What's new
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!

Will you get a Covid vaccine when available? (3 Viewers)

Will you get a Covid vaccine when available?

  • Yes, as soon as it comes out

    Votes: 236 55.4%
  • Yes, but not for a while until some time passes

    Votes: 93 21.8%
  • No, I don't think it will be safe

    Votes: 19 4.5%
  • No, I don't think it will be effective

    Votes: 5 1.2%
  • No, I already had Covid

    Votes: 13 3.1%
  • Unsure, but leaning yes

    Votes: 32 7.5%
  • Unsure, but leaning no

    Votes: 28 6.6%

  • Total voters
    426
Uh, you been watching the news lately, or have kids?  Everyone and I mean everyone is coming back with delta stories.  It's just out of the news cycle mostly at this point for reasons I can't explain.  Here's the one that seems to be getting national traction, but the other big camps like Pine Cove are getting hammered also.

https://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/health/article/Delta-variant-confirmed-at-Houston-area-church-16296602.php
Uh, I said in the first sentence of my response that I had two kinds under 12. I also had a relative die of Covid last year, so I assure you I take this s##t very seriously, and have been following all of the latest news on Delta and constantly asking myself if we need to adjust how we're protecting our kids. And so far, I haven't seen anything that leads me to think that Delta is a game-changer in terms of posing the same kind of risk to kids that Classic Covid poses to unvaccinated adults. Our policy has been to let our kids participate in group activities like summer camp and, in the fall, in-person school, but still have them wear masks indoors. So far, at least, I see no need to reassess that.

I completely understand -- and share -- your concern about the prospect of Delta and other variants putting us in increased danger. But using words like "decimate" doesn't seem warranted given the evidence we're seeing so far

 
Volcano erupts. Half the cavemen jump in the lava. Half the cave men run away to the mountains and hide. Rinse repeat each generation.  Eventually, the people who jump in the lava are gone. 

 
You don't see the clinical or moral argument for reducing viral spread among the population, making it less likely that new variants will emerge and saving lives?  :confused:
For the population lagging in the vaccine percentages, I just don't see the issue.  The at risk population is largely vaccinated.  :shrug:

You can protect yourself now, or not.  Each person has their own situation, and I totally understand people not wanting to get a new vaccine when they have next to no need to worry about Covid to begin with.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
No. Masks or not, the immune system will work just fine. 
I was referring to something like the Hygiene Hypothesis, which has been studied extensively in diseases such as Crohns,  with mixed results. If I wear a mask for the next year, and prevent the flu (BTW,  I get a flu shot annually) and multiple other viral infections, many which may be asymptomatic,  will I be at greater risk when I decide to take off the mask. 

>>Exposure to several different types of microorganisms in early childhood trains the immune system to keep a healthy balance between attacking and tolerating intruders. Children raised in cleaner environments are less likely to be exposed to a variety of microbes in early childhood. Consequently, when these children are older, their immune systems are unfamiliar with normal microorganisms and thus overreact to their presence. Experts believe that this causes the inflammatory immune response that leads to IBD conditions like Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis.<<

 
For the population lagging in the vaccine percentages, I just don't see the issue.  The at risk population is largely vaccinated.  :shrug:

You can protect yourself now, or not.  Each person has their own situation ...
Disagree with the bolded -- everyone in society is in the same soup so long as healthy people unknowingly spread COVID to others while asymptomatic. And the chain of transmission through healthy asymptomatics (including children) can be several people long -- it's not even necessarily about the familiars in one person's life.

There's some necessary social reciprocity about all this that too many people are discounting.

 
My buddy didn’t get the vaccine. Has a wife who got it and two kids. Got sick the other day and it’s covid. Even when he found out he got it he texted me saying his immune system would handle it blah blah (he’s extremely healthy) — but now he’s been down for 3 days and is in misery. Super high temp, wife considering taking him to the hospital, kids freaked out and now he can’t use his tickets to game 5 of the Cup Final tonight to watch the Bolts try to win the Cup. Also couldn’t help his wife prep for the tropical storm which rolled through here yesterday. 
 

Just a total idiot. I can’t stand how stupid he’s been about this. 
Update: his daughter now has it. What a selfish ahole he is. 

 
Disagree with the bolded -- everyone in society is in the same soup so long as healthy people unknowingly spread COVID to others while asymptomatic. And the chain of transmission through healthy asymptomatics (including children) can be several people long -- it's not even necessarily about the familiars in one person's life.

There's some necessary social reciprocity about all this that too many people are discounting.
If the at risk population is largely vaccinated (75%+ last I saw)... what difference does it make if those not at risk are transmitting it to others not at risk?

If you are in the at risk segment, and you haven't protected yourself - that is now on you.  You can no longer blame other people for your covid.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
If the at risk population is largely vaccinated (75%+ last I saw)... what difference does it make if those not at risk are transmitting it to others not at risk?
Because vaccination protection is not perfect. And is less perfect as one moves more into the at-risk categories.

Aside from that: Infected asymptomatics provide a continuous reservoir for mutations to occur. Once again: it's not at all about the individual.

 
Because vaccination protection is not perfect. And is less perfect as one moves more into the at-risk categories.

Aside from that: Infected asymptomatics provide a continuous reservoir for mutations to occur. Once again: it's not at all about the individual.
No - we are past the individual.  We are talking about a minority of people at this point who aren't vaccinated.  These conversations also always seem to ignore those who have had it and are likely in the clear.  So more like a super minority.

The "variants" we hear about everyday simply aren't as scary as they want us to believe.  Not even a blip.

Your scenario just isn't happening.  Quite the opposite.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Because vaccination protection is not perfect. And is less perfect as one moves more into the at-risk categories.

Aside from that: Infected asymptomatics provide a continuous reservoir for mutations to occur. Once again: it's not at all about the individual.
And not everyone is eligible to receive the vaccination due to health conditions.

 
No - we are past the individual.  We are talking about a minority of people at this point who aren't vaccinated.
Second-to-last sentence in my post :shrug:   Might not be a compelling point for you, but for the benefit of the house I stand by it.

 
No - we are past the individual.  We are talking about a minority of people at this point who aren't vaccinated.  These conversations also always seem to ignore those who have had it and are likely in the clear.  So more like a super minority.

The "variants" we hear about everyday simply aren't as scary as they want us to believe.  Not even a blip.

Your scenario just isn't happening.  Quite the opposite.
Who wants you to believe?  Forget the news. Forget Fox, CNN, CSPAN, right and left wing news outlets. Just look at data from, let's say Israel and the UK, and what is happening right now in those places. Take Delta for example. Yep it's in the news. Why? because it's now causing the majority of cases that are occurring in several countries. That may not be "scary" per se, but it's definitely a cause for concern. We've experienced the same resurgences they have after following nearly similar protocols, relaxations, etc. throughout the pandemic. For whatever reason, we are a little behind them on the overall timeline, but following the same trajectories.  It seems we still haven't learned our lessons yet. 

Also, the "ones who have had it" are definitely included in the "herd immunity" discussion, but conversely, we also definitely know many of those people do not have nearly as robust antibodies as do the vaccinated, and studies are already showing that less robust antibodies are much more susceptible to Delta. 

 
If the at risk population is largely vaccinated (75%+ last I saw)... what difference does it make if those not at risk are transmitting it to others not at risk?

If you are in the at risk segment, and you haven't protected yourself - that is now on you.  You can no longer blame other people for your covid.
Hundreds of people are still dying from Covid in this country every day. That's way better than where we were at last fall but I would rather not see that happening, especially because many of those deaths are easily preventable. 

What really puzzles me is that I've seen you and many others use language ("no clinical and moral case", "why would anyone care about someone else's vaccination status?") that suggests you not only disagree with the logic of communitarianism, but find it utterly incomprehensible. But is it really so hard to understand why people might not want to see others die?

Related question: Do you support seatbelt laws? I've always thought that was the ultimate test of dogmatic libertarianism. The only people protected by seatbelts are those who wear them, so the pure libertarian view should be that if those people want to endanger their own lives, they have the right to. At the same time, the net effect of seatbelt laws is that, in exchange for a minimal imposition, fewer people die every year.

Vaccinations aren't exactly the same thing (and for the record, I don't support government-mandated vaccinations), but the principle is the same. I want as many people as possible to get vaccinated not just because I'm scared for my unvaccinated children or that a breakthrough variant might endanger me. Those are valid concerns, but they also buy into the framework that the only thing that matters is the individual. I want to see everyone vaccinated because we have it in our power to basically prevent anyone from dying of Covid and I want to see us accomplish that.

 
Hundreds of people are still dying from Covid in this country every day. That's way better than where we were at last fall but I would rather not see that happening, especially because many of those deaths are easily preventable. 

What really puzzles me is that I've seen you and many others use language ("no clinical and moral case", "why would anyone care about someone else's vaccination status?") that suggests you not only disagree with the logic of communitarianism, but find it utterly incomprehensible. But is it really so hard to understand why people might not want to see others die?

Related question: Do you support seatbelt laws? I've always thought that was the ultimate test of dogmatic libertarianism. The only people protected by seatbelts are those who wear them, so the pure libertarian view should be that if those people want to endanger their own lives, they have the right to. At the same time, the net effect of seatbelt laws is that, in exchange for a minimal imposition, fewer people die every year.

Vaccinations aren't exactly the same thing (and for the record, I don't support government-mandated vaccinations), but the principle is the same. I want as many people as possible to get vaccinated not just because I'm scared for my unvaccinated children or that a breakthrough variant might endanger me. Those are valid concerns, but they also buy into the framework that the only thing that matters is the individual. I want to see everyone vaccinated because we have it in our power to basically prevent anyone from dying of Covid and I want to see us accomplish that.
We don't disagree... I want as many vaccinated as well.

I just don't get the mass high-horse people are jumping on over young healthy people not getting vaccinated.  I can't convince myself they need to have the vaccine, so I can't judge them for it - in fact I find myself defending it.  :shrug:  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
We don't disagree... I want as many vaccinated as well.

I just don't get the mass high-horse people are jumping on over young healthy people not getting vaccinated.  I can't convince myself they need to have the vaccine, so I can't judge them for it - in fact I find myself defending it.  :shrug:  
Because the longer covid stays around—the more it effects all of our lives—young, old, fat, skinny, rich, poor..everybody.   It has been proven that if you let this disease stay around and spread—it comes back to effect our communities and economies in a detrimental manner.   It is in the best interest of every body to do what they can to help prevent the spread of this disease and to get the numbers low enough to eradicate it.  This includes the “young and healthy”.  If they don’t want to get vaccinated—they should mask up.  The problem is that a lot of people that don’t want to get vaccinated are the very same people that complain about masks and other protocols that are aimed and limiting the spread of this thing for the good of everybody (including themselves). 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Because the longer covid stays around—the more it effects all of our lives—young, old, fat, skinny, rich, poor..everybody.   It has been proven that if you let this disease stay around and spread—it comes back to effect our communities and economies in a detrimental manner.   It is in the best interest of every body to do what they can to help prevent the spread of this disease and to get the numbers low enough to eradicate it.  This includes the “young and healthy”.  If they don’t want to get vaccinated—they should mask up.  The problem is that a lot of people that don’t want to get vaccinated are the very same people that complain about masks and other protocols that are aimed and limiting the spread of this thing for the good of everybody (including themselves). 
This has become like debating religion - the dogma is impressive.  

You just white washed over so many nuances I don't even know where to start.  You can't have the individual conversation because you only allow for a binary option.  You have your position and opinion - all disagreements from large to small, black to gray to white get lumped into the other single box and labelled together.

 
I addressed that extensively.

The much more compelling question to me is why I did it at all.
i know.  some of the back and forth, was with me.  and i have zero issues, with you making a decision, on how you vaccinate your kids.

it just doesn't jive with your statement of you wanting as many people vaccinated as possible.   :shrug:  

 
I addressed that extensively.

The much more compelling question to me is why I did it at all.
Have you seen the data out of Israel regarding the infections they are seeing in people who have only had 1 dose vs the people who have had both doses?  If I told you (and provided the links to said data) that Delta has an easier time getting around the defenses of those with only one vaccine dose, would that change your mind or give you pause at all?

 
This has become like debating religion - the dogma is impressive.  

You just white washed over so many nuances I don't even know where to start.  You can't have the individual conversation because you only allow for a binary option.  You have your position and opinion - all disagreements from large to small, black to gray to white get lumped into the other single box and labelled together.
No it hasn’t become like debating religion—you resort to making the “religion” example about anybody who brings up a point that you don’t happen to agree with. Its a built in excuse for you. You are looking for confirmation bias to support your “tunnel vision-like” stance on things.  The fact of the matter is that anything that cripples our communities and our societies is something that every individual in that society has a vested interest in being against.  Covid is exactly that.  We all pay taxes because we all enjoy driving on paved roads and having emergency services when needed.  That’s a personal sacrifice that we all make (that sucks) that for the betterment of the community as a whole.  It has been proven that covid will not be conquered battling it on an individual level.  The best success has happened during coordinated and community action where the vast majority of people work together collectively to reduce the numbers.  That’s just a fact. If you want to ignore reality and use the confirmation bias of disproven and fake articles and artificial facts to somehow support your stance —so be it.  In the meantime—learn not to get offended when you ask a question and don’t always get the answer that you want to hear.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
We don't disagree... I want as many vaccinated as well.

I just don't get the mass high-horse people are jumping on over young healthy people not getting vaccinated.  I can't convince myself they need to have the vaccine, so I can't judge them for it - in fact I find myself defending it.  :shrug:  
I'm not going to argue the "libertarian vs communitarian" issue with you. That's ultimately a values debate, and you feel how you feel.

But I"m still really flummoxed by this idea that you "just don't get" why people want others to get vaccinated. People in this thread have told you over and over again that they don't want any more people to die from this virus. Whether or not you agree with that position, is it really all that hard to understand where it's coming from? It seems forehead-smackingly obvious to me.

By way of analogy, I disagree with pro-lifers that abortion is murder. But I would never in a million years say that I don't understand their dogmatism on the issue. If you believe that life begins at conception, then aborting a month-old fetus is the same thing as murdering a one-year-old child or a 30-year-old adult. Of course you're going to be dogmatic about that.

Similarly, pro-vaxxers see the tens of thousands of Americans who have died in the months since vaccines became universally available to all adults and view those deaths as a thoroughly unnecessary tragedy. Some will react with anger, some will do or say irrational things in response, but everyone should be able to understand the impulse that motivates those reactions.

So tell me: What am I missing here? What's the part that still confuses you?

 
I was referring to something like the Hygiene Hypothesis, which has been studied extensively in diseases such as Crohns,  with mixed results. If I wear a mask for the next year, and prevent the flu (BTW,  I get a flu shot annually) and multiple other viral infections, many which may be asymptomatic,  will I be at greater risk when I decide to take off the mask. 

>>Exposure to several different types of microorganisms in early childhood trains the immune system to keep a healthy balance between attacking and tolerating intruders. Children raised in cleaner environments are less likely to be exposed to a variety of microbes in early childhood. Consequently, when these children are older, their immune systems are unfamiliar with normal microorganisms and thus overreact to their presence. Experts believe that this causes the inflammatory immune response that leads to IBD conditions like Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis.<<
Sure. Kids kept in a bubble are more prone to allergies and stuff associated with the microbiome later in life. Adults wearing PPE aren’t impairing their immune systems in any way TMK.

 
4 million confirmed dead. estimates of 6x those figures. We have China reporting 4500 dead (Seriously?) and North Korea with zero, jeebus. Let's say the actual number is 2.5x, that's 10 million people, and I'd wager that figure is low.

I'm sure the detractors will come in and say the 4 million figure is exaggerated, so the 10 million dead figure is just erroneous, which it may be, but do we really know?

 
4 million confirmed dead. estimates of 6x those figures. We have China reporting 4500 dead (Seriously?) and North Korea with zero, jeebus. Let's say the actual number is 2.5x, that's 10 million people, and I'd wager that figure is low.

I'm sure the detractors will come in and say the 4 million figure is exaggerated, so the 10 million dead figure is just erroneous, which it may be, but do we really know?
My cousin’s best friend’s sister’s boyfriend died in a motorcycle accident and they classified it as Covid therefore the numbers are way lower than what’s been reported

 
My cousin’s best friend’s sister’s boyfriend died in a motorcycle accident and they classified it as Covid therefore the numbers are way lower than what’s been reported
And don't forget the aunt that works in the billing department at the hospital and they were forced to call everything Covid. :coffee:  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Preliminary, and will require replication and corroboration. Still worth reporting IMHO. Really hoping this holds up over future studies:

Pfizer and Moderna Vaccines Likely to Produce Lasting Immunity, Study Finds (MSN/New York Times, 6/28/2021)

The vaccines made by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna set off a persistent immune reaction in the body that may protect against the coronavirus for years, scientists reported on Monday.
Some corroboration out of Sweden:

Antibodies after mild covid-19 last for at least a year and also bind the new Delta variant (Danderyds sjukhus [Danderyds Hospital], Stockholm, 7/15/2021)

The COMMUNITY study, which examines long-term immunity after covid-19, has now followed participants for a year and sees that the vast majority still have high levels of antibodies one year after infection. It has been investigated whether the antibodies bind both to the original virus and to a number of new variants, including Alpha (formerly called B 1.117) and Delta, which are currently spreading in Sweden and Europe. The results suggest continued good protection one year after natural infection.

....

By examining the study participants as regularly as every four months, we have collected unique data that shows the course over a year. In summary, we can say that we see a generally good antibody response one year after mild covid-19. One uncertainty has previously been whether the immunity after natural infection of the original virus also protects against the new virus variants, such as Alpha and Delta. It is reassuring that we see that the antibodies also bind these more contagious virus variants, says Charlotte Thålin, specialist doctor and responsible researcher for the COMMUNITY study at Danderyd Hospital.

 
I can't get it to translate to English. This seems to fly in the face of previous larger scale studies that I had seen (thankfully, since this one had much better findings).  How many in this study? And what did they classify as "mild" Covid?
I'll post the English-language text below in full since the article is a press release and is not from a pay site:

The COMMUNITY study, which examines long-term immunity after covid-19, has now followed participants for a year and sees that the vast majority still have high levels of antibodies one year after infection. It has been investigated whether the antibodies bind both to the original virus and to a number of new variants, including Alpha (formerly called B 1.117) and Delta, which are currently spreading in Sweden and Europe. The results suggest continued good protection one year after natural infection.

In the spring of 2020, samples were collected from more than 2,000 employees at Danderyd Hospital, where about 19 percent were shown to have antibodies to SARS-CoV-2. Samples were also collected from more than 100 inpatient covid-19 patients. Now a year has passed and the 12-month follow-up has been completed.

The study took a closer look at a group of study participants who fell ill in the spring of 2020 and who have not yet been vaccinated. In this group, it has been possible to study immunity after natural infection over a period of one year. The results show that over 80 percent of those who had mild symptoms in the spring of 2020 still, a year later, have measurable antibody levels. Corresponding analyzes have also been performed in the group of patients who were hospitalized for covid-19, and all have continued measurable antibody levels one year after the infection.

The researchers have also looked at the ability of the antibodies to bind the new virus variants, and found that they also bind the Alpha and Delta variants, which now account for the majority of the spread in Sweden and Europe.

- By examining the study participants as regularly as every four months, we have collected unique data that shows the course over a year. In summary, we can say that we see a generally good antibody response one year after mild covid-19. One uncertainty has previously been whether the immunity after natural infection of the original virus also protects against the new virus variants, such as Alpha and Delta. It is reassuring that we see that the antibodies also bind these more contagious virus variants, says Charlotte Thålin, specialist doctor and responsible researcher for the COMMUNITY study at Danderyd Hospital.

- Despite this positive message, it is important that everyone continues to follow recommendations from authorities, and get vaccinated regardless of whether they have had covid-19 or not. We see that the antibody levels in those who previously had covid-19 rise significantly after vaccination, and we do not yet know how the levels correlate to the duration of protection, says Sebastian Havervall, assistant chief physician at Danderyd Hospital and doctoral student in the project.

The COMMUNITY study continues

- Now the COMMUNITY study continues and the next sampling will take place in August / September when most participants are probably vaccinated. We will continue to compare the immune system after natural infection and after vaccination, as well as look at the immune response for different types and combinations of vaccines. The study group is unique and we will continue to follow the participants with ongoing sampling in the future, says Charlotte Thålin.

Facts about the COMMUNITY study

The study is run and carried out in close collaboration between Danderyd Hospital (principal of the study), Karolinska Institutet, KTH, SciLifeLab, Uppsala University and the Swedish Public Health Agency.

The research group includes from Danderyd Hospital and Karolinska Institutet specialist doctor and responsible researcher Charlotte Thålin , assistant chief physician and doctoral student Sebastian Havervall , specialist doctor and doctoral student Ulrika Marking , chief physician and Med dr Max Gordon , from KTH professors Sophia Hober and Peter Nilsson , from Uppsala University Med dr Mikael Åberg , Associate Professor and Senior Lecturer Sara Mangsbo and Professor Mia Phillipson and from Karolinska Institutet and the Public Health Agency Associate Professor Jonas Klingström and Med. Dr. Kim Blom .

The study is funded by Jonas and Christina af Jochnick Foundation, Leif Lundblad with family, Region Stockholm, Knut and Alice Wallenbergs foundation, SciLifeLab, Familjen Erling-Perssons Stiftelse and Atlas Copco.
There are 2,100 study participants. Based on a reading of the third paragraph above, "mild COVID" was defined as "not requiring hospitalization".

 
I'll post the English-language text below in full since the article is a press release and is not from a pay site:

There are 2,100 study participants. Based on a reading of the third paragraph above, "mild COVID" was defined as "not requiring hospitalization".
Thanks for posting it. I wish they weren't so vague with their descriptions. Maybe they'll publish an official pre-print, etc. with more details. 

 
Courtesy of superchuck500 over at Saintsreport:

Federal district court in Indiana upholds vaccine policy for Indiana University. The policy is that in order to be on campus and attend in-person classes, students must be vaccinated, or they must wear masks and use social distancing.

This isn't surprising, as vaccine requirements have been upheld in the past in other applications and this isn't the first case upholding Covid-related vaccine rules at public institutions.

Klaassen v. The Trustees of Indiana University (LINK)
These court cases are going consistently one way -- in favor of de facto near-mandatory public vaccination in many public spheres.

 
Courtesy of superchuck500 over at Saintsreport:

These court cases are going consistently one way -- in favor of de facto near-mandatory public vaccination in many public spheres.
That’s good. I’m hoping my son will be attending all classes full time this fall and he’s fully vaccinated. In fact, he’s been working at their COVID lab this summer and likely will unfortunately have enough to keep working part time.

Hopefully, more colleges put this type of plan in place to spur more college kids to get the vaccine. Still time.

 
I’m a bit closer to getting the vaccine with the delta variant data.   I’m not concerned for my own well being but general increases in cases have me reconsidering the vaccine.  
Good call.  I would not want to take my chances with the delta variant if I were unvaccinated.

 
Good call.  I would not want to take my chances with the delta variant if I were unvaccinated.
My friend I mentioned upthread just felt good enough the other day to resume work/life. 3 weeks in bed, guy is a marathoner and tough mudder. Told his wife he’s finally going to get the vax now. Thankfully their young kid who caught it had no issues at all.  

 
My friend I mentioned upthread just felt good enough the other day to resume work/life. 3 weeks in bed, guy is a marathoner and tough mudder. Told his wife he’s finally going to get the vax now. Thankfully their young kid who caught it had no issues at all.  
Yet...

 
My employer, large health system, is requiring all employees (minor exceptions) to be vaxxed by November 1st. Am happy but would have liked to see even sooner.

 
(Cross-posted from TPF)

For those reading this thread on the sidelines ...

Covid-19 vaccine myths: These reasons for not getting a shot don’t hold up. In fact, they’ll set the US back (CNN, 7/19/2021)

Here are the reasons specifically addressed in the article:

- ’I don’t want to get Covid-19 from the vaccine’
- ’We don’t know what the long-term side effects are’
- ’I’ve already had Covid-19, so I don’t need to be vaccinated’
- ’The vaccine might hurt my fertility’
- ’It’s none of your business if I don’t get vaccinated’
- ’I’m young and healthy, so I don’t need to get vaccinated’
- ’These vaccines only have emergency use authorization, not full FDA approval’
- ’My faith will protect me, so I don’t need to get vaccinated’
- ’I might not be able to afford a vaccine’


 
(Cross-posted from TPF)

For those reading this thread on the sidelines ...

Covid-19 vaccine myths: These reasons for not getting a shot don’t hold up. In fact, they’ll set the US back (CNN, 7/19/2021)

Here are the reasons specifically addressed in the article:

- ’I don’t want to get Covid-19 from the vaccine’
- ’We don’t know what the long-term side effects are’
- ’I’ve already had Covid-19, so I don’t need to be vaccinated’
- ’The vaccine might hurt my fertility’
- ’It’s none of your business if I don’t get vaccinated’
- ’I’m young and healthy, so I don’t need to get vaccinated’
- ’These vaccines only have emergency use authorization, not full FDA approval’
- ’My faith will protect me, so I don’t need to get vaccinated’
- ’I might not be able to afford a vaccine’
except for maybe fertility, I think we've covered all those in this very thread :hifive:  

 
The Life Cycle Of A COVID-19 Vaccine Lie (NPR, 7/20/2021)

Misinformation about COVID-19 vaccines can appear almost anywhere: from an uncle's Facebook post to a well-trusted news commentator. But where does it come from, and why do some myths spread further than others?

With the help of the internet research firm Graphika, NPR analyzed the rise of one persistent set of lies about COVID-19 vaccines: that they can affect female fertility.

Despite a mountain of scientific evidence showing the vaccines are safe and effective, the false information persists.

Graphika's data analysis tools allow the firm to track key points at which a piece of information is shared or amplified. It can illustrate how many of these kinds of lies often go viral.

...

Step 1: Start with a kernel of truth

After receiving the COVID-19 vaccine this spring, "a lot of women noted heavy menstrual periods," says Alice Lu-Culligan, an MD-Ph.D. candidate at Yale University who studies the immune system and reproductive health.

Lu-Culligan says that immune cells play an important role in menstruation, and so it is in fact possible that the vaccine could temporarily alter that process. "It's very plausible that you could have abnormalities to the typical menstrual cycle," she says.

...

Step 2: Find an influencer to spread doubts and questions

... One of the people reading [the 'COVID-19 Vaccine Side Effects' Facebook group] page was an anti-vaccine campaigner named Naomi Wolf. Formerly best known for her writing about feminism, Wolf has, over the years, drifted into anti-vaccine advocacy. "She is a very highly followed influencer in what we call the pseudo-medical community," Smith says.

Wolf is not a medical doctor, and yet on April 19, she tweeted out a link to the Facebook group along with this message: "Hundreds of women on this page say that they are having bleeding/clotting after vaccination, or that they bleed oddly AROUND vaccinated women. Unconfirmed, needs more investigation, but lots of reports."

Smith points out that Wolf is using an old trick: by saying something "needs more investigation," she's raising doubts, without presenting facts that can be refuted.

...

Step 3: Pile on some related myths

Wolf's tweet also seamlessly inserted a myth: that somehow vaccinated women could pass side effects on to the unvaccinated.

Lu-Culligan says that's absolutely not the case. She adds that this myth seems to echo another popular falsehood: that somehow women who live together can influence each other's cycles.

Wolf kept tweeting and piling on more misinformation in question form: Can vaccines cause infertility? Miscarriages?

...

Step 4: Make waves in mainstream media

Days after Wolf started tweeting about vaccines and fertility, other influencers began picking it up, and a few clickbait websites wrote fake news stories.

But it was the real news that gave the lies their biggest boost. About a week after the initial tweets, a Miami private school, the Centner Academy, announced it would no longer allow vaccinated teachers into the classroom. It said there were too many questions about whether the vaccine could spread to unvaccinated mothers and children.

The school's CEO, Leila Centner, is an established anti-vaccine advocate, so her decision wasn't surprising. But the ban made national news anyway.

...

Step 5: Morph to fit the messenger

Finally, because misinformation about vaccines is not grounded in data, it can mutate to fit any political message or worldview.

Vaccine myths about fertility and reproduction are particularly potent because they affect a large swath of the population, particularly when they incorporate myths about vaccinated women spreading the side effects. "It's kind of a one-size-fits-all theory in some ways, and the potential impact is everyone, rather than one specific community," Smith says.

In the weeks following the initial wave of coverage, others were using these ideas to grab audiences. Conservative commentator Candace Owens brought the link between vaccines and menstruation up on Instagram. In a six-minute video questioning vaccine safety, Owens never directly repeated the lies about fertility but didn't refute them either.

...

Step 6: Repeat the cycle with new lies

By late June, the lies about fertility had spread everywhere from France to Brazil. But then, Smith says, they started fading away.

"It seems to have kind of fallen by the wayside in terms of the COVID-19 news cycle that happens in these spaces on the internet," she says.

And that's the last lesson about the lies: They don't stick around. They grab the attention, raise questions and doubt, but there's no substance there. So once they've shocked those they're meant to engage, they disappear.

Or more properly, they're replaced by a new, incredible story.

 
The Life Cycle Of A COVID-19 Vaccine Lie (NPR, 7/20/2021)
Can someone find a bunch of lawyers or DAs to sue/arrest these idiots on behalf of all the people who die of COVID who could have been vaccinated? It’s one thing to believe a schill like this and it’s another to be the creator of misinformation that truly has caused people to die. In the truest sense of the word, that Wolf lady is a murderer.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top