If the FDA approves the vaccine,will you get jabbed?

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    32,254
    149
    Columbus, OH
    I think you might be giving insufficient 'shrift' to the informed part of informed consent

    Rather than try increasingly coercive means to induce me to get vaccinated, why not give me hard data with transparent provenance about the level of risks of all options and allow robust debate

    If I have a 2% chance of abnormal clotting leading to stroke or other damage from the vaccine and a 2% chance of similar complication if I contract an active case of WuVid is a much different calculus if those numbers are 0.2% and 2% - or worse yet 2% and 0.2%

    Perhaps they should not have so thoroughly burnt down any credibility they had if they planned to rely on that later
     

    phylodog

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    59   0   0
    Mar 7, 2008
    18,959
    113
    Arcadia
    As far as the last, that's the cultural war aspect. It's become some symbol of if you trust "them" or not for so many people that it's no longer just a choice on medical care, it's a political and cultural statement as well.
    I don't consider it a statement of any kind. It is a simple choice to which a simple "no thank you" should be sufficient. For me, the numbers don't add up and are about as reliable as Indiana weather. There is plenty of data as well as medical experts on both sides of the argument and people should be free to choose who to put their faith into.
     

    BehindBlueI's

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    29   0   0
    Oct 3, 2012
    25,947
    113
    I think you might be giving insufficient 'shrift' to the informed part of informed consent

    Rather than try increasingly coercive means to induce me to get vaccinated, why not give me hard data with transparent provenance about the level of risks of all options and allow robust debate

    If I have a 2% chance of abnormal clotting leading to stroke or other damage from the vaccine and a 2% chance of similar complication if I contract an active case of WuVid is a much different calculus if those numbers are 0.2% and 2% - or worse yet 2% and 0.2%

    Perhaps they should not have so thoroughly burnt down any credibility they had if they planned to rely on that later

    Do you know how to research it for yourself? Serious question. I know where to look and can understand summaries but don't have a clue as to how to evaluate the underlying science. So, peer reviewed studies is about the best I can hope for. I'm satisfied with that and what acquaintances "in the industry" have said. It's not as sexy or as interesting as media and social media, but it's probably the best shot and being actually informed.

    I'm not going to try and convince you to take it or not take it, because frankly why should anyone take my opinion on it. I'm just saying a lot of the arguments put forth against it are specious or based on provable lies. That said, I think a lot of the "pro-mask" arguments are exactly the same. I remain pretty unconvinced mask mandates accomplish much and haven't found a peer reviewed study in realistic circumstances that say they are. So, yeah, I'm not saying "just listen to the talking heads".
     

    Tombs

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 13, 2011
    12,126
    113
    Martinsville
    Do you know how to research it for yourself? Serious question. I know where to look and can understand summaries but don't have a clue as to how to evaluate the underlying science. So, peer reviewed studies is about the best I can hope for. I'm satisfied with that and what acquaintances "in the industry" have said. It's not as sexy or as interesting as media and social media, but it's probably the best shot and being actually informed.

    I'm not going to try and convince you to take it or not take it, because frankly why should anyone take my opinion on it. I'm just saying a lot of the arguments put forth against it are specious or based on provable lies. That said, I think a lot of the "pro-mask" arguments are exactly the same. I remain pretty unconvinced mask mandates accomplish much and haven't found a peer reviewed study in realistic circumstances that say they are. So, yeah, I'm not saying "just listen to the talking heads".

    I don't care what some peer review says on the internet.

    When people I trust on this forum report side effects they have had or a family member has had, I'd put infinitely more weight on their word.
     

    Keith_Indy

    Master
    Rating - 95.2%
    20   1   0
    Mar 10, 2009
    3,255
    113
    Noblesville
    No mRNA vaccine is on the market, and have only been in development (according to the linked article) since 2017. That’s new from my perspective.

    Never Been Done Before?

    That's not completely true. While an mRNA vaccine has never been on the market anywhere in the world, mRNA vaccines have been tested in humans before, for at least four infectious diseases: rabies, influenza, cytomegalovirus, and Zika.

    What Do We Know About Safety?


    While the flu and rabies vaccines appeared to be "safe and reasonably well tolerated," Weissman and colleagues wrote, trials did show "moderate and in rare cases severe injection site or systemic reactions."

    Their chief safety concerns, which they said should be closely watched in future trials, were about local and systemic inflammation, as well as keeping tabs on the "expressed immunogen" and on any auto-reactive antibodies.

    A possible concern could be that some mRNA-based vaccine platforms induce potent type I interferon responses, which have been associated not only with inflammation but also potentially with autoimmunity," they wrote. "Thus, identification of individuals at an increased risk of autoimmune reactions before mRNA vaccination may allow reasonable precautions to be taken."
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    32,254
    149
    Columbus, OH
    Do you know how to research it for yourself? Serious question. I know where to look and can understand summaries but don't have a clue as to how to evaluate the underlying science. So, peer reviewed studies is about the best I can hope for. I'm satisfied with that and what acquaintances "in the industry" have said. It's not as sexy or as interesting as media and social media, but it's probably the best shot and being actually informed.

    I'm not going to try and convince you to take it or not take it, because frankly why should anyone take my opinion on it. I'm just saying a lot of the arguments put forth against it are specious or based on provable lies. That said, I think a lot of the "pro-mask" arguments are exactly the same. I remain pretty unconvinced mask mandates accomplish much and haven't found a peer reviewed study in realistic circumstances that say they are. So, yeah, I'm not saying "just listen to the talking heads".
    I am not capable of designing and running the experiments, but I'm quite capable of evaluating the data - as is most anybody if the data is put into a rational format

    It is when the CDC just stops counting breakthrough infections, or I can see that the data is often presented in percent increase or decrease if that assists the hype, or raw, often cumulative numbers if it does not, that I am reminded of the jamilism that "If it looks like you're hiding something, I'ma going to believe you're hiding something" [general 'you', not specific]. When public sources talk about case numbers but never mention deaths anymore, a quick trip to worldometers shows that death numbers are still low even though the spike in cases began 5 to 6 weeks ago in most places in the US (which should obviate the 'deaths are delayed X weeks after illness' - X used to be 4 but when that doesn't work I'm sure some excuse will be found to increase the number as necessary)

    The point I'm trying to make is un-massaged, factual, easily verifiable data presented at a layman's level of complexity in order to enable as many people as possible to make an informed decision - and then accepting that decision even if it doesn't go the way they want it to - should be what the government has been doing all along if they want the most people possible to get vaccinated. They will never get 100% and should not expect to
     

    Jeepster48439

    Master
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    13   0   0
    Jan 12, 2012
    1,902
    113
    Marion County
    Also, son is army national guard with flight status. They leave him alone because his mos is in demand, and he is E6 and has earned his position


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    My daughter is Navy Reserve on Active Duty at the Bureau of Naval Medicine. They refused to allow her leave to go on a family vacation to Orlando unless she got vaccinated.
     

    Timjoebillybob

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Feb 27, 2009
    9,418
    149
    And tested and proven. And like a real vaccine, if you get it, you don’t get measles.

    Unlike some “vaccines” that allow you to still get the illness for which it’s supposed to prevent but somehow also reduces possible hospital stays. Well, except for the blood clots, Bell’s Palsy, myocarditis and infertility...
    About .3% of those that get the measles vaccine can get measles, there is no vaccine that is a 100% effective.

    And the chicken pox vaccine is only about 85-90% effective, but it is believed to be 100% effective at preventing moderate to severe cases.
    .
    No mRNA vaccine is on the market, and have only been in development (according to the linked article) since 2017. That’s new from my perspective.

    Never Been Done Before?
    That is not accurate, human mRNA vaccines have been in development for longer than that, from a study linked in that article they started human testing on a mRNA rabies vaccine in 2013. They published results from it in 2017. So it was in development well before then, since it had to be developed and go through animal trials first.

    They have also been in use in some animal vaccines for 10+ years.
     

    Keith_Indy

    Master
    Rating - 95.2%
    20   1   0
    Mar 10, 2009
    3,255
    113
    Noblesville
    So, I missed the mark by 4 years, and you think that makes it "less new," I've got underwear older than that.

    1st generation, 10th century China inoculation against small pox
    2nd generation, 1880s by Louis Pasteur who developed vaccines for chicken cholera and anthrax
    3rd generation, 2016 DNA vaccine for Zika, 2020 mRNA for COVID19


    And from the article you cite... So, it worked when "administered with a needle-free device" but not when injected.

    Interpretation: This first-ever demonstration in human beings shows that a prophylactic mRNA-based candidate vaccine can induce boostable functional antibodies against a viral antigen when administered with a needle-free device, although not when injected by a needle-syringe. The vaccine was generally safe with a reasonable tolerability profile.
     
    Last edited:

    Keith_Indy

    Master
    Rating - 95.2%
    20   1   0
    Mar 10, 2009
    3,255
    113
    Noblesville
    Religious exemption letter for Catholics...

     

    Joniki

    Master
    Trainer Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    10   0   0
    Nov 5, 2013
    1,603
    119
    NE Indiana
    As I was reading through this thread, I had to chuckle. There is so much misinformation floating around on the internet that no one really knows what is true and what is BS! If you want the truth, the whole truth, sit down with an ICU nurse or respiratory therapist.
     

    BugI02

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jul 4, 2013
    32,254
    149
    Columbus, OH
    As I was reading through this thread, I had to chuckle. There is so much misinformation floating around on the internet that no one really knows what is true and what is BS! If you want the truth, the whole truth, sit down with an ICU nurse or respiratory therapist.
    There are diametrically opposed viewpoints among them, and indeed all medical professionals, as well

    If I have to live with any consequences, ultimately the decision must be mine
     

    drillsgt

    Grandmaster
    Rating - 100%
    108   0   0
    Nov 29, 2009
    9,652
    149
    Sioux Falls, SD
    As I was reading through this thread, I had to chuckle. There is so much misinformation floating around on the internet that no one really knows what is true and what is BS! If you want the truth, the whole truth, sit down with an ICU nurse or respiratory therapist.
    I probably wouldn't rely on the 'truth' coming from an ICU nurse or respiratory therapist, their experiences would be centered around the worst cases of covid, it'd be like letting ER doctors and trauma surgeons decide gun policy.
     

    IndyTom

    Expert
    Rating - 87.5%
    7   1   0
    Oct 3, 2013
    1,336
    63
    Fishers
    My son is now p*ssed. Got an email saying that everyone has to wear a mask in class (college) even after forcing them to get the jab.

    So, clearly, one of these things, if not both, doesn’t work.
     

    gregr

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 1, 2016
    4,371
    113
    West-Central

    rhamersley

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Jan 9, 2016
    3,756
    113
    Danville

    But, how could the FDA give approval to the vaccine, when by their own guidelines, they`ve not satisfied their protocols...

    AD5549F9-E5EE-489A-9D85-9C8FEA29735B.gif
     
    Top Bottom