What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Can We Civilly Discuss Thoughts On Vaccination? A Poll. (1 Viewer)

Where would you land among these descriptions?

  • Vaccinated and no regret

    Votes: 292 82.5%

  • Vaccinated but some regret

    Votes: 18 5.1%

  • Not Vaccinated and don't plan to

    Votes: 32 9.0%

  • Not Vaccinated but considering it

    Votes: 12 3.4%
  • Total voters
    354
Sweet J said:
Bottomfeeder Sports said:
He is referencing those that argue these vaccines are still very much untested because it takes years of data to prove they are safe.  Which is generally rebutted by the medical guys asking which vaccine historically didn't show adverse effects relatively shortly after introduction.

Basically it is the argument that an unlikely, unknown future risk from the vaccine should be given much greater weight than the better but not fully known risk of getting Covid.
Click to expand...


the funny thing is that I get that argument. History is replete with the medical field giving us stuff that turns out to be harmful. Where they lose me is with talks of vast conspiracies or attempts by the government of "controlling' the population, or even intentionally depopulating the world. Just wacky stuff. 

If we could limit the arguments to those based in a reasonable sense of reality, there is a conversation to be had. I mean, at least I get the argument that someone doesn't want to take the vaccine because it hasn't been tested enough. I disagree with it, but I understand where it's coming from.

But the level of anger/snark/vitriol around all this is disheartening. 
Click to expand...
It's more basic than even this.  There are many who associate the time it takes to get to market with a vaccine's safety.  They don't go deeper than that.  We need to get away from that line of thinking.  Vaccines are not more safe or less safe because they took X amount of time to get to market.  I don't see the discussion to be had there.

The "future risk" stuff I can sort of see, but once you start digging into the position, you quickly realize the line is completely arbitrary.  I've asked those invoking this line what the appropriate amount of time is for them personally to get passed their perceived issue.  Not a single one who's actually answered will give a time frame....not one and MOST people just ignore the question all together.  The "future risk" argument continues to exist for any and all vaccines out there.  Tomorrow we could find out there's something wrong with the chicken pox vaccine.  If one wants to go that route, they can, but there's really no meaningful discussion to be had there either.  It's one arbitrary line vs another.  

 
The Commish said:
If we cut all the government overhead out of vaccines of the past and compare to today, it's easy to see that the science portion was not impacted in a meaningful way and any minuscule differences are completely covered in the popularity and willingness to jump into trials.  The data sets are the largest I've ever seen, but I've only been on this earth for 47 years.
Click to expand...
Also the spread and prevalence of the disease makes it easy to get data points (unless they are kids, which just seems weird).

 
Max Power said:
Bro my neighbors are as liberal as they come, but they have told me they aren't vaccinating their 7 year old. The data just isnt there.

Mandate that and see what happens...
Click to expand...
The vaccine trial for 5-11 year olds was only 2000 kids? Wow. You people are out of your mind if you consider getting your young children vaxxed right away.

 
jobarules said:
The vaccine trial for 5-11 year olds was only 2000 kids? Wow. You people are out of your mind if you consider getting your young children vaxxed right away.
Click to expand...


I'm not a statistician, but I've worked with them in the past. Very, very, very smart people have a lot to say about the size of the population you need for testing well, anything. You'd be surprised by how small a population that a statistician believes is necessary. 

 
Sweet J said:
I'm not a statistician, but I've worked with them in the past. Very, very, very smart people have a lot to say about the size of the population you need for testing well, anything. You'd be surprised by how small a population that a statistician believes is necessary. 
Click to expand...
Ordinarily this would normally be true, but in this particular case jobarules happens to be right that the sample was too small to find any statistically significant differences in infection between the control and treatment groups.  Pfizer acknowledges as much.  The reason why they think their vaccine works in kids is because it produces a similar antibody effect that we know provides protection in adults, so we figure it probably provides similar protection in kids too.  

In other words, they found good evidence for efficacy, but it's indirect evidence.  It would have been nice to see an actual difference in infection rates, but that gets us back to the small sample thing.

(This is all academic to me because my kids are in college now and were vaxxed months ago, but I would definitely get my 7 year-old vaccinated, if I had one).  

Whoops.  Here's the link that I meant to include: https://apnews.com/article/business-science-health-coronavirus-pandemic-coronavirus-vaccine-202cb6e44b90270ec4d1f19690ed94c5

 
Last edited by a moderator:
IvanKaramazov said:
The reason why they think their vaccine works in kids is because it produces a similar antibody effect that we know provides protection in adults, so we figure it probably provides similar protection in kids too.  
Click to expand...
The antibodies are the same.  The question at hand was "how potent does it need to be to produce a similar quantity in children?"  They've found the dose that seems to achieve that.  

This is a luxury we have in the new technology that we didn't in the old where we don't have to contemplate the various chemicals used in neutralizing the pieces of the virus that is then injected into the body along with everything else.  

 
Sweet J said:
I'm not a statistician, but I've worked with them in the past. Very, very, very smart people have a lot to say about the size of the population you need for testing well, anything. You'd be surprised by how small a population that a statistician believes is necessary. 
Click to expand...


The study isn’t large enough to detect any extremely rare side effects, such as the heart inflammation that sometimes occurs after the second dose, mostly in young men. The FDA’s Marks said the pediatric studies should be large enough to rule out any higher risk to young children. Pfizer’s Gruber said once the vaccine is authorized for younger children, they’ll be carefully monitored for rare risks just like everyone else.
Click to expand...

 
I have no idea if I’d get my small children vaxed.  My 12 year old got the vaccine so I’m pretty sure I would. I tend to trust science and I don’t understand the antivax position.  We also don’t know what long term effects there are from serious covid cases.  
 

The biggest arguments I’ve seen online against the vax are that there is a huge conspiracy to cover up deaths, but that seems outlandish.  I know hundreds of people who have had it with very little side effects from any of them.  I know multiple who have died from covid.  Seems straight forward.  Get the vaccine. 

 
shader said:
I have no idea if I’d get my small children vaxed.  My 12 year old got the vaccine so I’m pretty sure I would. I tend to trust science and I don’t understand the antivax position.  We also don’t know what long term effects there are from serious covid cases.  
 

The biggest arguments I’ve seen online against the vax are that there is a huge conspiracy to cover up deaths, but that seems outlandish.  I know hundreds of people who have had it with very little side effects from any of them.  I know multiple who have died from covid.  Seems straight forward.  Get the vaccine. 
Click to expand...
Children?

 
jobarules said:
The vaccine trial for 5-11 year olds was only 2000 kids? Wow. You people are out of your mind if you consider getting your young children vaxxed right away.
Click to expand...


My 11 year old son is bigger than alot of grown ### women ( 5'6'- 135 lbs).  My wife wanted to sneak him in to get vaccinated in the past few months which I didn't agree to.  We're going to get him vaccinated now that it will be available for his age group.

 
The Commish said:
It's more basic than even this.  There are many who associate the time it takes to get to market with a vaccine's safety.  They don't go deeper than that.  We need to get away from that line of thinking.  Vaccines are not more safe or less safe because they took X amount of time to get to market.  I don't see the discussion to be had there.

The "future risk" stuff I can sort of see, but once you start digging into the position, you quickly realize the line is completely arbitrary.  I've asked those invoking this line what the appropriate amount of time is for them personally to get passed their perceived issue.  Not a single one who's actually answered will give a time frame....not one and MOST people just ignore the question all together.  The "future risk" argument continues to exist for any and all vaccines out there.  Tomorrow we could find out there's something wrong with the chicken pox vaccine.  If one wants to go that route, they can, but there's really no meaningful discussion to be had there either.  It's one arbitrary line vs another.  
Click to expand...
They don't answer the question, in part, because they are not researchers with knowledge of deciding these things and you are asking them to give you an answer on something they are clearly telling you that they are uncertain about BECAUSE OF that very aspect. You are criticizing them for not knowing literally what they are saying they don't know and that is because of what they don't know, they can't say. 

 But all that is academic because it's clear by the way you think and then write that it's not even the angle you are pursuing here. Instead of asking a person "how long (and maybe WHAT) would you need before you make a decision?", you say "how long do you need before you get past your perceived issue?"  That tells the other person (and the rest of us) everything we need to know. You already have in you head that there is no discussion with an acceptable answer or opinion. Instead, you frame it as an internal conflict the person has that is perceived and not real and your only question is "how long before you get over this so I can get back to my normal life". 

So, no, it is in now way arbitrary. What you are ignoring or unaware of is that future risk is exponentially more likely in a drug that has almost no history and, until very recently, was not even approved vs. something with a century of data behind it like chicken pox. Some people understand that and are not quick to judgment. 

 
Shutout said:
They don't answer the question, in part, because they are not researchers with knowledge of deciding these things and you are asking them to give you an answer on something they are clearly telling you that they are uncertain about BECAUSE OF that very aspect. You are criticizing them for not knowing literally what they are saying they don't know and that is because of what they don't know, they can't say. 

 But all that is academic because it's clear by the way you think and then write that it's not even the angle you are pursuing here. Instead of asking a person "how long (and maybe WHAT) would you need before you make a decision?", you say "how long do you need before you get past your perceived issue?"  That tells the other person (and the rest of us) everything we need to know. You already have in you head that there is no discussion with an acceptable answer or opinion. Instead, you frame it as an internal conflict the person has that is perceived and not real and your only question is "how long before you get over this so I can get back to my normal life". 

So, no, it is in now way arbitrary. What you are ignoring or unaware of is that future risk is exponentially more likely in a drug that has almost no history and, until very recently, was not even approved vs. something with a century of data behind it like chicken pox. Some people understand that and are not quick to judgment. 
Click to expand...
Please don't put words in my mouth or thoughts in my head.  You couldn't possibly be more wrong in your assumptions as outlined in this post.  The emotion of this entire thing is killing people.  We need to get away from that.  The "because this is the way it was done 30 years ago" attitude is killing people.  We need to get away from that.  The "hey, it took x amount of time for this other vaccine so it should take that long for this one" attitude is killing people.  We need to get away from that.  I pose the question ONLY in hopes to get people to think about this in a different way than those two things.  

And no matter how you try to justify it "I don't know, but it's not been long enough" is exactly arbitrary.  It's the perfect definition of arbitrary :shrug:  

To the bold, I'd settle for an answer to either.  Seems like asking the exact same question two different ways.  Though I'd push back on "perceived"...again words in my mouth.  I have never questioned that people feel their concerns are real.

 
I totally get the "please don't put words in my mouth". But  . . . don't put "thoughts in my head"? Are we developing an immunity to new thoughts now?

 
Two month booster shots now LINK

"a 2-month booster resulted in 100% protection against severe cases  and 94% protection against symptomatic cases of COVID"

 
Max Power said:
WTF are we doing...
Click to expand...
It's really too bad that they said JNJ was a one shot deal and most people who got the JNJ are past the two month mark now.  On the other hand, no reason to wait any longer, get in line!  Oh wait, this has to be reviewed by the FDC and CDC first, maybe in a couple more months.

 
tonydead said:
It's really too bad that they said JNJ was a one shot deal and most people who got the JNJ are past the two month mark now.  On the other hand, no reason to wait any longer, get in line!  Oh wait, this has to be reviewed by the FDC and CDC first, maybe in a couple more months.
Click to expand...
These vaccines will solve all of your problems for 6 months or until a new variant. Whichever comes first.  :grad:

 
Max Power said:
These vaccines will solve all of your problems for 6 months or until a new variant. Whichever comes first.  :grad:
Click to expand...
And the alternative is a few million dead people.

We get annual flu shots. If we need semi-annual covid shots, what exactly is the huge deal?

 
the moops said:
And the alternative is a few million dead people.

We get annual flu shots. If we need semi-annual covid shots, what exactly is the huge deal?
Click to expand...
That's not what the vaccine was marketed as. It was sold as a one time thing.  Now they are talking 6-8 months. 

Comparing covid to the flu last year was blasphemy.  Now its our measuring stick. 

 
Doug B said:
OK. But why is that an issue?
Click to expand...
We're mandating a vaccine that might only work for 6 months or until a new variant comes along. We haven't even considered natural immunity into the equasion.  COVID is at an all time high. We can't get a straight answer on boosters.  Vaccine Passports are starting to cause violence in our streets. 

It's obvious we are flying by the seat of our pants and its clear now that we don't know what we are doing. 

But blame the unvaxed is a great company line.  Lets keep that up. 

 
It's a novel Coronavirus. Learning new things about it all the time should be expected. This idea of "that's not what they said though!", get past it.

For example, the idea that we may need booster shots, did anyone ever guarantee you absolutely 100% that the shots were a one and done scenario? Is it so appalling that we may need boosters that we just resort to "SEE! NOTHING WORKS!" C'mon. 

 
Grace Under Pressure said:
It's a novel Coronavirus. Learning new things about it all the time should be expected. This idea of "that's not what they said though!", get past it.

For example, the idea that we may need booster shots, did anyone ever guarantee you absolutely 100% that the shots were a one and done scenario? Is it so appalling that we may need boosters that we just resort to "SEE! NOTHING WORKS!" C'mon. 
Click to expand...
Policy has been implemented based on "what they said". Lockdowns, passports, segregation and discrimination have all been implemented by government edict based on "what they said." So no, we will not get past it and accept "what they are saying now" when "what they said" has caused a heck of a lot more problems over the last year than solutions. 

 
Max Power said:
Just pointing out all the times "things are different now" is being used. 
Click to expand...
Still my favorite:

Masks not needed - Masks needed - Double Masks! - Don't use the good ones, make homemade ones! - Masks not needed outdoors - Masks not needed for vaccinated - Everyone needs mask indoors - School Children! - ad nauseam

:lol:  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Max Power said:
We're mandating a vaccine that might only work for 6 months or until a new variant comes along. We haven't even considered natural immunity into the equasion.  COVID is at an all time high. We can't get a straight answer on boosters.  Vaccine Passports are starting to cause violence in our streets. 

It's obvious we are flying by the seat of our pants and its clear now that we don't know what we are doing. 

But blame the unvaxed is a great company line.  Lets keep that up. 
Click to expand...
Covid is at an all time high among the unvaccinated.

Violence is occurring because anti-vaxxers are unwilling to follow or accept the law.

I do blame the unvaxxed for the 2 above mentioned problems.  Who do you blame for these issues?

 
Max Power said:
That's not what the vaccine was marketed as. It was sold as a one time thing.  Now they are talking 6-8 months. 

Comparing covid to the flu last year was blasphemy.  Now its our measuring stick. 
Click to expand...
I’m not sure where you got these ideas, but they’re both off-base.

The prospects of vaccine boosters were mentioned from the get-go, as the durability of immunity (natural or vaccine-derived) is uncertain.

Flu comparisons were terrible then, and they still are.

 
tonydead said:
Still my favorite:

Masks not needed - Masks needed - Double Masks! - Don't use the good ones, make homemade ones! - Masks not needed outdoors - Masks not needed for vaccinated - Everyone needs mask indoors - School Children! - ad nauseam

:lol:  
Click to expand...
Damn man, it's almost like opinions and recommended procedures get changed as new information becomes available. It sucks that some people can't seem to understand that, especially those that tended to vote for and support our last president, but sometimes inconvenience can't be avoided. 

 
Insein said:
Policy has been implemented based on "what they said". Lockdowns, passports, segregation and discrimination have all been implemented by government edict based on "what they said." So no, we will not get past it and accept "what they are saying now" when "what they said" has caused a heck of a lot more problems over the last year than solutions. 
Click to expand...
I would like to get past selfishness, ignorance and gullibility as being stumbling blocks to public safety and a return to normalcy, but the same people who can't get past what you're talking about are preventing me from getting past what I'm talking about. 

 
Chaz McNulty said:
Covid is at an all time high among the unvaccinated.

Violence is occurring because anti-vaxxers are unwilling to follow or accept the law.

I do blame the unvaxxed for the 2 above mentioned problems.  Who do you blame for these issues?
Click to expand...
The media hyping delta and uninformed governement officials. 

 
Insein said:
Policy has been implemented based on "what they said". Lockdowns, passports, segregation and discrimination have all been implemented by government edict based on "what they said." So no, we will not get past it and accept "what they are saying now" when "what they said" has caused a heck of a lot more problems over the last year than solutions. 
Click to expand...
Ok. Keep resisting then. Because that's been productive.

Definitely frustrating though for the 76% of adults 18+ in the U.S. that have received at least one shot. Same circular arguments over and over. It's almost as if creating swirl is the actual intention.

NB: Because people repeat things and then they somehow become "fact", I'll address this very old point: No one locked down. Link to people not being able to leave their house? Go to the grocery store? The pharmacy? Target, Walmart, Home Depot? In the beginning the limited shutdowns are what we had to slow the spread.

Segregation and discrimination.  :lol:  Talk about first world problems. "I'm the victim!". Tiring.

 
Terminalxylem said:
I’m not sure where you got these ideas, but they’re both off-base.

The prospects of vaccine boosters were mentioned from the get-go, as the durability of immunity (natural or vaccine-derived) is uncertain.

Flu comparisons were terrible then, and they still are.
Click to expand...
Joe Biden was literally out there in the spring telling everyone to get vaccianted and get their life back to normal.  I'm sure some studies indicated boosters would be needed, but lets not kid ourselves that in the early days they said breakthrough cases would be extrememly rare... They are not rare.  

The flu comparisons are from the people equating a covid shot to a flu shot. 

 
Herb said:
Damn man, it's almost like opinions and recommended procedures get changed as new information becomes available. It sucks that some people can't seem to understand that, especially those that tended to vote for and support our last president, but sometimes inconvenience can't be avoided. 
Click to expand...
Is But Trump! your excuse for everything?    :lmao:

HTH - Masks were never the kryptonite to the Covid, especially now the vaccine is available to anyone who wants it.  Ditch the mask.

 
Herb said:
I would like to get past selfishness, ignorance and gullibility as being stumbling blocks to public safety and a return to normalcy, but the same people who can't get past what you're talking about are preventing me from getting past what I'm talking about. 
Click to expand...
It's ok to live your life.  Stop being scared. The real world has dangers. 

 
Herb said:
I would like to get past selfishness, ignorance and gullibility as being stumbling blocks to public safety and a return to normalcy, but the same people who can't get past what you're talking about are preventing me from getting past what I'm talking about. 
Click to expand...
None of what you said has anything to do with public safety. 

 
Grace Under Pressure said:
Ok. Keep resisting then. Because that's been productive.

Definitely frustrating though for the 76% of adults 18+ in the U.S. that have received at least one shot. Same circular arguments over and over. It's almost as if creating swirl is the actual intention.

NB: Because people repeat things and then they somehow become "fact", I'll address this very old point: No one locked down. Link to people not being able to leave their house? Go to the grocery store? The pharmacy? Target, Walmart, Home Depot? In the beginning the limited shutdowns are what we had to slow the spread.

Segregation and discrimination.  :lol:  Talk about first world problems. "I'm the victim!". Tiring.
Click to expand...
"I complied with the government so everyone else should too."

I'll wait for the eventual "I couldn't go to a restaurant today because I didn't have proof of my 3rd booster shot" post and the indignation that follows.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GordonGekko
Lyricist Nancy Pelosi Begs Pro-Choice Voters For $15 To Attain A Team Blue Majority That Already Exists (6/30/22 18:29 PST)
Replies
17
Views
624
GordonGekko
GordonGekko
KiddLattimer
  • Poll
Is Voting 3rd Party A Wasted Vote?
2 3
Replies
108
Views
3K
Navin Johnson
N
Joe Bryant
  • Poll
Democratic Woman Attends Trump Rally - Thoughts On Her Article?
3 4 5
Replies
227
Views
8K
NorvilleBarnes
NorvilleBarnes

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top