Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?

Current issues and things in the news

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
otseng
Savant
Posts: 18587
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2004 1:16 pm
Location: Atlanta, GA
Has thanked: 146 times
Been thanked: 214 times
Contact:

Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?

Post #1

Post by otseng »

DrNoGods wrote: [Replying to post 134 by AgnosticBoy]
I think we all need to tone down our fears about this virus, especially now that there's a treatment for covid-19:


That might be wording it a little too strongly. The tests showed two things:

1) Hospital stays were reduced from 15 days on average to 11 days.

2) The mortality rate was 8.0% vs. 11.6% for placebo.

These are certainly beneficial results, and technically a "treatment" as it improves the patient's condition. But an 8% mortality rate is still something to be concerned about and I think most people would consider that to suggest that we still need to remain vigilant. As the study doctors say, more work is needed. It is a treatment not a cure, and people can still die who get the drug as the study showed. So not pouring cold water on the results, but I doubt it will allay fear in most people just yet. Good news all the same.
For debate:

Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?

User avatar
Miles
Prodigy
Posts: 3395
Joined: Fri Aug 28, 2009 4:19 pm
Has thanked: 266 times
Been thanked: 942 times

Re: Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?

Post #11

Post by Miles »

otseng wrote: Sat May 02, 2020 8:47 am
DrNoGods wrote: [Replying to post 134 by AgnosticBoy]
I think we all need to tone down our fears about this virus, especially now that there's a treatment for covid-19:


That might be wording it a little too strongly. The tests showed two things:

1) Hospital stays were reduced from 15 days on average to 11 days.

2) The mortality rate was 8.0% vs. 11.6% for placebo.

These are certainly beneficial results, and technically a "treatment" as it improves the patient's condition. But an 8% mortality rate is still something to be concerned about and I think most people would consider that to suggest that we still need to remain vigilant. As the study doctors say, more work is needed. It is a treatment not a cure, and people can still die who get the drug as the study showed. So not pouring cold water on the results, but I doubt it will allay fear in most people just yet. Good news all the same.
For debate:

Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?
Need a scientific reference. What ya got?

.

User avatar
thomasdixon
Apprentice
Posts: 180
Joined: Sat Jun 06, 2020 3:19 pm
Location: usa
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 19 times
Contact:

Re: Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?

Post #12

Post by thomasdixon »

Below are a few precautions when using masks that I have not heard before
[1] Do not smell your mask
[2] Do not touch the outside surface of your mask
[3] Do not give or loan your mask to anyone
[4] ___________________________ suggest something
(:-

User avatar
Jemima
Student
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2021 11:50 pm
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?

Post #13

Post by Jemima »

otseng wrote: Sat May 02, 2020 8:47 am
DrNoGods wrote: [Replying to post 134 by AgnosticBoy]
I think we all need to tone down our fears about this virus, especially now that there's a treatment for covid-19:


That might be wording it a little too strongly. The tests showed two things:

1) Hospital stays were reduced from 15 days on average to 11 days.

2) The mortality rate was 8.0% vs. 11.6% for placebo.

These are certainly beneficial results, and technically a "treatment" as it improves the patient's condition. But an 8% mortality rate is still something to be concerned about and I think most people would consider that to suggest that we still need to remain vigilant. As the study doctors say, more work is needed. It is a treatment not a cure, and people can still die who get the drug as the study showed. So not pouring cold water on the results, but I doubt it will allay fear in most people just yet. Good news all the same.
For debate:

Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAHi3lX3oGM

Early treatments are already available but are not being offered.....
Always what I post is my opinion, according to my understanding.

User avatar
Jemima
Student
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2021 11:50 pm
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?

Post #14

Post by Jemima »

Miles wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 8:19 pm
otseng wrote: Sat May 02, 2020 8:47 am
DrNoGods wrote: [Replying to post 134 by AgnosticBoy]
I think we all need to tone down our fears about this virus, especially now that there's a treatment for covid-19:


That might be wording it a little too strongly. The tests showed two things:

1) Hospital stays were reduced from 15 days on average to 11 days.

2) The mortality rate was 8.0% vs. 11.6% for placebo.

These are certainly beneficial results, and technically a "treatment" as it improves the patient's condition. But an 8% mortality rate is still something to be concerned about and I think most people would consider that to suggest that we still need to remain vigilant. As the study doctors say, more work is needed. It is a treatment not a cure, and people can still die who get the drug as the study showed. So not pouring cold water on the results, but I doubt it will allay fear in most people just yet. Good news all the same.
For debate:

Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?
Need a scientific reference. What ya got?

.
https://youtu.be/xWBC-JX6lsg
Always what I post is my opinion, according to my understanding.

benchwarmer
Guru
Posts: 2106
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:40 am
Has thanked: 1363 times
Been thanked: 524 times

Re: Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?

Post #15

Post by benchwarmer »

Jemima wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 6:49 pm
Miles wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 8:19 pm Need a scientific reference. What ya got?

.
https://youtu.be/xWBC-JX6lsg
A link to a youtube video is not a scientific reference. A link to a peer reviewed article (or article submitted for peer review) are the type of scientific references that I personally would be looking for (can't speak for Miles, but assume something similar is meant). In other words, data, methodology, scientists (doctors) involved, and who reviewed the findings.

User avatar
Jemima
Student
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2021 11:50 pm
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?

Post #16

Post by Jemima »

benchwarmer wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:02 pm
Jemima wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 6:49 pm
Miles wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 8:19 pm Need a scientific reference. What ya got?

.
https://youtu.be/xWBC-JX6lsg
A link to a youtube video is not a scientific reference. A link to a peer reviewed article (or article submitted for peer review) are the type of scientific references that I personally would be looking for (can't speak for Miles, but assume something similar is meant). In other words, data, methodology, scientists (doctors) involved, and who reviewed the findings.
This is not a YouTube conspiracy theorist.....and if you had watched the video you would have seen that he is a qualified medical scientist who has himself published peer reviewed papers. The first video is addressing the Texas Senate HHS Committee...this second one backs it up.

How sad that these doctors are gagged by the mainstream media and have to resort to YouTube in order to be heard. These are as qualified as the ones who heavily promote the vaccines which are proving to be failing as the means to address Cv19 adequately. Early intervention is the key. 50% of those hospitilized for Cv19 were vaccinated.
Always what I post is my opinion, according to my understanding.

User avatar
Tcg
Savant
Posts: 7162
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 5:01 am
Location: Third Stone
Has thanked: 1292 times
Been thanked: 1517 times

Re: Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?

Post #17

Post by Tcg »

Jemima wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:37 pm 50% of those hospitilized for Cv19 were vaccinated.
Absent any source provided it's hard to decipher this claim. What is the time period for this claim? Is this worldwide? Perhaps you can provide a source for this claim to clear up these answers.

The charts referenced below are U.S. specific and paint a drastically different picture:
These charts show that COVID-19 vaccines are doing their job

Immunizations are keeping the majority of vaccinated people out of the hospital

As the coronavirus continues to surge across the United States, hospitals are again filling up with ill COVID-19 patients. And the vast majority of those patients are unvaccinated, as two new charts help make exceedingly clear.

One of those charts shows that from January 24 to July 24, vaccinated individuals were hospitalized with COVID-19 at a much lower cumulative rate than unvaccinated individuals. And the difference in rates between the two groups has only grown over time. By late July, a total of about 26 adults per 100,000 vaccinated people had been hospitalized for COVID-19. That’s compared with about 431 hospitalized people for every 100,000 unvaccinated individuals — a rate roughly 17 times as high as for those who were vaccinated. The data come from 13 states, including California, Georgia and Utah.

The accumulation of hospitalizations in each group over time, which that first chart shows, illustrates the risk of developing severe COVID-19 overall. And its message is clear: If you’re vaccinated during this pandemic, your risk of hospitalization is much, much lower than if you’re not vaccinated. The weekly rate, on the other hand, is a bit like the speedometer on a car — providing a glimpse of what’s happening week by week as the coronavirus spreads. Its message is also clear: The risk of a vaccinated person becoming hospitalized remains low at any given time, while the risk for unvaccinated people can fluctuate, probably as a result of community transmission.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/cov ... vaccinated

[Follow the link above to view the charts this article references.]

Tcg
To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

- American Atheists


Not believing isn't the same as believing not.

- wiploc


I must assume that knowing is better than not knowing, venturing than not venturing; and that magic and illusion, however rich, however alluring, ultimately weaken the human spirit.

- Irvin D. Yalom

benchwarmer
Guru
Posts: 2106
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:40 am
Has thanked: 1363 times
Been thanked: 524 times

Re: Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?

Post #18

Post by benchwarmer »

Jemima wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:37 pm
benchwarmer wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:02 pm
Jemima wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 6:49 pm
Miles wrote: Wed Aug 19, 2020 8:19 pm Need a scientific reference. What ya got?

.
https://youtu.be/xWBC-JX6lsg
A link to a youtube video is not a scientific reference. A link to a peer reviewed article (or article submitted for peer review) are the type of scientific references that I personally would be looking for (can't speak for Miles, but assume something similar is meant). In other words, data, methodology, scientists (doctors) involved, and who reviewed the findings.
This is not a YouTube conspiracy theorist.....
You sure about that?
Jemima wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:37 pm and if you had watched the video you would have seen that he is a qualified medical scientist who has himself published peer reviewed papers. The first video is addressing the Texas Senate HHS Committee...this second one backs it up.
Oh, I looked up the doctor mentioned: Peter McCullough:

From:
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/ ... on-license
Column: A warning to doctors — spreading COVID misinformation could cost you your license

...

Take Texas doctor Peter McCullough, who has questioned the safety of COVID-19 vaccines and advised pregnant women and recovered COVID patients against taking them — advice that runs counter to that of the medical establishment.

Since Feb. 24, according to a legal filing, McCullough has conducted “dozens, if not hundreds, of interviews in print and video,” during some of which he is identified as a staff official at Baylor Medical Center or its affiliated institutions, such as “vice chief of internal medicine” at Baylor.

That’s a key date, according to a lawsuit filed against McCullough by Baylor affiliates, because it’s the date on which McCullough reached an agreement with Baylor not to use his previous Baylor titles or “hold himself out as affiliated” with Baylor or its related institutions. The July 28 lawsuit seeks to force McCullough to stop using his former relationship.

A McCullough lawyer told the Dallas Morning News that every misidentification cited in the lawsuit is “something said/printed by a third party with no encouragement from Dr. McCullough.” The lawyer told MedPage Today that the lawsuit was “a politically motivated attempt to silence Dr. McCullough as he saves countless patient lives from COVID-19.”

A few state medical boards have taken action against doctors spreading COVID or vaccine misinformation, but enforcement appears to have been spotty.

In part that’s because in virtually every state and territory, investigations of doctors remain confidential at least until a formal accusation or stipulated resolution is filed. That moment can come years after the alleged wrongdoing, during which the doctor can continue practicing without informing patients of an ongoing inquiry.
Jemima wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:37 pm How sad that these doctors are gagged by the mainstream media and have to resort to YouTube in order to be heard. These are as qualified as the ones who heavily promote the vaccines which are proving to be failing as the means to address Cv19 adequately. Early intervention is the key.
I'm guessing doctors involved in legal litigation may not have access to as many reputable outlets.
Jemima wrote: Thu Sep 02, 2021 9:37 pm 50% of those hospitilized for Cv19 were vaccinated.
Source? Please not another youtube video link...

User avatar
Jemima
Student
Posts: 79
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2021 11:50 pm
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 18 times
Been thanked: 15 times

Re: Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?

Post #19

Post by Jemima »

Tcg wrote: Fri Sep 03, 2021 5:15 pm Absent any source provided it's hard to decipher this claim. What is the time period for this claim? Is this worldwide? Perhaps you can provide a source for this claim to clear up these answers.
All we need to do is turn off mainstream media and look at YouTube if we want a balanced approach to information. It is the only source of accurate information from both sides of this issue. Those who want to have a balanced approach are not allowed a voice on mainstream media.
Those who can evaluate the risk/benefit ratio truthfully, according to the available science, are then at liberty to help people to enact their choice. Isn't this the best approach?
Tcg wrote: Fri Sep 03, 2021 5:15 pmThe charts referenced below are U.S. specific and paint a drastically different picture:
I do not believe that they paint a totally accurate picture. There are always two sides to every story. If we form our opinions on only one biased (vested interest) side of a story, then we can kiss the truth goodbye. Are people afraid of the truth? There is so much censorship, even of those who are equally qualified medically speaking, to make their views public. Why are their voices silenced? Don't we have to wonder?

Like this man....Dr Peter McCullough....what does he have to gain by wanting the truth to be told.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QAHi3lX3oGM

Please do not dismiss his testimony. Surely with his qualifications, he has a right to be heard too....?
These charts show that COVID-19 vaccines are doing their job
Immunizations are keeping the majority of vaccinated people out of the hospital
There is also a large number of people who have died, and thousands who have been disabled by the vaccines that they thought would protect them.
No one is hearing about them. These were not anti-vaxers....but victims, and they are being ignored and told to go away.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9h5c4OQMYU

A report from the CDC itself says....
"Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 369 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through August 30, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 7,218 reports of death (0.0020%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine."

Did any of those people think that the vaccine would do that to them? All of them were confident that what they had been told about vaccine safety was the truth. If there was even a possibility that this could happen, then shouldn't these people have been about it informed first?

Statistically, dying from the vaccine is rare, but death from Cv19 is also "rare" statistically speaking.....barely 2% actually get sick enough to go to hospital. And according to Dr Peter McCullough 85% of them could have been treated early and avoided hospital treatment. Thousands of people die of the ordinary seasonal flu every year.

The virus is real, no doubt about it, but some in the medical community are being gagged about how beneficial natural immunity is in leading to herd immunity, which is the only thing that will lead us out of this pandemic. Those who die from Cv19 in almost all cases had underlying health issues that also contributed to their inability to fight off the virus. But we are being told that even a seasonal flu might have had the same outcome for such people. The number of deaths attributed to Cv19, is thus inflated when co-morbidity is involved.
As the coronavirus continues to surge across the United States, hospitals are again filling up with ill COVID-19 patients. And the vast majority of those patients are unvaccinated, as two new charts help make exceedingly clear.
The vaccinated are also filling up the hospitals. Look what happened in Israel....? We will only reach herd immunity when enough people have had the virus and recovered. Natural immunity, regardless of the scare tactics to the contrary in the media, are the most successful at providing good and lasting immunity. If people want to have the jab, then let them but, please, all we ask is for transparency and the whole truth to be told. Don't we deserve that?
One of those charts shows that from January 24 to July 24, vaccinated individuals were hospitalized with COVID-19 at a much lower cumulative rate than unvaccinated individuals. And the difference in rates between the two groups has only grown over time. By late July, a total of about 26 adults per 100,000 vaccinated people had been hospitalized for COVID-19. That’s compared with about 431 hospitalized people for every 100,000 unvaccinated individuals — a rate roughly 17 times as high as for those who were vaccinated. The data come from 13 states, including California, Georgia and Utah.
These charts are not the whole story IMO. Many medical experts are coming out to tell us that early intervention in the treatment of Cv19, (as above) using existing therapies that already have approval, and are proving to be very successful overseas, are not being offered. Even many doctors have been given the impression that there is no early intervention possible. That is simply not true.
The accumulation of hospitalizations in each group over time, which that first chart shows, illustrates the risk of developing severe COVID-19 overall. And its message is clear: If you’re vaccinated during this pandemic, your risk of hospitalization is much, much lower than if you’re not vaccinated. The weekly rate, on the other hand, is a bit like the speedometer on a car — providing a glimpse of what’s happening week by week as the coronavirus spreads. Its message is also clear: The risk of a vaccinated person becoming hospitalized remains low at any given time, while the risk for unvaccinated people can fluctuate, probably as a result of community transmission.
Do you understand that no amount of vaccination will eliminate Cv19, no matter how many are vaccinated. You can still get it, and you can still spread it. The danger lies in believing that you are now immune, when no vaccine will do that. People should do their homework instead of listening only to mass media who are told what they can report and what they can't.

This has become such an emotive issue when all it needs is a calm and rational approach, and all avenues of early intervention explored and tried if the patients request it. Some people are going to die and there is no way to prevent that in some patients. But for the vast majority, this virus is not going to put them in hospital.

That is my informed and honest opinion.
Always what I post is my opinion, according to my understanding.

benchwarmer
Guru
Posts: 2106
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:40 am
Has thanked: 1363 times
Been thanked: 524 times

Re: Do we now have a treatment for covid-19?

Post #20

Post by benchwarmer »

Jemima wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 12:23 am All we need to do is turn off mainstream media and look at YouTube if we want a balanced approach to information.
That's hilarious.

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE YouTube. I can find out how to take a dishwasher apart, watch people do sports I can't do, and listen to all manner of people voice their opinions on practically everything.

HOWEVER, to call this 'balanced' is a stretch. Any information from mainstream media or YouTube needs to be fact checked from other sources before giving it much weight. Like I posted above, the doctor you seemed focused on is in some legal hot water for apparently misrepresenting himself as he gives this 'balanced information'.
Jemima wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 12:23 am It is the only source of accurate information from both sides of this issue.
Baloney. There are all kinds of place to find information. YouTube is not the holy grail. To say it is the "only" source shows your bias and also sinks any point you might have been trying to make.
Jemima wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 12:23 am Those who want to have a balanced approach are not allowed a voice on mainstream media.
It's true that not everyone has a voice on mainstream media. It's also true that anyone with a webcam and an internet connection can upload a YouTube video. There's no guarantee the information on YouTube is 'balanced'.
Jemima wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 12:23 am Those who can evaluate the risk/benefit ratio truthfully, according to the available science, are then at liberty to help people to enact their choice. Isn't this the best approach?
No, the best approach is to do the hard science and publish the findings for peer review. Lots and lots of actual data from various studies published for all other doctors and scientists to review and attempt to replicate.

Using one's credentials as a doctor on YouTube to bolster personal opinion is NOT the best approach.
Jemima wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 12:23 am Like this man....Dr Peter McCullough....what does he have to gain by wanting the truth to be told.
Why does anyone want their opinion to be taken seriously? Given the possible misrepresentation this doctor is involved in, it makes me extremely skeptical of anything further he has to say. Perhaps you have the latest info on that and can clear things up?
Jemima wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 12:23 am Please do not dismiss his testimony. Surely with his qualifications, he has a right to be heard too....?
He, along with everyone, has a right to be heard.

However, one has to do some extra research to determine if what any given person says is worth taking seriously.
Jemima wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 12:23 am There is also a large number of people who have died, and thousands who have been disabled by the vaccines that they thought would protect them.
No one is hearing about them. These were not anti-vaxers....but victims, and they are being ignored and told to go away.
Large? You seem to play fast and loose with the adjectives when it suits your point of view. 0.0020% is 'large'? Also, no one is being 'ignored'. The possible side effects of the vaccines are well known for anyone paying attention. No one is denying the issue.

The full info from the CDC that you obviously saw since you quoted (but failed to provide the link):
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-nc ... vents.html
Serious adverse events after COVID-19 vaccination are rare but may occur.

For public awareness and in the interest of transparency, CDC is providing timely updates on the following serious adverse events of interest:

Anaphylaxis after COVID-19 vaccination is rare and has occurred in approximately 2 to 5 people per million vaccinated in the United States. Severe allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis, can occur after any vaccination. If this occurs, vaccination providers can effectively and immediately treat the reaction. Learn more about COVID-19 vaccines and allergic reactions, including anaphylaxis.
Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome (TTS) after Johnson & Johnson’s Janssen (J&J/Janssen) COVID-19 vaccination is rare. As of August 25, 2021, more than 14.2 million doses of the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine have been given in the United States. CDC and FDA identified 44 confirmed reports of people who got the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and later developed TTS. Women younger than 50 years old especially should be aware of the rare but increased risk of this adverse event. There are other COVID-19 vaccine options available for which this risk has not been seen. Learn more about J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and TTS.
To date, two confirmed cases of TTS following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Moderna) have been reported to VAERS after more than 346 million doses mRNA COVID-19 vaccines administered in the United States. Based on available data, there is not an increased risk for TTS after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination.
CDC and FDA are monitoring reports of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS) in people who have received the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine. GBS is a rare disorder where the body’s immune system damages nerve cells, causing muscle weakness and sometimes paralysis. Most people fully recover from GBS, but some have permanent nerve damage. After more than 14.2 million J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine doses administered, there have been around 176 preliminary reports of GBS identified in VAERS as of August 25, 2021. These cases have largely been reported about 2 weeks after vaccination and mostly in men, many 50 years and older. CDC will continue to monitor for and evaluate reports of GBS occurring after COVID-19 vaccination and will share more information as it becomes available.
Myocarditis and pericarditis after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. As of August 25, 2021, VAERS has received 1,377 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis among people ages 30 and younger who received COVID-19 vaccine. Most cases have been reported after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna), particularly in male adolescents and young adults. Through follow-up, including medical record reviews, CDC and FDA have confirmed 798 reports of myocarditis or pericarditis. CDC and its partners are investigating these reports to assess whether there is a relationship to COVID-19 vaccination. Learn more about COVID-19 vaccines and myocarditis.
Reports of death after COVID-19 vaccination are rare. More than 369 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines were administered in the United States from December 14, 2020, through August 30, 2021. During this time, VAERS received 7,218 reports of death (0.0020%) among people who received a COVID-19 vaccine. FDA requires healthcare providers to report any death after COVID-19 vaccination to VAERS, even if it’s unclear whether the vaccine was the cause. Reports of adverse events to VAERS following vaccination, including deaths, do not necessarily mean that a vaccine caused a health problem. A review of available clinical information, including death certificates, autopsy, and medical records, has not established a causal link to COVID-19 vaccines. However, recent reports indicate a plausible causal relationship between the J&J/Janssen COVID-19 Vaccine and TTS, a rare and serious adverse event—blood clots with low platelets—which has caused deaths.
Jemima wrote: Sat Sep 04, 2021 12:23 am Did any of those people think that the vaccine would do that to them? All of them were confident that what they had been told about vaccine safety was the truth. If there was even a possibility that this could happen, then shouldn't these people have been about it informed first?
I don't know about you, but before I got my vaccine I was informed about the statistically rare chance of a side effect. In fact we had to wait 15 mins after getting the shot and then were handed a piece of paper of symptoms to watch out for just in case.

As we've seen in the news, some anti-vaxxers thought the vaccines we unsafe and later ended up in the ICU begging for the vaccine. Shouldn't those people have been informed of this possible outcome first? Oh ya, they were.

‘It’s too late’: US doctor says dying patients begging for Covid vaccine
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... s-vaccines

Look, I get your basic point. No one want to have an adverse side effect from a vaccine OR Covid-19. You have to look at the latest science and make your choice.

Post Reply