, assuming certain percentages of unvaccinated? I would start with 10% and 20%.

@KRD Yes, indeed. However, you and I both realize that Biden and company have an agenda. They are not forcing vaccination on anybody, yet, but the indirect pressure being applied is fairly obvious.

@Demosthenes Let me understand you. Take the case of an immunocompromised child of 16–17. As I understand it taking the vaccine may be hazardous for his/her health. I presume you would allow a medical exemption in those cases. Now, let us move on to the travel restrictions. As far as I know, vaccine requirements are imposed by a receiving country, not the sending country; therefore, if an unvaccinated person wants to travel to a covid hotbed like India from the US, why would s/he require vaccination? I could understand the person requiring a psychiatrist, perhaps!

@Inspired_2write Any US citizen has the right to live (or die) according to his/her beliefs. It is understood that a person takes responsibility for his/her actions. For instance, it is not incumbent on our Emergency Services to help out a person who defies a mandatory evacuation order.

As far as a vaccine passport goes, please keep in mind that vaccination makes sense for individuals wishing, for some strange reason, to visit a place that has a higher covid rate than their home town. Why should such a person have to prove that s/he is vaccinated? By the way, I am fully aware that I have in earlier days advocated strongly for vaccine passports. It is only recently that I have come to appreciate the viewpoints of opposers like my son.

@LuckyGuy This is hard for me because I agree with you. However, I have to play the devil’s advocate.

If you have faith in the vaccine, you should not care who breathes the same air that you do. Because the vaccine will protect you. The same goes for your grandchild.

@KNOWITALL We have to take the same viewpoint for the vaccine that we have taken for abortions. “My body, my choice” should apply in spades.

@Smashley What you are saying makes sense…until you dig deeper. For one thing, the government can compel me to take a drug that I do not want, because of the greater good, but must undertake to protect me from any harm caused by the drug. All I see is a sea of lawsuits clogging up our already clogged courts.

You allowed a religious exemption. How about a medical exemption? A conscientious objector exemption? How about an exemption for what right do you have? More lawsuits.

crazyguy's avatar

@elbanditoroso I have been waiting for somebody to question my motives for asking a rather straightforward question. However, I did not expect that to be you.

In any case, as so ably pointed out by @JLeslie, I am taking a stance that seems to fly in the face of my previous stance. Which was: “Screw those people who refuse the vaccine!”

@ucancallme_Al I agree with your rather strong sentiment. Would you care to elaborate?

@KNOWITALL Thanks for drawing attention to the CDC data that I included a long time ago. The data just points out the fallacy in your argument. 5,800 infections out of 77 million vaccinations, with 74 deaths and 396 hospitalizations just proves that the vaccine reduces your chance of catching covid by 99.99+%!

lastexit's avatar

@seawulf575 if the government releases your vaccination status to one and all as you say, then I would suppose that your status would say not vaccinated due to a medical exemption.

I believe that whether or not you decide to get the vaccination should be a personal decision. If you decide not to get it then private entities have every right to deny you service. If you have a medical or religious exemption that should be taken into account.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie Thanks for an accurate assessment. The only thing I’ll add is that, even though I am still of the opinion that anybody who rejects the vaccine is an idiot, I have slightly modified my stance by arguing that individuals have the right to make their one risk/reward calculation.

For instance, here is my son’s calculation:
Option1: NO vaccine

Catching COVID and dying: .0035%
Catching COVID and being hospitalized: .075%
Having moderate COVID (extreme discomfort, no hospitalization): .15%

Option 2: Get vaccinated

Getting the vaccine and dying in absolute terms: .0075% (I had to triple check this and maybe I still have something wrong, but it’s just what you get when you calculate 4000 deaths out of 51,000,000 fully vaccinated)
Getting the vaccine and being hospitalized (10,000 hospitalizations out of 51,000,000 fully vaccinated): .019%
Having moderate side effects from the vaccine: 50% (this is anecdotal, of course, and also I think it’s fair to see that moderate COVID is much worse than moderate vaccine side effects…but 50% is a much bigger number than .15% :)

I just got his email and have not yet had a chance to second-guess his numbers.

crazyguy's avatar

@seawulf575 @JLeslie I’ll reply to you guys together because some of the points involve both of your answers.

1. Even Biden would not be stupid enough to overrule the need for a medical exemption.
2. The reason I asked the question is that the new villain in town is the unvaccinated person.
3. Because it makes people sick just by breathing Not if you are vaccinated.
4. If the flu vaccine were anywhere near the efficacy of the covid vaccine, flu would be history by now.

@seawulf575 @lastexit I think all venues, and all events should be open and available to all, unmasked. The vaccinated are protected and the unvaccinated are taking a calculated risk by attending.

stanleybmanly's avatar

This question amounts to asking whether the traditional setup regarding epidemics is valid. When the actual question should be: am I entitled to infect you through my negligence or refusal to be vaccinated? If the answer is no, the question becomes: to what extent am I allowed to exclude your interaction with my clients, customers, etc. If the bulk of my clientele is masked, is my sign excluding the unmasked discrimination or just sound business? And the analogy of the choice to vaccinate as equivalent to pro choice is flawed from the gate in that a pregnancy is not contagious.

JLeslie's avatar

Of course there should be a medical exemption. Just like there is for every vaccine. It’s called a contraindication.

This is why I think cruises are looking to have 95% compliance, because some people cannot take the vaccine for medical reasons.

stanleybmanly's avatar

And I will bet that the ships will ask for evidence either way.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie If you are vaccinated, do you really have to worry about the people around you? Considering that between the start of vaccinations and April 26, the total number of breakthrough infections (defined as infections occurring in fully vaccinated people) were 9,245 out of more than 95 MILLION fully vaccinated people (see https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html) two things are obvious to everybody except @stanleybmanly:

1. There is almost no chance of catching covid.
2. There is an equal chance of spreading the disease.

Therefore, why should any business have to worry about whether you are vaccinated or not? If you are, you have almost no chance of being infected. If you are not, well, you made your bed…

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy I probably don’t need to worry, but it would be really nice to know the stats for breakthrough by age group since there a question about the efficacy in older people. Similar to the stat that only .7% of people die from covid who contract it, the rate of death was more like 10% of known cases in the very elderly.

Right now Florida has a pretty terrible hospitalization rate. Probably because we have a lot of older people in the state. I’d love to know how many cases are breakthrough cases here. Maybe it’s none, maybe it’s 100. I have no idea. Here’s a link to see hospitalizations by state. Scroll down past the US map to the table if you’re interested. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/covid-cases.html?fbclid=IwAR1U3y7jNdCYwnFCj2PYEedQOsi1kCfd2AlpvD0vV3FC1dk6nd7XE7KmS8I

SnipSnip's avatar

Yes, of course it is a personal choice.

LostInParadise's avatar

@crazyguy , Your statistics for those who have been fully vaccinated are way off. Link – In the U.S., among those fully vaccinated, there have been 5800 who got covid and 74 who died out of 75 million fully vaccinated. Those stats are from a month ago. Things couldn’t have changed that much since then.

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy One other thing to keep in mind is the more COVID19 spreads, the more it mutates, and there is the risk of it outsmarting the vaccine. So far the vaccines seem pretty good against the variants, but that could change. India has a new variant now that the experts are watching.

JLeslie's avatar

Sorry for another post. July 15th is my deadline because it takes us through Memorial Day and July 4th.

Memorial Day I’m assuming will give us opportunity to impress upon vaccine reluctant people that vaccinated cities did not see big increases in cases and deaths while unvaccinated cities did. We’ll see.

July 4th we can see if we get through that holiday and see no spike, especially focusing on hospitalizations and deaths.

If we still have lots of people hospitalized and dying then maybe we need to do more to get people vaccinated.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@JLeslie In my area many businesses offer free food, like a free donut every day, if you show your vax card. Could be a game-changer.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie I cannot access your link because I will not give my email address to that rag.

The best info I can get is that close to half of all breakthrough cases are in the 60+ group.

crazyguy's avatar

@LostInParadise About a month ago there were 5,800 breakthrough cases. As of April 26, there were 9,245 breakthrough cases. Please explain why you think my stats are way off.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie You are right; the more covid spreads, the greater the opportunity for mutation. My point is that my vaccination puts almost a complete stop to any spread through me.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie So you may decide on July 15, that vaccines should be forced on everybody?

JLeslie's avatar

@crazyguy I don’t think I will ever get to the point of forcing the vaccination, but right now I am in the mode of let people have some times to feel comfortable. It isn’t irrational to want to wait a few months and see how the vaccinated people are doing now that it is being given to the masses. It has happened before in history that once a drug or vaccine starts being given to millions of people some bad side effects come up, and they pull the drug. So, people hear these stories and want to wait and see. I would say now, we have a lot of really good information, and so far the risks seems very low with the vaccine, so more and more people who were hesitant are getting the shot now.

Moreover, people continue to grow tired of being careful when their friends and family are getting back to normal and practically shunning the unvaccinated friends and family. This is helping some of those unvaccinated people finally get vaccinated. I am still keeping a distance from unvaccinated people until more time passes. I am in a wait and see about that.

The last bit of information to push these people who are holding out will be the holidays and some more people dying. Although, since it is summer there will be less transmission than maybe their would be if it was colder out; although, Florida is about to go inside more in a few weeks.

I think if anyone with an audience bothers to do the analysis of where the outbreaks continue to be and the vaccination rates there, it might create even more pressure to ostracize the people who are not vaccinated and to do more incentives or restrictions.

I think the big question is will schools require the vaccine. Some jobs might require employees wear a mask if they don’t get vaccinated.

LostInParadise's avatar

@crazyguy , You said that those who were fully vaccinated had 4000 deaths out of 51 million and my source said 74 deaths out of 75 million. That is a big difference.

KRD's avatar

Even though you get the covid vaccine you still can get it but it will be less likely to get covid.

crazyguy's avatar

@KRD Your post is confusing: you seems to be saying that vaccinated folks can still catch covid but are less likely to catch covid! That is a truism if I ever hear one!

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie I glanced through your link. It says basically that whatever conclusions can be drawn from the study are inconclusive. Therefore, I’ll choose to ignore the study.

KRD's avatar

@crazyguy I’m saying that even though you get the vaccine you can still get covid but the chances of getting covid are less likely.

seawulf575's avatar

@KRD agreed. The vaccine is not proof against getting Covid. In fact, I was having this discussion on a different thread with one of our resident medical professionals. He was avoiding actually saying that. But the vaccines are not 100% effective. Neither is getting the disease proof against getting it again. And in both cases, the chances are small.

JLeslie's avatar

@seawulf575 If someone has covid in a room, someone who is not vaccinated and never had covid has an extremely high chance of catching covid. If they are vaccinated they have an extremely low chance of catching it.

seawulf575's avatar

@JLeslie Not sure “extremely high” is accurate, but I understand what you mean. The point is that so many on these pages have bought into this vaccine against all logic. As was mentioned, I had covid. I have antibodies to help protect me. Because I have them, it is effectively the same as being vaccinated. Why? Because in the case of a former Covid patient and a vaccinated person, there is still a chance of getting the disease again, though it is a small chance. In fact, the best I can tell, the chances are higher that a vaccinated person would get it than a previously infected person.
So now let’s look at the scenario you presented. There are four people in a room. One has covid right now. One has been vaccinated, one had covid previously, and one has never had covid nor a vaccine. I’m going to assume they are all breathing. The covid positive person is releasing water vapor that has the Covid-19 virus in it. All three of the others are breathing air with this in it. As you said, the one that never had the virus and isn’t vaccinated can catch the virus fairly easily. But between the vaccinated and previous Covid people, who is more likely to get it? I would say the vaccinated person. The incidents of people that had covid getting it again are very small. Something like 0.008% (about 5700 times this has happened against 70 million cases). But vaccines are at best 95% effective. So that means the vaccinated person has a 5% chance of getting it, right off the bat.
So I think the question becomes, why are we looking down on someone who had Covid and chooses not to get vaccinated? It doesn’t seem like a logic thing to do.

JLeslie's avatar

^^I’m not looking down on the person who recently had COVID. I’ve already said I’m not worried about people who had COVID in the last few months. Did you actually test positive? I don’t remember.

As far as the unvaccinated and never had COVID before, I think if he’s within 6 feet talking indoors or at the same table his chance of catching covid is over 80%. I saw it over and over again here, we have been tracking it. 4 people go out to lunch or go bowling or play cards and they all get it. 12 people at a dinner table, 7 get it. My friend’s zumba class she was allowing 45 in the room, people spaced about 6 feet apart. During the holidays 14 got it in the class within days of the first reported case. She shut it down through January and then started up again when most people were vaccinated. She had one positive person in class since then and no others caught it that I know of. I know she never stopped class when that positive person was reported to her.

TJFKAJ's avatar

As opposed to what?!

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie According to the CDC website (https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/vaccine-benefits.html)

‘COVID-19 vaccination is a safer way to help build protection
COVID-19 can have serious, life-threatening complications, and there is no way to know how COVID-19 will affect you. And if you get sick, you could spread the disease to friends, family, and others around you.
Clinical trials for all vaccines must first show they are safe and effective before any vaccine can be authorized or approved for use, including COVID-19 vaccines. The known and potential benefits of a COVID-19 vaccine must outweigh the known and potential risks of the vaccine before it is used under what is known as an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA). Watch a video explaining an EUA.
Getting COVID-19 may offer some protection, known as natural immunity. Current evidence suggests that reinfection with the virus that causes COVID-19 is uncommon in the months after initial infection, but may increase with time. The risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19 far outweighs any benefits of natural immunity. COVID-19 vaccination will help protect you by creating an antibody (immune system) response without having to experience sickness.
Both natural immunity and immunity produced by a vaccine are important parts of COVID-19 disease that experts are trying to learn more about, and CDC will keep the public informed as new evidence becomes available.’

The message is garbled, as has become typical with the CDC. It mixes obvious truisms with garbage.

For instance: Getting COVID-19 may offer some protection, known as natural immunity. Current evidence suggests that reinfection with the virus that causes COVID-19 is uncommon in the months after initial infection, but may increase with time. The risk of severe illness and death from COVID-19 far outweighs any benefits of natural immunity.

Let us dissect this paragraph. Having had the disease, you get natural immunity, which may decrease with time. I thought the same thing happens with the vaccine! So the message is convoluted.

Here is the garbage: _’COVID-19 vaccination is a safer way to help build protection
COVID-19 can have serious, life-threatening complications, and there is no way to know how COVID-19 will affect you. And if you get sick, you could spread the disease to friends, family, and others around you._ Point out one thing the long paragraph tells you.

KRD's avatar

Getting the vaccine is what I’m interested in getting soon don’t know when but we might get it.

crazyguy's avatar

@KRD If you are thinking that getting the vaccine will change your life, think again!

JLeslie's avatar

@KRD What are you waiting for? Are you in the US?

@crazyguy The CDC has been fairly consistent with saying the vaccine gives a stronger immune response than having COVID generally speaking. The CDC gives guidelines, advisories, and then governments, businesses, and individuals take the information and use it in a way that can be as practical as possible. There is all sorts of voodoo in medical science. They do their best with the information they have.

KRD's avatar

@JLeslie I’m gonna get it soon.

crazyguy's avatar

@JLeslie I 100% agree that the vaccine is awesome, and nobody should think twice about taking it. Its efficacy is closer to 100% than to the study result of about 94%.

What I meant by my message to @KRD was that lifestyle changes that should accrue by taking such a powerful vaccine are still not available. You still have to wear masks, keep your distance, etc.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

Mobile | Desktop


Send Feedback   

`