Quote:
Originally Posted by PepsiFree
But neither of these statements are facts. mRNA technology has been around for decades. The vaccine is the first approved, but to say it is new technology completely ignores the work that has been done since the 1980s to get us to this point. As for long term side effects, we can also confidently say that any that would emerge, have emerged. Historically, long-term side effects show up within the first couple of months and there is nothing special about mRNA vaccines that would make them any different. People have had the vaccine for well over a year now. If it were to occur, even in rare circumstances, we would know about it.
Sorry, I disagree that there are “valid opinions on both sides.” There aren’t. Even suggesting people who refuse to get the vaccine have valid opinions is stupid, and you ought to know better. There is no valid reason for those who can get the vaccine, not to. It’s as simple as that. And the more you baby these people the longer they believe they’re special and valid.
|
First of all, the fact that the technology has been in development for many years is irrelevant. Here are a couple of potential issues as an example that may be possible areas of concern with an mRNA vaccine. Firstly, they use a nanolipid capsid of sorts to encase the mRNA(not used in traditional vaccines). Since nanolipids are not created endogenously in the human body it is entirely unknowable what the long term effects of having these injected into the human body are.
Secondly, the behaviour of these nanolipids as vectors for the mRNA are not fully known either, there is evidence to suggest that they carry the mRNA into more tissues than a traditional vaccine would.
Full disclosure, I have received both doses of the Pfizer vaccine, and I have encouraged others to do so. However, I cannot in good conscience sit here and say that everyone should be forced to get this vaccine or be stripped of their ability to have a livelihood. It simply isn't the case that all opposing opinions are wrong - there are valid reasons for people to be hesitant about this vaccine technology which is being used on the general public for the first time. In fact, there are several scientists who are unsure of the mRNA vaccines - mainly because it is technically impossible to be certain of their long term safety at this time.
I agree that the likelihood of these vaccines having negative long term effects that are worse than COVID is very low. My point is, it is not zero - that is a fact. And I am uncomfortable with the government forcing people who are uncomfortable with these risks to inject something into their bodies.
Don't tell me I ought to know better, it is incredibly condescending - I have a degree in biology and am very capable of reading and digesting scientific literature.
Edit: I would be for this mandate if all the vaccines were readily available (both mRNA and traditional viral vector(AstraZeneca, J&J) - so that people could have the choice of vaccines that are absolutely proven to be safe in the long term, and those that haven't.