srt101fan

Accordig to your own quotes of their testimony, they did NOT say that 50% of their employees "chose not to be vaccinated"!

Effate Loc: El Dorado Hills, Ca.

Read the transcript, they never said it could be higher and said a little more that half, probably 60%. I don’t know why people are resistant to any narrative that may even bring into question anything that is contrary or may challenge their conventions. I said earlier that I (or anyone else) could not support these estimates with certainty but if even questioning causes one to not get vaccinated then shame on them (if I am allowed to use a pronoun).

loumazz12 Loc: Hawaii

I believe that if one chooses not to be vaccinated because of mistrust in the medical and/or scientific community, they should then lose the right to seek assistance from that same medical and/or scientific community when they contract the disease for which they refuse to be vaccinated. How can you claim to not trust them with your life in one instance, then claim otherwise when the tables are turned, while still refusing to be vaccinated?

Fredrick Loc: Former NYC, now San Francisco Bay Area

One of the dumbest things I’ve ever heard. Then how do you account for the 13 states mostly in the southeast with the lowest vaccination rates that are NOW seeing a rise in Covid infections and deaths? The states all around the U.S. with the higher vaccination rates are NOW seeing a dramatic decrease in
Covid infections and deaths.
What exactly don’t you get??

Fredrick Loc: Former NYC, now San Francisco Bay Area

RustyM

Good point, although I would argue that some people are not getting vaccinated because they believe false information being spread through the web, including in this thread. Should they then be penalized, possibly with their lives, if they then get sick?

berchman Loc: South Central PA

The article approvingly quotes Mercola, a proven quack.

Alafoto Loc: Montgomery, AL

My wife and I both had the virus. Interestingly we didn't find out until she went to our family physician with a sore throat. They diagnosed that as a strep infection and prescribed an antibiotic, but also ran a routine test for the Covid virus and she tested positive. They suggested that I come in for a check as well and sure enough, and not surprisingly, I tested positive. No real symptoms in either of us except her sore throat. No fever. Nothing. Completely asymptomatic. We stayed away from our family for two weeks, just to be safe. Also on the advice of our doctor, got the vaccine as soon as it was available.

We were given the Moderna version and thus far, no side effects. That was a couple of months ago but who knows what can happen in the future? If I turn green, I'll let you all know.

Alafoto Loc: Montgomery, AL

Last resort? Perhaps a corollary to the "no atheists in foxholes theory."

David NW Loc: Oregon, USA

This is a complete distortion of the situation. If you wanted to, you could have easily found that no such thing was said, but you felt the need to share “your version” of the the truth with us.

soba1 Loc: Somewhere In So Ca

CDub excellent article thanks

Alafoto Loc: Montgomery, AL

A suggestion: In future, please hit the "quote reply" button so we will know which of us you are calling out to rag on.

South49 Loc: Charlotte

fetzler Loc: North West PA

This is a free country (at least for a little while yet) so you can do what you want. The article, however, is largely a bunch of bunk from someone with no experience in medicine or pharmaceutical development.

The job of the FDA is to assess the Safety and Effectiveness of drugs. It is easy for the FDA to reject new drugs.

Safety and Effectiveness has to be judged with regard to the seriousness of the disease. Drugs for the sniffles have to be much safer than for drugs for generally terminal cancer. Effectiveness has also to be assessed in terms of alternate treatments and doing nothing at all. In the case of drugs approved for emergency use there is good evidence that the drug is generally safe and that the drug is generally effective. In the case COVID this means that antibodies to COVID are produced. COVID vaccine has now been used on hundreds of millions of people with generally good results. The affected population for this disease is much, much larger that for most other indications.

Vaccines, in general, have a record of effectiveness for more than 200 years. George Washington inoculated soldiers for smallpox during the Revolution. His efforts helped to ensure victory and creation of the United States. Safety of course was much less than that of modern vaccines. Today we no longer give vaccines for smallpox as the disease has been eradicated. I am old enough to have known people who survived smallpox.

Conducting clinical trials requires adherence to recognized ethical standards. This is to prevent future Dr. Mengele's form doing horrific experiments on unsuspecting patients.

Clinical trials require that the patient give informed uncoerced consent. Pregnant women are not included in clinical trials as the fetus cannot give consent. The mother could possibly give consent but there would need to be an overwhelming potential benefit for the fetus. Minor children are also excluded for consent reasons as well. People over the age of 65 are also excluded as such individuals may have other medical conditions that complicate interpretation of the results. Individuals with certain medical conditions(unhealthy individuals) are also excluded.
The exclusions mentioned in the article are completely normal.

When you get your shot, you have given consent. Medical professionals cannot treat you for anything without it.

There are certainly individuals that probably should NOT receive the COVID vaccine. Such individual include young children and young adults under 30 where the risk to benefit ratio is too high. Adults less than 30 have had some issues after taking the 2nd does. Complications are rare but the benefit of the vaccine is small for these individuals. the FDA is reviewing this now. People who are allergic to eggs will not be administered the vaccine. People who have suppressed immune systems for various reasons should be evaluated by their physician before receiving the vaccine. People who have recovered from COVID and have good antibody titers should likely refrain from vaccination as well. These folks will not benefit from the vaccine.

It is unusual for the raw clinical trial data to become public before publications and/or patents are completed. Indeed, the average person would be completely unable to interpret the data anyway. You can be assured that experts at the FDA, academia and industry will be evaluating it.

Large pharmaceutical companies try very hard to produce the the best possible products. Yes, they are human and can make mistakes. Mistakes are very costly to the company and indeed could cause bankruptcy. Great caution is taken in releasing a new product. The folks working in large pharmaceutical companies are very smart and try each day to do the best possible job. The FDA is also watching very closely.

You should be reminded that long term effectiveness studies take a long time. This amount of time has not passed yet but the vaccine appears to be good for at least a year. In the future, a COVID shot might be included with your flu shot.

In short, I think the author is an ignoramus and someone who has no relevant medical conditions should get the vaccine for both his benefit and he general benefit of mankind. If your health conditions are of concern consult your physician before getting a vaccine.

berchman Loc: South Central PA

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/343263629_A_Complete_Debunking_of_Denis_Rancourt's_Mask_Don't_Work

The foregoing link proves that the article you referenced is absolute junk.