37818
Well-Known Member
What good is a vaccine where the vaccinated need to be protected. Such talk is irrational if said vaccines work to protect the vaccinated. It seems you cannot understand this.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
mRNA vaccine question.
- Thread starter 37818
- Start date
The flu and measles vaccines are the same way. Even if you have been vaccinated against the flu, someone with the flu can infect you.
I think that is the reason so many remain cautious. Covid is more contageous than the flu, and more deadly. Chances are people will survive (regardless of vaccination status). But people don't want to take those chances as they see them as unnecessary (just as some don't want to risk a vaccine they believe unnecessary).
Are you serious? You appear to believe the fantasy that unless a vaccine is 100% effective, it is no good.
Honestly, man, do you really believe this?
And, as expected, no evidence from a credible source to defend your position.
No, my liberty to choose what goes into my body and to ignore over-educated idiots.
I bet you're all about a woman's liberty with her body to terminate [kill] a baby in the womb all the while opposing my liberty to refuse a vaccine shot.
Last edited:
37818
Well-Known Member
People merely not vaccinated are not same as being infected. The unfected pose no threat not being infected.
That's actually a very good point. The argument is really about potential and not actual dangers.
I will only discuss this with you if you are serious - this is not a serious reply.
No it is not a good point, Jon.
It is a clear case of someone who has painted themselves into a corner and is dancing.
Nope. You make assertions, you prove them.
You are the one representing himself as a qualified medical expert by calling your brothers false.
Is that what they teach engineers at Princeton?
I can see this one both ways. If somebody is not infected then they do not pose a direct threat
But that is a big "if", and one that can turn on a dime.
Over the past few months we have lost 6 employees to covid (unvacvinated). We have several hospitalized (again unvaccinated) and about 60 at home with covid (most unvaccinated) and a couple hundred quarantined due to family members.
So the impact is definitely felt, and the unvaccinated do contribute to the problem.
The last day of employment at my workplace for the unvaccinated is 30 November. Things should pick up then (at work anyway).
Not to forget foolish and evil
To be fair, the vaccine was said to be safe in comparison to the vaccine (the risks were announced even before the vaccines came out...without new risks being developed and without exceeding the risk level anticipated. That alone (regardless of whether one takes or rejects the vaccine) is amazing. People say too many have had these side effects, but the serious side effects still remain very low.
Dave G
Well-Known Member
We'll see, Jon.
So far these new CoVID vaccines ( and I use the term "vaccines" loosely, considering how they actually work ) have only been in the public sphere for less than a year.
That's a very short time in terms of virology.
Myself, I have much more confidence in whole virus or protein sub-unit vaccines, and that isn't saying much.
They are, by definition, vacvines regardless of their effectiveness.
And you are correct. While mRNA vacvines are not new this is the first time we have a mRNA vaccine made avaliable to the public.
The first Pfizer shot was given May 4, 2020 and has been studied/ monitored for almost a year and a half.
But many gravitate to medications that have not been studied at all. Do you also find this at least a little ironic?
Dave G
Well-Known Member
That desperate people gravitate to desperate measures during times of desperation?
Not at all.