Please get vaccinated 👍
🇳🇱
@lupyuen I think ill wait a year or two until the safety is on par with existing vaccines.. I think its foolish to jump in on a vaccine that skipped the usual safety tests (long term trials).
@freemo @lupyuen
Have you considered that in this two years of wait you expose yourself and others to a significant higher risk of getting infected ? Also why two, why not one or three? Many health organisations have checked the Covid vaccines very thoroughly including the EU, US, UK and are satisfied. Are you sure your two year wait approach does not make it more unsafe with two years more exposure to the virus?
Besides that I think you will find shortly that many business are not willing to risk their lifeblood if you cannot prove immunity.
Not per legislation but by business owners requesting it.
Why should pubs, restaurants, cinemas, theaters, shops risk to be closed (again) for some time. They will expect their customers to be able to show they are immune and not a threat to their business. I more and more think that this is right. It feels a bit bad and discriminating, but I can't see business risking their existence in the attempt to make it right for everyone (which would probably not work anyhow, there is always someone)
So I guess 'no vaccine no beer' is coming soon.
How do you "check the covid vaccines very thoroughly" for long-term effects.. They have never been able to skip that step in past vaccines, there is no magical way to skip it now.. Be as thurough as you want you simply cant do a long-term case study in a short term period.
Keep in mind there are scientists in significant enough numbers who have raised formal objections to the skipped safety procesdures and some on the CDC and other organizations who quit in protest. This is hardly something that can just be hand waived away.
As for why we pick 1 or 2 years as a good number is because when we have tested vaccines in the past we have found thats the amount of time needed to expose the sorts of concerns which are typical for vaccines that show up long-term. ADE being the most notable concern doctors have which is about on the order of 1 - 2 years for that to start cropping up.
As for the idea that its more dangerous to wait because you will infect more people... well, simply put, we are completely in the dark about making that assertion as we have no long term data, so we are fairly cluess outside of some educated guesses how dangerous, if at all, the vaccine will be long term. Best case there are no problems, worst case, the virus causes extreme ADE or one of the other possible complicationsa nd everyone vaccinated now has a lethal response should they come across the virus. The risk of this is low but the mortality rate should it happen in a worst case scenario could be devastating, we simply dont know.
What compounds the risk even more so is that the viruses being administered are using a route that has never before been used for vaccines or on humans. So there is a really huge unknown there that is exceptionally worse than if this were designed more similarly to a conventional vaccine.
All in all there is little denying the risks, and even the medical researchers have voiced these concerns, so you cant hand wave them away.
I can tell you this, if businesses do make a "no vaccine no beer policy" I would actually refuse to vaccine, even after a year, as a form of protest to that and explicitly lie at bars, again as a form of protest.
I find it unacceptable that it should be legal for a person to effectively be forced to take a life-threatening vaccines (one that has not had the usual safety procedures) if they wish to participate in society. So I would do what I can to protest should that ever become a reality.
As for putting their patrons at risk.. the whole idea of a vaccine is if the staff an the people choose to be vaccinated they arent at risk, so the argument for such a policy is extremely weak in the first place.
