Voices
in
Japan

poll

When a vaccine that is proven to be effective against COVID-19 becomes available to all, will you take it?

101 Comments
© RikiWeb

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

101 Comments
Login to comment

Flu vaccine has been around over 40 years, but we still get the flu. This vaccine has not been tested anywhere near enough yet to be deemed safe and effective. You'd have to be highly gullible to believe it's safe at this stage!

Yellow fever vaccine has also been around for over 40 years, and it protects without problem people infected every year without need to change it.

The doctors and scientists that professionally make and test vaccines designed the protocol followed and it has already been in use for vaccine that are safe and effective, vaccines that are in use today. You would have to be gullible to think some nameless person on the internet is a better judge of what is or not safe and effective.

Not everyone needs to take it. Only 70% is needed for herd immunity. Getting the real virus is also more effective in making antibodies so I won't have to keep taking Covid-19 vaccines every year. Plus, I'm a healthy guy. I also don't want to support big pharma.

How do you know the real virus is more effective? antibodies for corona are actually not the primary factor that allows to evaluate immunity. On the other hand the real virus means higher chances of getting serious and maybe permanent side effects (not only death). Even for healthy people a safe and effective vaccine means lowering the risk of having problems. You don't need to do the rational thing, you can be irrational if you want to.

Plus, one patient in the ICU for a couple of weeks means much more profit for big pharma than hundreds of vaccines being sold, whatever you choose that increases the chances for someone to get the natural infection (maybe from a healthy guy that gets sick and carries it to them?) definitely counts as support for big pharma.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Not everyone needs to take it. Only 70% is needed for herd immunity. Getting the real virus is also more effective in making antibodies so I won't have to keep taking Covid-19 vaccines every year. Plus, I'm a healthy guy. I also don't want to support big pharma.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Flu vaccine has been around over 40 years, but we still get the flu. This vaccine has not been tested anywhere near enough yet to be deemed safe and effective. You'd have to be highly gullible to believe it's safe at this stage!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Probably the later, "childrenhealthdefense.org" is a well known source of false information and have been disproved endlessly in almost every single thing they publish.

In other words, stay away! Don't listen to it! .

Uh. Yeah. Exactly.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

"As mandatory as you can possibly make it" is very different from making it actually mandatory.

Think about what other things are actually mandatory, you can live your whole life without a driving license for example. You can even refuse a blood transfusion and die if that is your wish.

If you live outside of North Korea (and China or Russia maybe?) there is no real possibility that a COVID-19 vaccine will be mandatory, at least no more than what is done already now (vaccines required for certain jobs, activities or traveling).

Anyway, making any kind of health measure actually compulsory is not justified, at least not for adults. But making them (or a valid test for immunity) a requirement to avoid exposing other people to unnecessary dangers is perfectly justified.

A private company of course is perfectly justified to protect their costumers as long as it takes scientifically proved measures. There is nothing wrong with making immunity a requirement to give service. It is the same as saying that no abstinence from smoking or no fly.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

@Virusrex

No-one is talking about mandatory vaccinations.

Aussie PM Scott Morrison has brought it up: 

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/scott-morrison-says-a-coronavirus-vaccine-would-be-as-mandatory-as-you-can-possibly-make-it

UK health secretary, Matt Hancock, said the government was “looking very seriously” at making vaccinations compulsory...

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/jul/24/boris-johnson-says-anti-vaxxers-are-nuts-free-winter-flu-jabs

QANTAS Airways head Alan Joyce has suggested no vaccine no fly.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

So it's not just the "nutty conspiracy theorists" that hesitate to take vaccines.

That is obvious, after all full results have not yet been published. It is one thing to blindly trust everybody did they work perfectly, another is to examine the results yourself and see exactly what are the risks and benefits to decide, this is desirable.

By the way this is also completely opposite from what conspiracy theorists say happens. According to them health professionals never examine risks and just blindly do what they are told. Thanks for proving that the nutty ones are actually wrong also on this.

Not to mention that they will still try to say that the third that have enough assurance from the results of the vaccine approval system to trust this time is the usual and not the exception are all willing to poison themselves and their families only so other people get money, complete nonsense.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

According to a questionnaire from researchers at University of California at Los Angeles, 66 percent of Los Angeles health-care workers said they would delay taking a vaccine. Another study concluded that a third of New Jersey doctors would not take the vaccine (some would take it later).

So it's not just the "nutty conspiracy theorists" that hesitate to take vaccines.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Those who promote mandatory acceptance put adverse reaction risks on those who prefer to refuse.

The huge difference is that scientifically it can be proved that adverse reaction risks are much less and important on vaccines compared with the adverse reactions from the natural infection. If valid, objective data can prove then it is not valid to say you are putting others at risk for promoting vaccination, it would still be reducing the risk for them. Is like saying that promoting seatbelts put others at "risk of death" from using them.

Your choice is yours to make, but still is not a rational one, first because nobody is promoting mandatory vaccination, and second because it assumes that both options have equivalent amounts of risk.

We don't know whether the vaccine will prevent you from spreading the virus as admitted by Dr. Tal Zaks, Moderna’s chief medical officer.

We don't know how efficient is the vaccine is on stopping spreading, but we already know that symptomatic patients have a higher chance of doing it, so anything that help people becoming at least asymptomatic will at least have a positive effect preventing spreading, if viral levels or time of presence decreases as well this decrease will be much more important.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Those who promote freedom of choice and refuse, risk contraction and spreading to vulnerable elderly, etc.

The testing of vaccine effectiveness only looked at symptoms. All we know is that the vaccinated will have a decreased chance of feeling sick from SARSCoV2.

We don't know whether the vaccine will prevent you from spreading the virus as admitted by Dr. Tal Zaks, Moderna’s chief medical officer.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

Virusrex

Those who are not interested in the vaccine bear responsibility for their own health and their choices in case of contracting Covid.

As long as "bear responsibility" include refraining from activities where they endanger others because of lack of immunity that is right.

The choices of both sides give rise to risks to themselves and others.

Those who promote freedom of choice and refuse, risk contraction and spreading to vulnerable elderly, etc.

Those who promote mandatory acceptance put adverse reaction risks on those who prefer to refuse.

It's a tough choice, but I lean towards freedom to choose and respect for other's choices.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

Those who are not interested in the vaccine bear responsibility for their own health and their choices in case of contracting Covid.

As long as "bear responsibility" include refraining from activities where they endanger others because of lack of immunity that is right.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Vaccines do have side effects-some more than others.Ask the hospital where receiving the vaccine if they accept liability if complications occur.

Of course not, the same as every other health measure, that is why a doctor have to put it and take informed consent, the same for any surgery or antibiotic. It makes no sense to expect vaccines to be different.

And no, there is no lack of animal experiments, you ignoring something do not make that something not existing, it only means you don't know about it. Animal experiments with mRNA has been done for many years already.

It is less bother to take vitamin D and maintain a healthy lifestyle—these are more than 90% effective

more than 90% effective is still much lower than doing that AND vaccinating. There is no reason to do both things since it would lower the risks much more.

@gkamburoff - See if you can still find any information regarding the HUGE Dengue vaccine disaster in the Philippines about which Big Pharma is very actively suppressing any reference whatsoever

You mean the "debacle" where vaccinated people were in less danger than non vaccinated ones after their second or third infection, but not as low as they needed to be to be approved? the one that was discovered after "bigpharma's" own researchers alerted the authorities about the epidemiological findings that indicated this? One thing is that something is not permantely on the headlines and another very different that this is difficult to find, anybody able to use google can find out anything of important about it.

Your conspiracy is still non-believable. It still requires all doctors, nurses and scientist to be either criminally incompetent or willing to poison themselves, their family and friends just so some hidden power (not themselves) can profit.

Those who are not interested in the vaccine bear responsibility for their own health and their choices in case of contracting Covid.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

I think the important factor here is to respect people's personal choices on this matter.

Those who are not interested in the vaccine bear responsibility for their own health and their choices in case of contracting Covid.

Those who accept the vaccine should be immune (if they work as advertised) and also bear responsibility for their own health and their choices in case of negative side effects.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

But a guy on the internet says so, and he's got loads of followers.

They can't ALL be morons, can they?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

The black market for a fake Covid passport would be bigger than the black market for a dose of a vaccine. Get real.

Do you have any idea how difficult it is to fake a passport these days?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Most of us will get vaccinated. Some won't, and of those, some will die, and some will live with the terrible after effects. Eventually we'll gain herd immunity, after the virus has purged the anti-vaxxers who aren't able to combat it naturally.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Inoculations are not just good sense, they are good citizenship.

@gkamburoff - See if you can still find any information regarding the HUGE Dengue vaccine disaster in the Philippines about which Big Pharma is very actively suppressing any reference whatsoever. The April, 2019 Scientific American report "The Dengue Debacle" will tell you everything you might want to know. And this is not the only horrific Big Pharma medication coverup but just one of dozens. Read the details of Merck and Vioxx, for example. Drug disaster coverups are done VERY QUIETLY and involve snowstorms of NDAs and under the table monies. It's just business and physicians are just employees not free agents who can make their own judgements if someone else is paying their malpractice insurance premiums. Corporate, what do you expect? Yes, immunizations for community spread diseases is a lifesaver, but so is understanding the risk when believing ANYTHING Authorities say which is in any way connected to profits. Educate YOURSELF. THAT is even better citizenship and absolutely a primary responsibility if you are a parent, or the child of a vulnerable adult.

-3 ( +3 / -6 )

When pigs fly, will you guys go on rides on their backs ?

Why wouldn't you?

Why would I ? Will I need it ? Can anyone here predict the future ?

Can anyone tell that if some day there is a vaccine "proven and available", that day the Covid will still be around ? That it will still be uncurable ? And that I am not already immunised ?

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

Inoculations are not just good sense, they are good citizenship.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Don’t take it if you don’t want to. If you get infected sooner or later then you’ll have only yourself to blame. You might recover or fall victim to death if you get infected! If you choose to get vaccinated then you might be safe or have some side effects ( mild or adverse). The choice is up to you. Just remember that people have to face the consequences of their actions.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

It is less bother to take vitamin D and maintain a healthy lifestyle—these are more than 90% effective.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Vaccines do have side effects-some more than others.Ask the hospital where receiving the vaccine if they accept liability if complications occur.

No, healthy people will be signing waivers before getting their doses, won’t they?

Lack of animal studies to show possible side effects and an mRNA vaccine, do not give me a warm fuzzy feeling, so no to that.

In the case of a deactivated virus then maybe yes, after a period of several months.

Of the 5 people I have personally known with the virus ALL have recovered, 2 after a few days, the rest in a week or so.

Eventually the virus will mutate into a less deadly form so there won’t be a need for a vaccine anyway....

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

So, to summarise. Follow science not Facebook.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

Yeah sure, just incomparably lower risks, every single vaccine in use today is like that, there is no reason to think COVID-19 has to be different.

False, listing your personal, mistaken beliefs as if they were facts do not make them so.

-8 ( +3 / -11 )

Raw Beer and virusrex, you are just going around in circles. No need to post any further on this thread.

Vaccines also have risks of serious illness and death (someone even died during the clinical trials this year).

For healthy people, SARSCoV2 is clearly not dangerous enough to risk taking a vaccine, especially a rushed experimental vaccine.

Yeah sure, just incomparably lower risks, every single vaccine in use today is like that, there is no reason to think COVID-19 has to be different.

For healthy people a vaccine is not risky enough to risk getting the natural infection. It does not matter how much you think healthy people cannot get crippling long term complications or death, an approved vaccine means those risk become lower.

Do you think differently? it does not matter, unless you have data to prove it it is still just your belief.

And no, antibody maturation is not evolution, you are still using the word mistakenly. Selection is not even remotely similar and there is no expectation for the public health situation to change because of the "antibody evolution" before a few dozen human generations have passed.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

Vaccines lower the risk compared with natural exposure, that has been repeatedly proved, no matter what you have read. There is absolutely nothing wrong with getting immunity without the extra risks from infections.

Vaccines also have risks of serious illness and death (someone even died during the clinical trials this year).

For healthy people, SARSCoV2 is clearly not dangerous enough to risk taking a vaccine, especially a rushed experimental vaccine.

No, you are using the world "evolving" incorrectly. That is not what evolving means.

Antibody maturation is extremely similar to Darwinian evolution, so I think the term is appropriate in this discussion.

-8 ( +3 / -11 )

Yeah, you can die from it if you are old and unhealthy.

And young and healthy, as described all over the world, being healthy is not a guaranteed protection against the disease, no matter how much you want to believe it.

Except for the vulnerable, we should never have left our "normal life".

Not according to the science, only according to empty opinions that have no data to sustain that invalid conclusion.

Our antibodies evolve within our lifetime as we naturally expose our body to various bacteria and viruses.

But if we follow the idiotic "new normal" and always wear a mask, social distance, and sanitize everything then perhaps we might become dependent on these unnatural risky vaccines to keep our immune system updated.

No, you are using the world "evolving" incorrectly. That is not what evolving means.

We might? as in your personal uninformed opinion? that is no argument, we might become even healthier, or learn how to fly. I mean, if you think that presenting an imaginary conclusion as a realistic possibility without objective, scientific proof then anything goes (and all is invalid of course).

Vaccines lower the risk compared with natural exposure, that has been repeatedly proved, no matter what you have read. There is absolutely nothing wrong with getting immunity without the extra risks from infections.

Sorry that the health professionals around the world recommend something you don't like, but just because you think differently does not mean they are wrong.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

And getting sick from the virus, and dying from the virus and getting long term health problems from the virus. Because being related do not mean the diseases have to be similar, that is faulty logic.

Yeah, you can die from it if you are old and unhealthy.

Some people would consider advantageous to go back to a normal life without the increased risk from the pandemic thanks to a safe and effective vaccine without having to evolve a natural resistance a few dozens human generations later.

Except for the vulnerable, we should never have left our "normal life".

Our antibodies evolve within our lifetime as we naturally expose our body to various bacteria and viruses.

But if we follow the idiotic "new normal" and always wear a mask, social distance, and sanitize everything then perhaps we might become dependent on these unnatural risky vaccines to keep our immune system updated.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

The media is reporting on the deceptive agenda-driven propaganda that some call "research"; e.g. when they reported about this kid that developed type 1 diabetes and the only like to covid19 was that his parents might have had it. That is not medical research.

False, the media reporting is perfectly representative of the current scientific consensus, On the other hand you trying to imply that one simple case is somehow representative of the many other cases that have been found around the world, and that is obviously included as a reflection of a realistic situation is what is validly characterized as misrepresenting the research because of your agenda.

But they never talk about the countless other studies that have demonstrated that HCQ is effective and very safe when given early:

https://c19study.com/

That is because congregating huge, well designed studies and tiny badly designed ones as if they were all equivalent is something that is considered misleading and invalid in science (we are getting a pattern here). It is a methodology mistake that nobody doing science seriously would ever do, unless they wanted to deceive people.

Bad studies with terrible bias on the selection of the patients appeared to show some marginally advantage to HCQ, much better designed studies demonstrated it was all an effect from the bias, and showed HCQ do not contribute at all to fight COVID-19 it is already old news talked about in many kinds of scientific and popular sources like

https://www.self.com/story/hydroxychloroquine-myth-coronavirus

At this point only people that have no understanding of science ignore the real scientific consensus about it.(some even have the lousy idea that only the better studies that showed no advantage had groups that were not treated with HCQ!)

4 ( +8 / -4 )

According to the WHO, more polio cases are now caused by vaccine than by the wild virus.

Yeah, a tiny microscopic fraction of the millions of cases at the peak of the epidemics of polio.

You also forgot to mention how the cases are all in UN-vaccinated people.

Yeah, but they are all related, our immune system has evolved to handle these viruses, and will continue to evolve with the virus.

And getting sick from the virus, and dying from the virus and getting long term health problems from the virus. Because being related do not mean the diseases have to be similar, that is faulty logic.

Some people would consider advantageous to go back to a normal life without the increased risk from the pandemic thanks to a safe and effective vaccine without having to evolve a natural resistance a few dozens human generations later. Wow, the nerve of those people, right?

4 ( +8 / -4 )

Yeah, the media has constantly been trying to scare us with this "pandemic".

How dare the media report on the results of medical research!

The media is reporting on the deceptive agenda-driven propaganda that some call "research"; e.g. when they reported about this kid that developed type 1 diabetes and the only like to covid19 was that his parents might have had it. That is not medical research.

And then there is Lancet Gate, where a bunch of nobodies fabricated outrageous data to convince people hydroxychloroquine was dangerous and ineffective. How could such a piece of trash have been accepted by the Lancet and why did all MSM jump on this paper nonstop for a week or so. But they never talk about the countless other studies that have demonstrated that HCQ is effective and very safe when given early:

https://c19study.com/

Despite all this, there are some agenda-driven or MSM-hypnotised people who will insist that the consensus is that HCQ is dangerous and does not work.

The media is not informing people, it is just promoting Big Pharma.

Indeed, listing your personal, mistaken beliefs as if they were facts do not make them so.

-5 ( +4 / -9 )

Then came the vaccination and today we are free of polio. I think in one or two countries there are some polio case like in Pakistan because they refuse the vaccination claiming the west is trying to kill their children.

According to the WHO, more polio cases are now caused by vaccine than by the wild virus.

And? How is that relevant to SARS-Cov-2. Humans have only been getting SARS-Cov-2infections for as long as 2019. This is completely new, so why are you pretending that it is not?

Yeah, but they are all related, our immune system has evolved to handle these viruses, and will continue to evolve with the virus.

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

I'm old enough to have been around during the days of polio. School kids walking with irons on their legs. Others in iron lung machines for the rest of their lives. The great Ian Drury had polio.

Then came the vaccination and today we are free of polio. I think in one or two countries there are some polio case like in Pakistan because they refuse the vaccination claiming the west is trying to kill their children.

8 ( +10 / -2 )

Raw Beer

Humans have been getting coronavirus infections for as long as there have been humans. 

And? How is that relevant to SARS-Cov-2. Humans have only been getting SARS-Cov-2 infections for as long as 2019. This is completely new, so why are you pretending that it is not?

7 ( +11 / -4 )

Yeah, the media has constantly been trying to scare us with this "pandemic".

I think the numbers of people dying of the pandemic is quite scary. Not forgetting, of course, the covidiots and deniers trying to play it down.

4 ( +9 / -5 )

Yeah, the media has constantly been trying to scare us with this "pandemic".

How dare the media report on the results of medical research!

No, it is not the media but the science that keep discovering new ways in which COVID-19 damages the health of people both in the short and in the long term.

It is not only inflammation, and no, if the problem is presented in higher numbers in patients that have been infected than in the normal population it can validly be said that is related to the infection. Also it is not "one" kid but several cases identified around the world, same with neuronal degeneration and many other kinds of likely permanent damage.

This is not something the media invented out of nothing but medical reports that are being shared in order to deal better with the disease.

It is irrelevant that humans have contact with OTHER coronaviruses, this is the one that causes this effects, and likely many others that have not been identified yet. Healthy people have died even if you refuse to accept it, the vaccine is not rushed, there is nothing about artificial measures and the natural infection is demonstrably more risky for anybody than an approved vaccine, because that is a requisite.

Listing your personal, mistaken beliefs as if they were facts do not make them so.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

As others have pointed out, it's very likely that one will not be able to travel internationally anywhere without being vaccinated.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

How about being one of the last ones that gets a yet undiscovered health problems with the natural infection? doctors and scientists keep finding more of those things almost every week.

Yeah, the media has constantly been trying to scare us with this "pandemic".

So they detected inflammation in some people, not knowing whether the inflammation was already present before the infection. They also reported about this kid that developed type 1 diabetes, but they didn't even know whether he ever had covid19. They are just deceptive scare tactics.

Humans have been getting coronavirus infections for as long as there have been humans. If we are healthy, we can handle it and unnatural rushed experimental vaccines are much riskier.

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

It's out in the open. You're just not paying attention.

Bigpharma and Bigtech want to put a chip in my brain! If course there’s no evidence because they covered it all up. That’s what they do! But if you join this kooky Facebook group you’ll find everything because Bigtech can’t censor Facebook, oh wait...

4 ( +7 / -3 )

kyronstavic

Valid debate does exist, but in the case of this virus it's been smothered with smears against anyone and anything in the medical field dareing to challenge the narrative that only a vaccine, distancing, lockdowns and masks can save us.

Knowing how viruses spread makes it pretty clear how distancing, masks and lockdowns can save us. It's blatantly obvious. Knowing how vaccines work is pretty clear how they can help us. This isn't rocket surgery. It's basic common sense. You really have to try hard to not believe it.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

The last thing I want is to be one of the first ones to get one and then discover that some unintended health effect occurs that they hadn't foreseen.

How about being one of the last ones that gets a yet undiscovered health problems with the natural infection? doctors and scientists keep finding more of those things almost every week.

In other words, stay away! Don't listen to it! ... because you might learn something that Big Pharma does not want you to know about.

Completely wrong, as I said don't listen to it because the site is known to be pushing lies, this is a perfectly reasonable recommendation, if whatever you find there is more likely to be false than true it is a terrible source of information. Even if you like what you find there.

Valid debate does exist, but in the case of this virus it's been smothered with smears against anyone and anything in the medical field dareing to challenge the narrative that only a vaccine, distancing, lockdowns and masks can save us.

Of course not, only those that base their criticism in fantasy against science, world wide conspiracies without a single proof as a reason to go against valid information should be rejected and everybody has a duty to do it.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

virusrexToday  11:12 am JST

*There is no debate, Big Pharma would never allow it.*

Valid debate exist all around medical sciences that is the whole point of the discussion part of every scientific paper, what is not allowed by logic is debate based on demonstrable lies as many of your sources try to do. 

If for example you try to excuse the mistake of thinking that mRNA have not been tried on humans before this year, and then say this is because you have been aware of other mRNA vaccines tried on humans before this year, that is enough to disqualify the comment as self contradictory.

Valid debate does exist, but in the case of this virus it's been smothered with smears against anyone and anything in the medical field dareing to challenge the narrative that only a vaccine, distancing, lockdowns and masks can save us.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Probably the later, "childrenhealthdefense.org" is a well known source of false information and have been disproved endlessly in almost every single thing they publish.

In other words, stay away! Don't listen to it! ... because you might learn something that Big Pharma does not want you to know about. I'm sure an honest debate would quickly expose what you're claiming. Strange that Big Pharma avoids these debates, especially considering that they say the level of vaccine hesitancy is concerning.

If, after vaccinations begin, I'll wait a few months to see if there are any serious side-effects or not. If the results are good, I'll get one.

The last thing I want is to be one of the first ones to get one and then discover that some unintended health effect occurs that they hadn't foreseen.

Very wise, but it might take more than a few months before we see the serious side effects.

-7 ( +3 / -10 )

If, after vaccinations begin, I'll wait a few months to see if there are any serious side-effects or not. If the results are good, I'll get one.

The last thing I want is to be one of the first ones to get one and then discover that some unintended health effect occurs that they hadn't foreseen.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Do you actively go out and get your news, or just go with what your facebook feed (where that link shows it came from) shows you?

Probably the later, "childrenhealthdefense.org" is a well known source of false information and have been disproved endlessly in almost every single thing they publish. Considering them a good source is like recommending people to lick money.

6 ( +10 / -4 )

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/truth-kennedy-daniel-pinchbeck/?utm_source=fb&utm_medium=defender&fbclid=IwAR2NffWIXSwYnt7tsTJfs57pmTf9WKDBXvgXS7ePoLHlyfbC5DQv7527hAY

Do you actively go out and get your news, or just go with what your facebook feed (where that link shows it came from) shows you?

6 ( +9 / -3 )

Here is a good recent interview discussing vaccine safety:

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/truth-kennedy-daniel-pinchbeck/?utm_source=fb&utm_medium=defender&fbclid=IwAR2NffWIXSwYnt7tsTJfs57pmTf9WKDBXvgXS7ePoLHlyfbC5DQv7527hAY

Do not blindly accept anything, from either side, but I suggest people have a listen and look more into the matter.

-7 ( +4 / -11 )

That is still self contradictory, If you think this year COVID-19 vaccine volunteers are enough to constitute "significant numbers" then that would also include the participants in several dozens studies for the many other applications for mRNA, from cancer to gene editing, gene therapy, stem cell therapy, etc. Significant now, significant before, still no difference. (and still no specific side effect to something that is present naturally in the body).

4 ( +8 / -4 )

If for example you try to excuse the mistake of thinking that mRNA have not been tried on humans before this year,

My original quote was:

Humans have been infected by coronaviruses since there have been humans.

Humans have been injected with lipid nanoparticle mRNA vaccines since .... this year (in significant numbers)?

-3 ( +5 / -8 )

There is no debate, Big Pharma would never allow it.

Valid debate exist all around medical sciences that is the whole point of the discussion part of every scientific paper, what is not allowed by logic is debate based on demonstrable lies as many of your sources try to do.

If for example you try to excuse the mistake of thinking that mRNA have not been tried on humans before this year, and then say this is because you have been aware of other mRNA vaccines tried on humans before this year, that is enough to disqualify the comment as self contradictory.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

If there's a divide in the legitimate medical community, I will listen to the debate and decide accordingly.

There is no debate, Big Pharma would never allow it.

-8 ( +4 / -12 )

People that think that mRNA has just began to be used this year on humans for example, because that demonstrate that the interest they may have on the topic is not even enough to get properly informed.

Yeah, I was aware they were testing it for cancer, with little/no success. I was thinking in terms of vaccines for infectious diseases, but they were indeed still vaccines, my bad. But I believe they are still experimental.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

At the end of the day all this endless arguing over social media will not change the fact that just like all the other diseases before and all the diseases coming we will need to be vaccinated.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

I would rather take the vaccine like the flu shot and feel crappy for a couple day's. I really don't want to get covid, get really sick and possibly have permanent damage or even die. So of course I'll take the vaccine.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

I won't immediately, there are others who are probably more in need of it but if the virus persists, then yes.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

And what makes you enough of an expert to know that they're wrong?

First of all, basic knowledge and common sense. Second, I trust experts. And maybe a Ph.D. in science and more than 10 years in research does help.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Yeah, it's quite surprising indeed. But it's clear that these biology-challenged people are provided with documentation from Big Pharma that they rearrange into these long word salads that look impressive on the surface but which actually don't make much sense as they, as you said, are biology-challenged.

If you cannot understand something, and at the same time you are unable to demonstrate even one thing where it is wrong. It becomes completely obvious who is the one that do not understand the topic.

People that think that mRNA has just began to be used this year on humans for example, because that demonstrate that the interest they may have on the topic is not even enough to get properly informed.

Then again, worse would be to pretend to be a professional in the field only to be constantly corrected on very basic concepts and trying to refute arguments repeatedly saying "I don't understand any of it". And then try to use this "authority" to say that every professional in the health care fields is wrong.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

If there's a divide in the legitimate medical community, I will listen to the debate and decide accordingly.

But if the only people claiming that the vaccine cannot be trusted are armchair quarterbacks and fringe scientists, I'll be first in line to get it.

The sheeple can believe their false profits on their theories of conspiracy. I'll stay healthy based on science thank you.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Why suddenly all the biology-challenged people become immunology experts beats me.

Yeah, it's quite surprising indeed. But it's clear that these biology-challenged people are provided with documentation from Big Pharma that they rearrange into these long word salads that look impressive on the surface but which actually don't make much sense as they, as you said, are biology-challenged. But I have seen improvements in their posts, where they go from not knowing the different between mRNA and protein two months ago to then giving a clear explanation of mRNA's function... They are learning, I guess it's part of her job.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Have a look for yourself, or do you expect people to spoon-feed you your information?

Let me see, I had found absolutely nothing valid just what I told you were misleading cherry picked quotes that they are trying to twist into a meaning they don't have. There I just proved you lied.

See, this is what happens when you cannot provide proof of what you said and left the other people to search for it. My whole point is that nobody, not even you can find a valid proof because such a thing does not exist, thus you have no basis for your mistaken opinion.

6 ( +10 / -4 )

So in the open that you still depend on people trusting you are right without ever providing any proof? the very fact you could not bring what you wrote was supposedly proving your point is what does the opposite, personal opinions and convoluted explanations to completely natural things happening are not proof. Then again, I don't do precisely what I wrote I would not do anymore, maybe it is not possible to understand your point without that moral flexibility.

Have a look for yourself, or do you expect people to spoon-feed you your information? Have you even visited the WEF's website and watched the videos they have produced themselves. including Trudeau's?

-10 ( +4 / -14 )

timeon Today  06:04 pm JST

Why suddenly all the biology-challenged people become immunology experts beats me.

And what makes you enough of an expert to know that they're wrong?

-10 ( +4 / -14 )

Why suddenly all the biology-challenged people become immunology experts beats me.

Back on topic, you bet I will take it. I want the society to go back to normal as soon as possible, because I want to travel freely, I want to get rid of the damn mask, I want to go to live concerts, I want to go out with my guys getting blank drunk, etc. etc.

5 ( +11 / -6 )

mRNA vaccines? Are you sure?

Why do you quote text if you are not going to read it? the last three words are not there just for show, vaccines are just one of them, for other purposes it has been extensively tried from many years ago.

It's out in the open. You're just not paying attention

So in the open that you still depend on people trusting you are right without ever providing any proof? the very fact you could not bring what you wrote was supposedly proving your point is what does the opposite, personal opinions and convoluted explanations to completely natural things happening are not proof. Then again, I don't do precisely what I wrote I would not do anymore, maybe it is not possible to understand your point without that moral flexibility.

7 ( +12 / -5 )

Yes it is, a conspiracy for which you have no proof but cherry picked comments out of context that you try very hard to force into an imaginary meaning. If a simple explanation such as the old and proven health measures for control of infectious diseases are enough to explain why people would want proof of immunity to give you a service then there is no need for convoluted and irrational explanations for which you have no proof. You can believe anything you want, but you cannot force it as if it were a rational fact, because it is not.

It's out in the open. You're just not paying attention.

-10 ( +5 / -15 )

and are as experimental as all previously ones that are in use right now, the technology have been used for years in humans without problems on thousands over thousands of volunteers over many different applications.

mRNA vaccines? Are you sure?

-8 ( +4 / -12 )

All it requires is for health professionals to do what they were taught in school. 

Which is to professionally evaluate the information available for them in order to make a decision for the care of their patients, your complete mischaracterization is false. It would be completely simple to corroborate that a majority of the health professionals have to enroll their kids on special schools where vaccination is not required. So no, this terribly obvious proof of the conspiracy involving literally millions of professionals in the world that dedicate their lives to taking care of the health of their patients is both completely irrational and easy to demonstrate as false. (Let me guess, now you will say that all teachers and education institutions of the world are in the conspiracy) You begin saying that what I wrote is false, but your whole comment is about it being exactly what you believe to be true.

Only people that care for money and no other thing could ever believe this completely false conspiracy to be true, because it is easy for them to believe other people are like them. On the other hand normal, rational people can see this as something that has no chance of being real.

Cranks and known fraudsters as the ones that you keep bringing to the conversation should be called for their bad professional behavior, they should not enjoy any protection from exposing their terribly bad conflicts of interests that have caused them to act unethically and immorally. For example this time you bring a well known missinformation site:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Children%27s_Health_Defense

It is ironic that you blindly believe a site found to be lying repeatedly and at the same time are unable to trust the professionals that dedicate their careers to save the health and lives of their patients.

Sorry, the vaccines are not rushed, and are as experimental as all previously ones that are in use right now, the technology have been used for years in humans without problems on thousands over thousands of volunteers over many different applications.

5 ( +11 / -6 )

Your conspiracy requires for every health professional in the world...

You keep on saying this, but it is completely false.

All it requires is for health professionals to do what they were taught in school. Most of the health professionals who figure out something is fishy will say nothing as to not damage their career or funding, while quietly avoiding vaccinating their loved ones. And those health professionals who actually speak out will be attacked and silenced, and comments about them will be deleted from forums (as we recently witnessed).

Those behind the planned reset are speaking openly about it, if only one is willing to listen.

Anyway regarding whether one should take any of the upcoming rushed experimental vaccines, there is an interesting article that brings up some good points:

What the Leading COVID Vaccine Contenders Still Need to Tell the Public

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/leading-covid-vaccine-contenders-tell-public/?utm_source=fb&utm_medium=defender&fbclid=IwAR2dNcy6iabx9T447ytiB4-xES01plyhEiLY5RU5JwBc9XaHevSqKystzZ8

-8 ( +6 / -14 )

This is not some secret conspiracy, it’s out in the open. Justin Trudeau admitted as much recently.

Yes it is, a conspiracy for which you have no proof but cherry picked comments out of context that you try very hard to force into an imaginary meaning. If a simple explanation such as the old and proven health measures for control of infectious diseases are enough to explain why people would want proof of immunity to give you a service then there is no need for convoluted and irrational explanations for which you have no proof. You can believe anything you want, but you cannot force it as if it were a rational fact, because it is not.

Possibly after the massive Human trials that introduction of these unproven vaccines will really be and have reached a certain point of understanding the most salient side effects (some people with some vaccines WILL have side effects). 

Every single vaccine has to be introduced after human trials, and by definition the human trials are the step used to prove the vaccine efficacy and safety. As long as vaccinated people have less problems than someone with the natural infection there is absolutely no problem. Because the objective is not to develop a perfect intervention without any hint of a problem, just something that can importantly reduce the problems compared with not using it.

And no, "authority" is not the one that tests and checks the results from human clinical trials, its the scientific community in general, you don't want to trusts the experts? it is as simple as preparing yourself and understand the whole process so you can examine the reports when published and corroborate if they make sense or not. Just saying that a conspiracy may make this vaccine different from all the others that are in use and are safe and effective without any proof is useless, because the same can be done for everything, including for example a conspiracy to keep people sick and in strong social distancing measures instead of vaccinated so "some people" may make a profit (such as big pharma, that profits hugely more from each patient that has to be a few weeks in the ICU than from a thousand vaccines).

Your conspiracy requires for every health professional in the world (including thousands that have worked very hard to make vaccines safer and cheaper) to be either completely incompetent or a partner in the crime, that is not believable, specially because they will be vaccinating themselves, their families and their friends.

6 ( +15 / -9 )

Possibly after the massive Human trials that introduction of these unproven vaccines will really be and have reached a certain point of understanding the most salient side effects (some people with some vaccines WILL have side effects). And WHICH vaccine? Every country with a local branch of Big Pharma seems to have their own homegrown vaccine they are actively and vociferously hawking. Pfizer is screwed, I think, because RNA is the least stable of polymers and there are RNAses ubiguitous in the environment and maintaining safely Liquid Nitrogen conditions in the field quite difficult. Can we trust what Authority will tell us regarding these vaccines because all Authority really wants is for everyone to go back to making profits for Authority regardless of the risk, kids in school so Mom can return to her labors outside the home? And a prize like monopolizing the upcoming vaccine demand jeopardizes our Big Pharma greed merchants from drowning in their own salivation so can we trust their claims? I think for most people it is not the vaccines we don't trust but the people pushing them, drug dealers with neckties and sincere smiles...

-8 ( +7 / -15 )

AlexNov. 23  10:36 pm JST

You won’t be able to travel without one .

Qantas said yesterday they’d be requiring proof of vaccination to fly international with them, so you’re not this making stuff up.

The bigger picture here is control for its own sake, and the vaccine is a means to an end - a compliance test of sorts. How many restrictions will you be willing to put up with, how many times will you tolerate the goal posts being moved? This is not some secret conspiracy, it’s out in the open. Justin Trudeau admitted as much recently.

Keep in mind what George Carlin said: It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it.

-11 ( +7 / -18 )

yes I will.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

If the medicine and science are soud then yes.

If slimy gov't bureaucrats are behind it then H-LL NO!

6 ( +10 / -4 )

Yes - if it is proven and safe. I'd like to think I'm not at high risk of death from Covid - but you never know. I am resigned to the fact that I probably have 20-30% chance of being infected knowingly or unknowingly at some point anyway. @Alex - whoever has fed you that rubbish is guilty of more fake news. The black market for a fake Covid passport would be bigger than the black market for a dose of a vaccine. Get real.

-1 ( +6 / -7 )

Yes, if it is proven, as stated in the question. The current available ones are not, they are thrown on the market for profit, because of big panicking or political reputation. Many will have to be vaccinated before a valid statistic can be produced and shows trusted data summaries and then, yes, then I take it probably, why not...

-6 ( +6 / -12 )

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure

14 ( +17 / -3 )

You won’t be able to travel without one .

9 ( +14 / -5 )

I’ll take it.

Then again, I don’t believe in conspiracy theories and bathe as well as changing my underwear and socks every day.

15 ( +20 / -5 )

I won’t be taking it, but I won’t stop anyone else from doing so if they want to feel better about themselves. They key though is that freedom of speech, association and movement must under no circumstances be contingent on taking a vaccine. We’re not dealing with the Spanish flu, here.

-14 ( +5 / -19 )

Yes of course. Quick does not necessarily equate with rushed. While I don’t have a blind faith in “big pharma” or anybody else, I follow the evidence and logic. Also this is being done in the light of such huge public scrutiny both expert and public that if there were failures of procedure leading to harm, the reputational damage would be so great that it would sink even the largest company. So enlightened self interest is one of the strongest defences!

13 ( +16 / -3 )

Just like a sheep.

Better than just like a lemming.

16 ( +26 / -10 )

Yes, of course I would have the vaccine... unless there are medical reasons I see no reason not to. Only the tinfoil hat brigade would refuse it unless on medical grounds.

Just like a sheep.

-18 ( +10 / -28 )

A rushed vaccine? Na...

By the time it's available TO ALL (as per the title), we'll have enough feedbacks and fully tested options.

ie not before 2022

0 ( +8 / -8 )

Yes, of course I would have the vaccine... unless there are medical reasons I see no reason not to. Only the tinfoil hat brigade would refuse it unless on medical grounds.

13 ( +21 / -8 )

A rushed vaccine? Na...

But there's someone name Ito something... who wants to make it mandatory... check it out

-18 ( +8 / -26 )

Yeah, and even some of those vaccines have resulted in severe side effects. Such as the HPV vaccine resulting in hundreds of deaths and thousands of paralysis according to the VAERS data.

That is false and I have already proved it to you, studies of that same VAERS data have proved that vaccinated people have the same risk of health problems and death than non-vaccinated people.

There is no extra risk from having the HPV vaccine. On the other hand It has already been proved that HCQ is irrelevant in the treatment for COVID-19 and it is actually increasing the risk of death or other problems. And vaccines are still in very high demand even with drugs that are hugely more effective than HCQ appeared to be like dexametasone, that so completely proves your point as false that you have to avoid even mentioning in your responses.

If your criticism of a vaccine completely depends on information that have been proved to false to you, it may be time to reconsidering why you keep them instead of accepting reality.

14 ( +28 / -14 )

with no professional medical expertise , i see no other way but to trust the makers of the vaccine. 

Oh, you trust bigpharma! Perhaps you should have a look at this paper.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/10.1001/jama.2020.18740?guestAccessKey=bf354508-0f93-48b2-aea8-f948c9d4dad7&utm_source=For_The_Media&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=ftm_links&utm_content=tfl&utm_term=111720

Other vaccines have taken up to a decade to be developed, this one took less than a year.

Yeah, and even some of those vaccines have resulted in severe side effects. Such as the HPV vaccine resulting in hundreds of deaths and thousands of paralysis according to the VAERS data.

Also, to allow the rapid use of this vaccine they had to ignore all the positive data on the effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine (https://c19study.com); with bigpharma trolls insisting there is a consensus on HCQ not being beneficial.

I certainly will not be taking any of these new rushed experimental vaccines.

-10 ( +17 / -27 )

Some of us won't have a choice when we're ordered/directed to be vaccinated, but personally, I wouldn't hesitate.

7 ( +19 / -12 )

The virus will not respect their decision. It may infect them, and through them be spread to others. Giving the virus the opportunity to kill even more people.

Correct. But, you can’t force people to do something they don’t want. There’s a number of reasons why some people will choose not to take this vaccine. One of the reasons is valid, just like the previous poster said:

Other vaccines have taken up to a decade to be developed, this one took less than a year.

9 ( +20 / -11 )

Keen to travel. I imagine other countries may not allow unvaccinated people to visit. So a yes from me.

11 ( +26 / -15 )

In this case, yes, both for myself and also to increase the overall numbers of resistant people on the planet, so that the virus has ever more trouble and grief on its plate.

7 ( +21 / -14 )

Of course. I’ve had every other vaccine going. Prevention is better than treatment.

12 ( +31 / -19 )

But we also have to understand why some people prefer not to take it. Especially if they’re healthy. And respect their decision.

The virus will not respect their decision. It may infect them, and through them be spread to others. Giving the virus the opportunity to kill even more people.

1 ( +26 / -25 )

I won't take that rushed thing. Other vaccines have taken up to a decade to be developed, this one took less than a year. Even an acquaintance, who happens to be a nurse, told me that she wasn't going to get it due to it being rushed. Maybe after a few years if it doesn't cause any troubles I'll take it, in the mean time you guys go ahead.

3 ( +29 / -26 )

It is always a small risk to take a vaccine, specially a new one, but i think it would be a bigger risk not to take it

This.

But we also have to understand why some people prefer not to take it. Especially if they’re healthy. And respect their decision.

10 ( +27 / -17 )

with no professional medical expertise , i see no other way but to trust the makers of the vaccine. I am much more concerned for the handling and execution of the vaccination in Japan.

It is always a small risk to take a vaccine, specially a new one, but i think it would be a bigger risk not to take it

7 ( +25 / -18 )

1: Allergies or other health concerns that may prevent you from doing so safely.

2: Paranoia.

Another reason is that people sometimes misplace their trust and give it to someone that deceive them into believing vaccines are not the safe and effective measure they have proved to be.

It is important then to make available to them true, precise information so they don't fall for the antivaxxers lies so easily, many times they are perfectly reasonable and smart people, just trusting the wrong person.

7 ( +26 / -19 )

Why wouldn't you?

1: Allergies or other health concerns that may prevent you from doing so safely.

2: Paranoia.

Only number 1 is legitimate.

18 ( +36 / -18 )

Why wouldn't you?

13 ( +37 / -24 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites