YungSah

4y

Are you young , healthy and follow a good hygiene regimen ? Then dont take it

ganger

4y

Ok doctor

plants

4y

lot of women, my wife included, experienced some pretty major disruption to their hormonal cycle after the vaccine. and it wasnt nowhere in any listed side effects until months later. so even mid-rollout they was still learning how it effects people at least to some degree.

considering how gnarly long covid can be and all that s*** it's a well safe bet to get jabbed but still, hard to talk about this stuff sometimes without ppl going nuts

hot pancakes

4y

yep 2 of my girlfriends friends had cycle issues after the vaccine, seems to definitely be an unintended side effect

ganger

4y

Ok doctor

ganger

4y

You got two gifs?

K DOG 99

4y

Acting like you aren't replying to a literal doctor

YungSah

4y

You?

Prison Mike

4y

I mean doctors have different opinions

K DOG 99

4y

str8dollaz is a doctor

krishna bound

4y

all vaccines have a chance of side effects, that's how they work (and in wider terms all medicine in general)

the fearmongering about side effect percentages has to do with the perception based on population

for example, avg flu vaccination rate if 35.7% of adults aged 18-64 (source: https://www.tfah.org/report-details/issue-brief-as-flu-season-ramps-up-adults-18-64-years-old-least-likely-to-get-flu-shots/)

estimates show at least 80% of the US have gotten at least one dose of the covid vaccine, and 68% of the population have gotten two, and then another 33% with a booster (source: https://usafacts.org/visualizations/covid-vaccine-tracker-states)

even if the chances of side effects are an equal 0.05% and the total US population is 331.89 million - with 35.7% vs 80% you're going to see essentially 2x minimum at the same rate, but with a sample size of 331M that difference is A LOT of people. this doesn't account for a +/- 0.01-0.02% additional margin for example or even multiple dosages.

at minimum if you assume a base rate you're talking AT LEAST over 2x the rate of side effects in terms of perception. the same thing applies to anything else. the perceived difference is A LOT because of the huge sample size - but the difference in perception doesn't make it inherently less safe.

YungSah

4y

So this is just inherently wrong

1.Absolute vs relative figures

Duh

2. Its very simple to compare the side effects from say, rotavirus vaccine, measles vaccine, polio vaccine which have literally billions of patient samples to covid mRNA which has less and a larger side effect profile

Tldr;

The above paragraph is basically - tell me you don't know anything about vaccinology without telling me you don't know anything about vaccinology

krishna bound

4y

I'm not arguing about virology, I'm arguing about perception of relative frequency of side effects. If you think statistic observation is wrong, you're being obtuse. Separately, if you want to argue about the specific percentage under which you think the side effects will occur, that's different. How much do you want to say the percentage of side effects is or will be long term? 1% 5%? 10%? 99%?

YungSah

4y

You're comparing apples to oranges bro. Polio vaccines etc are well studied and work. We know what they do and cause and I'd take them any day.

Jody

4y

Isn’t this bannable?

YungSah

4y

You're comparing apples to oranges bro. Polio vaccines etc are well studied and work. We know what they do and cause and I'd take them any day.

krishna bound

4y

It's not apples and oranges. Polio vaccines etc. also have percentage margins for side effects. That's why I'm asking you specifically, what margin are you saying serious adverse side effects will occur by comparison for COVID vaccines? 5? 10%? 50%? 60%? if the relative side effect percentage isn't any higher than any other vaccine, and you're just angry for ethical reasons, fair enough, but scaremongering about the vaccine specifically (esp. since you literally said "anti-vaxxers were right") is different from making an ethical argument

Jody

4y

Isn’t this bannable?