I am not getting vaccinated, because I've analyzed that my odds of dying of Covid-19 at my age and health are less than my odds of dying in a car wreck. And I'm comfortable with that risk as opposed to the unknown long-term risks of RNA therapy.
Some things in communities take cooperation, you know?
You have no idea what the long-term risks of RNA therapy are. They are brand new. I might change my mind in 10 years. But right now, I'm not getting an mRNA therapy against a virus that both my parents have already survived in their 60s. I'm not getting an mRNA therapy against a 1 in a million chance of dying, in particular when the mRNA therapy itself isn't 100%. It's not going to save anyone's life and it's not prevent anyone from contracting Covid-19.
As for the rest of your complaints, I can’t manage to find the patience or empathy to respond in as productive of a manner as others[1] have already done in this same thread.
Good luck to you, wishing you good health. Glad your parents recovered well.
You have no idea if it causes cancer or Alzheimer's or any other complication down the road and you can't point me to a long term study that proves that because it hasn't been around long enough. As I said before, if in 10 years time there's a long track record of success in the odds of any long term complications are less than my odds of dying in a car wreck, I may change my mind. As it stands, already the AstraZeneca has been paused in numerous countries on account of blood clots. And I've already seen one person get Bells palsy from it.
It's not worth it to me. And I've had plenty of vaccines, but this is gene therapy, it's not a traditional vaccine.
The rates of re-infection (especially with new variants) in COVID-19 patients vs the protection via mRNA vaccines indicate otherwise - where is your data?
>>You have no idea what the long-term risks of RNA therapy are. They are brand new.
Pardon the language, but this is straight-up ignorance or bullshit
mRNA vaccines are NOT new (or they are only new to you because you are ignorant).
The first mRNA published studies were in 1989 [1][2] and in numerous human trials since 2011. Any substantial risks with this technology would have already shown up [5]. mRNA vaccines do not alter your DNA and are very specific, and likely safer than standard vaccines.
You act like simply another random grifter free-riding on the herd immunity maintained by those who are smarter and more ethical. Your clever self-important justifications may hide your deliberate ignorance from yourself, but they don't hide it from others, and your cleverness shows that you know how to do better, but choose not to.
Reconsider; you are not fooling anyone but perhaps yourself
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA_vaccine
[2] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC297778/
[3] https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-12-mrna-vaccine-safety.h...
Actually, we know that getting vaccines (esp. flu shot) somehow improves your health even beyond not getting what they vaccinate for. Getting the covid vaccine appears to cure long-term effects of covid infection in patients.
We are specifically talking about the COVID-19 vaccine vs the virus itself.
Stop moving the goalposts of the discussion.
* Death is only a small part of the risk. COVID-19 is not just a respiratory disease, it is more of a blood disease, and can permanently damage many organs.
* Lung damage can be severe and permanent, as in worse Smokers' Lung than heavy long-term smokers, even for large numbers of asymptomatic cases. [1], [2]
* Extended long-COVID can occur even after very mild cases. Initial data shows that these are significantly reduced by the vaccine [6]
* it is not just about you, but about you not becoming a vector. Public health matters to a society, you enjoy the benefits of the society, and share it's duty to contribute. Don't shirk.
* mRNA vaccines are not new, having been first published in 1989 [3][4] and in numerous human trials since 2011. Any substantial risks with this technology would have already shown up [5]. mRNA vaccines do not alter your DNA and are very specific, and I'd say likely more safe than standard weakened- or dead-virus vaccines.
[1] https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseas...
[2] https://www.ibtimes.com/some-covid-19-survivors-lungs-worse-...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA_vaccine
[4] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC297778/
[5] https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-12-mrna-vaccine-safety.h...
[6] https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/2021031...
Well, the mRNA vaccine only produces some parts of a whole virus, so it seems less risky. What makes it more risky, in your assessment?
What long-term risks are introduced by "RNA therapy" that we aren't bombarded with all day?