Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Had Covid did u vax? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter IC FBGCav
- Start date
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
While that may be a semi-true statement, it's no less true for literally all other vaccines. In fact, last numbers I saw indicated that were even less fatalities with the COVID vaccines. Moreover, the deaths that did occur, have to my knowledge still not been directly attributed to the vaccine. They just occurred post-vaccination and were under review.
If you have information stating otherwise, please do share.
beer 30
Footballguy
I know a CDC link in this thread trying to support vaccines is kinda stupid but I'm doing it regardless. I'm not trying to minimize these deaths but I'm also open minded enough to realize that people die from a variety of things. It's a risk to be sure but one I was willing to accept given the alternatives. It's a personal choice and I respect whatever one you make as an individual but realize, people are going to die from any vaccine that we come up with. It would be a huge statistical anomaly if no one did.
"Over 285 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through May 24, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 4,863 reports of death (0.0017%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine."
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/adverse-events.html
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
That's a pre-print study, first of all. (i.e. not peer-reviewed in how they conducted the survey, etc.). Second of all, I still contend that there are vastly different degrees of "previously infected" that absolutely affect the extent of protection one has going forward. If you had a more severe case, or had lasting symptoms for several days, I'd wager you are fairly well protected similar to (but, IMO, still not as robustly as) being vaccinated. If you had mild or no symptoms, I'd be weary of how robust your natural antibodies are and how long they might last. With the variants like the India one now creeping around looking for unprotected vectors, it's a big risk, IMO, when one could simply vaccinate and have peace of mind.
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
This was one of my concerns as well; However, after doing more research, I was satisfied with what I learned.
- mRNA is very fragile and degrades within 72 hours
- the lipids, another of the things unique to the Covid vaccine, that "carry" the mRNA to its destination leave within a few days also
- the other vaccine ingredients are also cleared from the body quickly
- there is no live virus in these mRNA vaccines
- in the history of ALL vaccines, major side effects have always appeared within the first 2 months
- these vaccines were not rushed; the technology has been around for quite a while and they didn't cut any corners to get these to the market. What they did do was remove a lot of the BS in the process (time between trials, conducting multiple trials at the same time, etc.)-- I say that to say, they are "new" but they've gone through the same safety protocols and rigorous trials as every other vaccine that is currently on the market
I'm pretty sure the Cleveland Clinic knows more about this topic than Nathan R Jessep, FBG scientist.
Ilov80s
Footballguy
Yes mRNA vaccines are not new. As a matter of fact, the technology was so simple and understood that the COVID vacccine was made before a single American had even died of COVID yet. Took them basically a weekend to just take what we knew about mRNA vaccines and update it for COVID19.
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
lol ok bro
but you may want to look up the difference between pre-print papers and peer-reviewed studies before you start relying on those for your information
AAABatteries
Footballguy
Not sure why the jab at NRJ was necessary but whatever. The headline is sensationalized - they are basically talking about prioritization of the vaccine and I agree with that. I doubt serious the Cleveland clinic would say there's no point in getting it because each individual and how long they have antibodies is unknown. If a vaccine is available and not preventing someone else from getting it (which is the case in the US) then there's possible benefits with almost no down side or at least down side that is less than if you contract it again or pass it along.
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
Just thought it was relevant to the topic
Did we not learn anything about forming science based opinions and then sticking to them despite new data over this past year?
Ilov80s
Footballguy
The vaccine is an absolute medical miracle too. We had been working for years and years to harness mRNA as a vaccine or treatment for so many other things like cancer, rabies, etc and in all those cases, it just wasn’t that effective. It’s incredible that in a pandemic when we desperately needed it to work, it didn’t just work but it exceeded anyone’s expectations by a mile in how effective it’s been. I personally think it’s kind of cool participating in one of the great advancements of man. Like getting to fly in a plane or use the telephone when they first were perfected.
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
Indeed. From what I recall reading a little while back, it was the delivery vehicle that gave them most of the problems in using mRNA for other vaccines they've tried this technology with. For COVID, the lipids worked perfectly as their delivery vehicle. Hopefully if they can't use lipids for the others for whatever reasons, maybe this will help them identify something they can use.
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
Yep, and if I didn't already have covid I would have took that risk too. But since there's no proven benefit to getting the vax, no reason to take the risk.
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
Answer me this. If there is no proven benefit to me getting vaxxed, why do it?
Doug B
Footballguy
This is a thing, too. Few people who invoke "long-term side effects" now are going to suddenly be willing to get the vaccine in the future. Next year, it'll be "need a few years of data". In five years, it'll be "could have bad effects down the road." And so on. For nearly all of the current vaccine-hesitant, it will be indefinite can-kicking having nothing to do with information, data, or science.
Last edited by a moderator:
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
I'm not of the opinion that there is no proven benefit to you (or anyone) getting vaccinated, so I can't answer that one for you.
Doug B
Footballguy
... the first trial particpants got them in March of 2020. They're going on 16 months. There's no mystery about this stuff ... no gotchas are coming up. Safety into the future is a firm, definite, known thing.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ilov80s
Footballguy
My thought process would be clarity. We may get info in the future that the vaccine needs a booster or that X vaccine doesn’t protect against Y variant, etc. The info will be clear and the data will be pretty universal. For those had COVID, it just creates some levels of uncertainty. Do you still have the antibodies? For how long will it last? Does it depend on what version or severity of COVID you have? Will the boosters work or will you have to go back and get the original vaccines anyway? What variants will or won’t your antibodies potentially protect you from? I think it’s nice for me to know that I can just follow whatever Moderna recommends and apply it to myself and not have any guesswork.
zazale
Footballguy
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
Moderna has no idea how long the vax is effective for but I am sure they will pump out boosters "just in case".
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
I can't name one firm, definite, known thing other than death. But kudos to your delusions.
Doug B
Footballguy
Seconded. I don't believe that anyone has died as a result of an mRNA vaccination (Moderna, Pfizer). The adenovirus-based vaccines (J&J, AstraZeneca, etc.) were the ones with the rare blood-clot risks.
Doug B
Footballguy
Jayrod
Footballguy
Statistically, getting the vaccine is safer than not getting it. That is a mathematical fact. You may think of yourself as some special type person where the virus is less harmful than the vaccine but to believe that is definitively delusional.
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
I had the virus, I have antibodies. Show me statistical proof getting a vax will help me. I'll save you time, you can't. I am the one using facts you all are in your opinions.
Statistically, getting the vaccine is safer than not getting it. That is a mathematical fact. You may think of yourself as some special type person where the virus is less harmful than the vaccine but to believe that is definitively delusional.
notoriousbill
Footballguy
It's a personal choice. I prefer not to get the vaccine having had COVID. Judge me as you may, it doesn't matter.
Those who chose to get vaccinated after having COVID had their reasons just like those that chose not to have their reasons.
I have friends and family that did and those that didn't after having COVID. I also have friends that never got COVID, got the vaccines and then got COVID.
I wish everyone the best of health!
Those who chose to get vaccinated after having COVID had their reasons just like those that chose not to have their reasons.
I have friends and family that did and those that didn't after having COVID. I also have friends that never got COVID, got the vaccines and then got COVID.
I wish everyone the best of health!
Hankmoody
Footballguy
It wasn't. That wasn't a Cleveland Clinic article, it was a hack job based on something that other scientists haven't had a chance to review and possibly debunk. It's the Tenpenny of articles.Just thought it was relevant to the topic
Did we not learn anything about forming science based opinions and then sticking to them despite new data over this past year?
Cold Dead Hands
Footballguy
The question also goes the other way. Show statistical proof that the vaccine will not benefit you. Here is the thing, when there is a lack of data pointing you in a direction the you look at the data you do have.
People can get reinfected. The vaccine is safer than COVID infection. Therefore, getting the vaccine is statistically more beneficial than not getting the vaccine for previously infected people. And the immunity conveyed by the vaccine is proven, immunity and duration provided by previous infection is still under debate.
The vaccine protects those who have received it and those who have yet to receive it through lowering the R0. Receiving these safe vaccines is a common good.
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
I look at it as an unnecessary risk at this point. That simple. You might not and great, get one every day, I don't care. Do you big boy!
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
Fyi, I am sure we will hear more and more of this. The wife of my co worker who was vaxxed in March just tested positive. She's a nurse.
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
Additionally, the vaccines (all of them, AFAIK) have shown to be effective against all known variants to date. They do not have any assurance yet that natural immunity has the same benefit, as it is a more of wait and see approach.
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
I know of a few also who have tested positive post-vaccination. My question is... how severe was her infection and did she have symptoms? Keep in mind these vaccines (as with any vaccines) are not 100% effective, and although they do now have the data to show that they also tame spread (reducing infectious viral load one carries), the main purpose of the vaccines has always been to reduce severity of infections and avoid hospitalization/death.
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
She got tested twice and her second positive was yesterday. He hasn't mentioned the extent of her symptoms yet.
Doug B
Footballguy
The vaccination has two main jobs:
1) Make identifiable infection far less likely, and
2) Make symptomatic infection far less likely
IMHO, the only thing that counts as a "vaccine failure" is a severe-symptom breakthrough case. If you were vaccinated and still end up with a COVID infection and ~48 hours of annoying cold symptoms or something like that ... that was a win for the vaccine.
1) Make identifiable infection far less likely, and
2) Make symptomatic infection far less likely
IMHO, the only thing that counts as a "vaccine failure" is a severe-symptom breakthrough case. If you were vaccinated and still end up with a COVID infection and ~48 hours of annoying cold symptoms or something like that ... that was a win for the vaccine.
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
Of course, I don't think anyone is debating this. I'm also not debating if it works or not.
Zegras11
Footballguy
Cav is a master baiter from way back.
This is the baitiest bait thread I've ever seen and I'm falling for it
The Commish
Footballguy
The differences between this vax approach and the traditional vax approaches are SIGNIFICANT to the point where I don't think it's honest to compare these to anything we've seen in the past. After having this drilled into my head by my lovely wife (in the field) and reading, I agree with this 1000000000%.Nathan R. Jessep said:
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
Ask her if vax's can have a negative effect on the bodies immune system and what happens when variants protein markers change and the vax send antibodies to fight against the original markers and how that might compromise your immune system from adapting to the new threat.
The Commish
Footballguy
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
I mean I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last night but this is pushing it.
If the vax recognizes the virus the protein markers in the original covid strain. And with each variant the markers change as the virus changes. Then can the vax lead to sending wrong antibodies or simply not recognize a variant as a threat.
Nathan R. Jessep
Footballguy
Will wait for his wife's official answer, but if I am understanding you correctly, the "booster" shot theory would come into play, similar to what they do with the current flu shots. But of note, the vaccines are effective on all currently known variants, so thus far it's a non-issue. I'm not sure they know the same to be true for natural infection based antibodies yet.
