Republican Bill In Idaho Would Make mRNA-Based Vaccination a Crime 518
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: Two Republican lawmakers in Idaho have introduced a bill that would make it a misdemeanor for anyone in the state to administer mRNA-based vaccines -- namely the lifesaving and remarkably safe COVID-19 vaccines made by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna. If passed as written, it would also preemptively ban the use of countless other mRNA vaccines that are now in development, such as shots for RSV, a variety of cancers, HIV, flu, Nipah virus, and cystic fibrosis, among others. The bill is sponsored by Sen. Tammy Nichols of Middleton and Rep. Judy Boyle of Midvale, both staunch conservatives who say they stand for freedom and the right to life. But their bill, HB 154, proposes that "a person may not provide or administer a vaccine developed using messenger ribonucleic acid [mRNA] technology for use in an individual or any other mammal in this state." If passed into law, anyone administering lifesaving mRNA-based vaccines would be guilty of a misdemeanor, which could result in jail time and/or a fine.
While presenting the bill to the House Health & Welfare Committee last week, Nichols said their anti-mRNA stance stems from the fact that the COVID-19 vaccines were initially allowed under emergency use authorizations (EUAs) from the Food and Drug Administration, not the agency's full regulatory approval. "We have issues that this was fast-tracked," she told fellow lawmakers, according to reporting from local news outlet KXLY.com. [...] "They ultimately were approved under the ordinary approval process and did ultimately, you know, survive the scrutiny of being subjected to all the normal tests," Rep. Ilana Rubel, a democrat from Boise, said. Nichols seemed unswayed by the point, however, with KTVB7 reporting that she responded that the FDA's approval "may not have been done like we thought it should've been done."
To date, more than 269 million people in the US have received at least one COVID-19 vaccine, and over 700 million doses of mRNA-based vaccines have gone into American arms, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The agency keeps close tabs on safety through various national surveillance systems. Although the shots do carry some risk (as is the case for any medical intervention), they have proven remarkably safe amid widespread use of hundreds of millions of doses in the US and worldwide. A study released late last year found that COVID-19 vaccination in the US alone averted more than 18 million additional hospitalizations and more than 3 million additional deaths from the pandemic coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2. The National Human Genome Research Institute notes that mRNA "is a type of single-stranded RNA involved in protein synthesis. mRNA is made from a DNA template during the process of transcription. The role of mRNA is to carry protein information from the DNA in a cell's nucleus to the cell's cytoplasm (watery interior), where the protein-making machinery reads the mRNA sequence and translates each three-base codon into its corresponding amino acid in a growing protein chain."
mRNA-based vaccines made their public debut amid the COVID-19 pandemic, but researchers have been "working toward these vaccines for decades beforehand," adds Ars.
While presenting the bill to the House Health & Welfare Committee last week, Nichols said their anti-mRNA stance stems from the fact that the COVID-19 vaccines were initially allowed under emergency use authorizations (EUAs) from the Food and Drug Administration, not the agency's full regulatory approval. "We have issues that this was fast-tracked," she told fellow lawmakers, according to reporting from local news outlet KXLY.com. [...] "They ultimately were approved under the ordinary approval process and did ultimately, you know, survive the scrutiny of being subjected to all the normal tests," Rep. Ilana Rubel, a democrat from Boise, said. Nichols seemed unswayed by the point, however, with KTVB7 reporting that she responded that the FDA's approval "may not have been done like we thought it should've been done."
To date, more than 269 million people in the US have received at least one COVID-19 vaccine, and over 700 million doses of mRNA-based vaccines have gone into American arms, according to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The agency keeps close tabs on safety through various national surveillance systems. Although the shots do carry some risk (as is the case for any medical intervention), they have proven remarkably safe amid widespread use of hundreds of millions of doses in the US and worldwide. A study released late last year found that COVID-19 vaccination in the US alone averted more than 18 million additional hospitalizations and more than 3 million additional deaths from the pandemic coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2. The National Human Genome Research Institute notes that mRNA "is a type of single-stranded RNA involved in protein synthesis. mRNA is made from a DNA template during the process of transcription. The role of mRNA is to carry protein information from the DNA in a cell's nucleus to the cell's cytoplasm (watery interior), where the protein-making machinery reads the mRNA sequence and translates each three-base codon into its corresponding amino acid in a growing protein chain."
mRNA-based vaccines made their public debut amid the COVID-19 pandemic, but researchers have been "working toward these vaccines for decades beforehand," adds Ars.
If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Insightful)
If anyone still thinks the GOP hasn't deteriorated into a fascist bunch of raving fucking lunatics... then you're not paying attention.
Re: (Score:3)
If anyone still thinks the GOP hasn't deteriorated into a fascist bunch of raving fucking lunatics... then you're not paying attention.
Or just chronically/congenitally are unable to piece simple things together to get a generalized idea of reality beyond repeating talking points. I mean, if this isn’t obvious to anyone I’m sorry you were dealt that hand in life.
Re: (Score:3)
It's probably a generalized tendency of elected politicians to be stupid. After all if they had useful life skills they'd have a real job instead.
Re:If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Insightful)
If anyone still thinks the GOP hasn't deteriorated into a fascist bunch of raving fucking lunatics... then you're not paying attention.
Problem is, that doesn't stop a significant portion of the electorate from voting for them. Back in ye olde 2016, I had similar conversations with the usual sort of friends and family who were quite concerned that a Democrat was gonna cast the socialism spell and their taxes would go up like Dogecoin after an Elon Musk tweet. At least, concerned enough that was a more important issue than the possibility of a Republican president winning, seating a bunch of right-wing biased justices to the SCOTUS, and my partner and I's marriage going up in a cloud of political homophobia.
Okay, the very last part of that ended up not transpiring, thanks to wins on the Democrat side and The Respect for Marriage act passing. It can't be said often enough: both sides are not the same.
Re:If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Insightful)
Indeed, both sides are not the same. Everyone should read The Reckoning [macmillan.com] by Mary L. Trump (that's right... Donald's niece) for a true picture of the fascist nature of today's GOP.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, parent was at 5 and is now at 3. Trollbot army has mobilized...
Re:If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Insightful)
It is nothing but an unsubstantiated slam against the politics of half the nation or somewhere or 150+ million people.
That's the paradox of tolerance [wikipedia.org], though. Accepting that all ideas deserve a seat at the table, even ones which reject science or dehumanize minorities, lends an air of legitimacy to such ideas. There are some things that should simply not be part of a major party's political platform in modern times, and they absolutely should be called out on it. The fact that 150+ million people think it's acceptable doesn't make it right, it makes it terrifying.
Re:If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Interesting)
No. The shift has been to the right. Mainstream Ds today sound like yesterday's Rs. Todays Rs sound like yesterdays crazy wingnuts.
Consider Eisenhower's famous speech about the military-industrial complex. Does it sound more like something a Democrat would say today or a Republican?
Re:If anyone still thinks... (Score:4, Informative)
Consider Eisenhower's famous speech about the military-industrial complex. Does it sound more like something a Democrat would say today or a Republican?
Or Nixon's EPA, for that matter.
Re:If anyone still thinks... (Score:4, Informative)
Or Ronald Reagan's support of the machine gun ban of 1986.
Re:If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Interesting)
>> members of the GOP, the majority of whom hold positions which were considered moderate-to-liberal stances less than a decade ago
Oh that _is_ funny, do go on
I grew up and live in a red state, all of my neighbors were republicans, I remember going to kindergarten PROUD that Richard Nixon won the Presidency
I was a bright kid, and the numerous veterans, military industrial complex workers, teachers, etc... that I grew up around were certain to tell me the lay of the land because they wanted me to know what was up. Every single one of them warned me of the mind rot that was the John Birch Society
In the 50 odd years since then, the children of the former president of the JBS (Fred Koch) bought the GOP lock, stock and barrel.
They used the propaganda and "dizzy up the bitch" techniques of their father to turn the members of the GOP into fear driven idiots
In the mean-time, astute Democratic politicians like Bill Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden took all of the core beliefs of my mentors and formed them into the platform of the Democratic Party, with just enough liberal heart to sell the ideas that it is better to educate than to incarcerate, better to befriend than to fight and better to vaccinate than to die of some treatable disease
I am a Democrat now, my state is a purple state and even my mother switched party this last election cycle and listens to NPR
So yeah, everything that the GOP used to be is in the Dem party now, and all that is left in the GOP are the JBS nutters
Wake up and smell the coffee ya dumbass
Re:If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Insightful)
That's the only appropriate response to your insane ramblings. To engage with your bullshit would be to give it an air of legitimacy that it very clearly does not deserve.
Re:If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Insightful)
Accept that all ideas deserve to be listened to - that way we know which ideas to discard.
So how much time do YOU spend listening to the latest varieties of flat earthism?
Re:If anyone still thinks... (Score:4, Insightful)
Really, this isn't that hard. Republicans are consistently on the wrong side of everything. They oppose facts. They oppose science. They oppose education. They support overthrowing our government by force. They support seceding from the country. They support civil war. They endorse racist, homophobic, treasonous politicians.
Please by all means continue your tirade of bigoted prejudice.
You see it's okay for ME to make prejudicial statements about certain tribes yet when the OTHER guy commits the same exact error in judgment about my of sacred cows ZOMG...wrong wrong wrong.
Almost as if people have grown incapable of seeing, feeling or even smelling their own shit.
It's really weird, because years ago, Republicans actually loved the United States, supported education, supported human rights, and wanted to see the country prosper.
Now they just want to kill you, all 150 million of them or maybe you are just as fucked in the head as they are.
Re: (Score:3)
The rest of us are forced to conclude that this is the modern GOP because the party its self has failed to corral the crazies. In fact recent surveys have concluded that around 30 - 35 percent of the party are hardcore election denying Trump supporters. And these folks turn out in droves for primary elections so their candidate field is full of these assholes too. In addition they're starting to get leadership positions which will give them a *bigger* platform in which to spew their bullshit.
I came up vo
Re:If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Interesting)
Rural communities just don't trust large or "outside" institutions at all, be it medicine or science. Sure the institutions are not perfect, but have far more checks and balances than most other endeavors.
But assuming such is true, why don't they apply the same distrust to Fox, OAN, Breitbart, etc? If science and medicine are so easy to corrupt, why is right-wing media immune to corruption?
The only answer I can get from them that makes semi-sense is that they trust their gut that Fox et. al. are reasonably accurate. Evangelicals are often taught that to get an answer, one prays and then trust their gut. That seems to be valued more than critical thinking and cross-checking.
If someone simply devalues critical thinking over their gut, they are probably unfixable, stuck in the pre-science era and happy to stay there.
Because (Score:5, Informative)
Rural communities have a lot of folks that simply don't want to hear it. So they pic Fox news, OAN etc. I call it shouting into the echo chamber. All they want to hear is that they are right. Every one else is wrong. Old Rich White Guys with bad tans will save them. People with dark skin are bad. All Mexicans are criminals. Before someone gives me a -1. I live in Oklahoma, I know of which I speak. These people don't want to think or attempt to see someone else's viewpoint. They just want hear that they are right and they have viewed the world is ok and everyone else is wrong, liberal, groomer etc. Trying to think through the science is way more than they want to deal with.
Re: (Score:3)
But you're missing the point of the post you're responding to. So you're saying that the science and drug companies that use it should constantly be questioned in case they get something wrong, misrepresent data, or are just plain not representing our best interests. Fine.
So why is it that so many people who are doing this are not also using this line of questioning on right-wing news sources or whatever random Youtube video they watch that are questioning the vaccines? If they used the same standards on th
I think they were always like this (Score:4, Insightful)
It's been like this since Goldwater lost. And it was Goldwater who warned us. [goodreads.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Interesting)
One good reason to lean in the direction of calling bullshit is because we've actually got a very good, statistically meaningful example of the difference in effectiveness of mRNA vaccines, and older adenovirus based vaccines: China. China is literally the only country who has flatly refused to import mRNA tech for the masses. They're also the only remaining country to still be fighting the pandemic like it's 2020.
Coincidence? I doubt it. Of course, their overall vaccination rate is pretty low as well, particularly among the elderly. But then again, GP is likely one of those idiots who advocates no COVID vaccines at all because none of them have been "tested" for four years. In which case I have to ask: Why wait four years when we already have something that we know to be effective?
China will, of course, teach the world what not to do.
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:4, Insightful)
Are you sure you want to draw those conclusions? China has also had some of the harshest quarantine policies worldwide.
Re: (Score:3)
Other countries used lockdown as a means to control infection rates until effective treatments & vaccination programs protected the most vulnerable. It mean that things loosened up over time and are effectively normalised now. China didn't. It was from total lockdown to virtually nothing and a lot of people needlessly died.
Re: (Score:3)
What are you even blathering about?
Re: (Score:3)
No dipshit. Lockdowns were effective and at slowing down the spread of the disease so that hospitals weren't overwhelmed with people getting sick to the point that doctors had to decide who got the ventilator and who died. And quite obviously they worked, as did the vaccine rollout that allowed things to return to normal. I realise some people are too fucking paranoid and stupid to trust doctors, science and evidence, but that's your burden not mine.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:2)
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Informative)
1) You are incorrect, the mRNA vaccines worked with a documented effectiveness of 96% https://academic.oup.com/cid/a... [oup.com] mRNA vaccines were also more effective against COVID-19 than other vaccination approaches https://academic.oup.com/cid/a... [oup.com]
2) Even if this particular vaccine had not worked, it would not rule out further mRNA vaccines as a whole. Previous approaches to vaccination also had varied efficacy and effectiveness. The expectation at this point is that mRNA vaccines are going to replace traditional vaccines whether you liked or not the previous one, *because they work better*.
3) Anyway calling anything a crime is entirely misdirected anger (probably by some religious zealot who felt offended by the successes of science). There are policies in place for approval of medicines and to ensure their safety and effectiveness. As a general rule when the policies are followed then possible problems are not a crime anymore. What one could do is to tighten some regulations for approvals, but given they are already a hell that requires many millions and hinder introduction of new life-saving medicines, I'm not sure it's a good idea.
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:4, Interesting)
I think the problem is that they want the vaccines to be permanently effective and 100% effective, and the COVID vaccines are neither. Well, I want that too, but to have any vaccine at all this quickly is really good. Probably in a decade we'll have a better vaccine. But I rather doubt that it will be permanently effective. Some immuniites don't seem to be permanent. I think the estimate for tetanus is 5-7 years.
So, yeah, I understand that they aren't satisfied with this vaccine. But it's quite unreasonable of them to expect better than we've gotten.
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Insightful)
I remember when the vaccine was new, my mom, and avid reader of misinformation from her far right email lists, claimed she didn't really want it because it wasn't 100% effective. I said no vaccine was 100% effective, and she strongly disagreed and said the the shingles vax was (it isn't). At the same time, she does get her flu vaccine which clearly is not 100% effective at all. So it's a big talking point to cast doubt and misinformation about what the far right sees as a plot. No real explanation of the plot that sounds sane, and what the plot is varies.
Anyway, "effectiveness" means many things. Ie, the flu vaccine for example will very much reduce the severity of symptoms even when you do catch it. Which means if you catch the flu but have lesser symptoms that the vaccine _worked_. Thus many people always take the vaccine anyway, knowing full well that it won't totally prevent influenza. However the far right talking point is when someone who had the covid vaccine catches a mild covid case is that either the vaccine is not effective or that covid is just a mild thing and the government overreacted.
Re: (Score:3)
I've seen people try and use Polio vaccine as a comparison and its really bizare.
Polio optimally has a 4-5 booster (it varies country to country) course for roughly the same efficacy as Covid vax (or at least covid vax with earlier variants) , AND a limited period of time before the immunity wanes.
The only one I can think of that actually has anywhere near 100% efficacy was Smallpox at 95%.
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Interesting)
I've seen people try and use Polio vaccine as a comparison and its really bizare.
Polio optimally has a 4-5 booster (it varies country to country) course for roughly the same efficacy as Covid vax (or at least covid vax with earlier variants) , AND a limited period of time before the immunity wanes.
The only one I can think of that actually has anywhere near 100% efficacy was Smallpox at 95%.
IPV is about 99% effective at preventing infection after three doses; I don't know how long its protection lasts in practice. The old oral polio vaccine lasted about a decade, and was 72% to 98% effective after three doses, depending on what study you look at.
That said, it's a ridiculous comparison, because polio is not a respiratory virus. It is much harder to catch polio through normal person-to-person contact than to catch a coronavirus. Nearly all of the spread of polio happens through contact with solid bodily waste, either directly or indirectly, e.g. people not washing their hands after using the bathroom, people swimming or washing clothes in rivers contaminated by sewage, people changing diapers, etc. Heck, if the polio vaccine didn't exist, there's a decent chance that the 1972 Clean Water Act would have eradicated polio from the U.S. by now anyway, just through improved drinking water quality and sewage treatment standards.
It's also a ridiculous comparison because polio has been around for millennia, which means it is fully adapted to human physiology, so the vaccine wasn't dealing with a crazy high rate of beneficial mutations (beneficial to the virus, that is).
Re:That's a bad argument to make (Score:5, Insightful)
The point you should be making is instead a much more nuanced point about the base rate fallacy, the places we do and do not see excess mortality (it's more among the unvaccinated than the vaccinated), and similar measures, rather than pretending that this stat from 2021 is still meaningful after several alphabets worth of variants
Because the original number is quite meaningful. When you have that strong of an early prevention, you can do a much greater job of damage control, even against future variants. That greatly eased the short-term burden on hospitals, and most (all?) of these variants came from other countries, which enables other controls, like travel restrictions, to at least slow down the spread. Furthermore, even in the absence of these other controls, these still offer a very good level of protection against these other variants. In fact, the protection they offered against these variants is still better than the protection we see in the typical flu shot.
Speak of the flu shots, they take months to produce, and by the time we do produce them, the flu virus frequently has already mutated a great deal. Meanwhile, mRNA shots can be produced in a much shorter time period, namely because mRNA is much faster to produce than a modified adenovirus (it's simple physics really -- PCR happens at a much faster rate.)
That said, I wouldn't be surprised at all if flu shots become far better after they switch to mRNA tech.
Re: (Score:3)
The point you should be making is instead a much more nuanced point about the base rate fallacy, the places we do and do not see excess mortality (it's more among the unvaccinated than the vaccinated), and similar measures, rather than pretending that this stat from 2021 is still meaningful after several alphabets worth of variants
Because the original number is quite meaningful. When you have that strong of an early prevention, you can do a much greater job of damage control, even against future variants.
You have to understand how they came up with 96% efficient. It is unethical to purposefully expose a person to a live virus. People in the study were either given the actual vaccine or a placebo. Everyone in the study was tested for COVID-19 on a regular basis. 96% of the people in the study which tested positive for COVID-19 received the placebo.
With such a high efficacy rate, we could have avoided a lot of cases if people were vaccinated before the first variant emerged. Everything about COVID-19 was poli
Re:That's a bad argument to make (Score:5, Insightful)
Effectiveness against the variants is diminished but still significant.
Your position shows an all too common strategy these days. Maintain contra-factual position. When the evidence mounts too high, add weasel words. When the evidence washes over the weasel words, take a step back and maintain you were talking about some more specific related point the whole time. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Sometimes, air bags and seat belts fail to save your life. But that doesn't mean you should rip them out of your car.
Re:That's a bad argument to make (Score:5, Informative)
You say that but this kind of crap is why people don't trust you and because they don't trust you, they don't get vaccinated.
I got vaccinated and I'm on the record on here telling people to get vaccinated since the start, feel free to check my post history on that one. But I also push for reality, because memeing this into simple stories when the actual situation is complicated is harmful and I see the harm because I actually talk to the people you guys talk down to.
For fuck's sake, Donald J. Fucking Trump got BOOED by his OWN SUPPORTERS when he told them getting vaccinated was a good idea. You think you're going to *reason* with people like that?
You have a better chance of winning Powerball with the same numbers in consecutive weeks
Re: (Score:3)
So are you claiming that the original COVID vaccine has ZERO percent effectiveness against recent mutations, or that you ripped out your seat belts and air bags, or both?
And actually, people do tend to trust me.
That depends on what you mean by "effectiveness", and it depends on when you got it.
If you got the original COVID vaccine last month, it is so-so, with 36% effectiveness against symptomatic infection from 7 to 59 days [jamanetwork.com] on average. By 180 days, effectiveness against symptomatic infection has fallen to 1% (in the study linked above), and by a year after vaccination, the effectiveness against symptomatic infection is within the margin of error of being zero (I can't remember which study that was, but I think i
Re: (Score:3)
And then immediately messed up the tags in my reply. Not my best week.
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:4, Insightful)
Stop getting your science information out of cracker jack boxes.
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Informative)
We could have stopped it in the beginning. Strict quarantining would have worked in January/February 2020 to prevent a large outbreak. But no, heads went into the sand until the deaths in New York couldn't be ignored or dismissed away, and by then it was too late, as it had spread too far. With that spread, it allowed the virus to mutate, and new strains develop, which then were different than what the initial vaccine could work against. And even then, getting the vaccine became a political statement. There are people who still have not been vaccinated 2 years after they became available, and that is letting the virus continue to mutate and the vaccine continue to possibly become less effective against a new mutation.
Lets look at vaccines in history that have worked well at eradicating the virus it was designed to prevent, vaccines for polio, small pox, mumps, measles... You know what they all have in common? They were widely distributed and administered to the population. In fact, many of them are still REQUIRED for you or your child is allowed to go to school. Unfortunately these viruses are much more stable and are not mutating. Something that is more like covid, would be the flu vaccines. Guess what, we get one of those every year because it is a fast mutating virus. The vaccine is also not 100% effective, but what it does do is lessens the likely-hood of needing to be hospitalized or die from the flu each year (wow, sounds kind of familiar, like what the vaccines for covid does....).
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Insightful)
Lets look at vaccines in history that have worked well at eradicating the virus it was designed to prevent, vaccines for polio, small pox, mumps, measles... You know what they all have in common? They were widely distributed and administered to the population.
My father in law had polio, he was born just a few years before the vaccine became available. He does not have use of one of his legs as a result. My friends kids had never seen anyone lose limbs to disease before and it really shocked them, they were teenagers. The main problem with vaccines is they work astonishingly well, so well that people don’t have dead and disabled family members to remind them of how serious diseases can be. It’s the lack of any context for what happens if you don’t vaccinate that’s the problem.
Re: (Score:3)
Coronavirus (same family as the flu, common cold, H1N1, SARS V1, etc.)
I have to disagree with you on a particular point: H1N1 (Influenza) is not a coronavirus, not the same family. But still really hard to prevent with a vaccine (due to so many variants).
Re: (Score:3)
it was significantly better at helping VS the original virus. it's not the vaccine's fault that so few people got it that it just kept circling around and mutating.
also we have so much evidence that even with the fact that it wasn't designed for the other strains, it drastically reduced death rate of covid.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I mean when you're out there spreading it faster than your mother works guys at the dock nothing is going to work. Sitting back and doing nothing, or worse, contributing to the problem doesn't help. Then all you do is sit there and go "SEE, I WAS RIGHT".
No. You were likely part of the problem that caused them to be less effective than they could have been. You're the kind of fucking moron who throws snow on the floor and says global warming is a myth...you have zero ability to see beyond what is in front of
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:4, Informative)
Well, consider for a moment that the mRNA âoevaccinesâ absolutely did not work.
They worked well enough that aside from the ongoing supply chain issues (which have nothing to do with the vaccine), daily life is essentially back to normal. The proof is literally visible the moment you go out in public.
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Insightful)
Right, so a 90% reduction (source) in hospitalization in deaths isn't good enough. If it's not a 100%, you might as well let 10x as many people die.
Re: (Score:3)
Source: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(23)00015-2/ [thelancet.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Polo vaccine requires 6 shots (down from 10+ when I was a baby, although you really should get a booster at 30 and the US Army gives them every 10 years or on deployment to the AfPak region) and does not give 100% immunity to active polio - it is only that at least 95% of the Earth's population gets vaccinated within the first year of life that there are so few active cases (not zero though).
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The vaccines worked just fine. Your brain on the other hand doesn't work. It couldn't possibly given the countless times the same bullshit line you just raised has been debunked, or the countless times it has been pointed out to you that no vaccine has a 100% efficacy, or the countless times evidence has been presented to you showing that vaccines contributed massively to the reduction of hospitalisation and death.
Now do yourself a real favour and read the replies here. All of them. Focus on the ones which
Re: (Score:3)
This phrase alone "namely the lifesaving and remarkably safe COVID-19 vaccines made by Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna" proves that this is an evidence free post by a paid industry stooge.
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Informative)
Exactly. Plus horrible side effects for many.
You lie.
Side effects were similar to other vaccines: mild soreness at the injection site and some sluggishness and/or a low-grade fever the next day.
A very, very small percentage had more pronounced symptoms, but no one suffered "horrible side effects".
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:4, Informative)
Correlation is not causation [xkcd.com], you _are_ new here aren't you
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Informative)
I know two people that had heart attacks within 3 days of getting vaccinated. Weird coincidence.
Hmm...have I seen you before? Namely, on reddit? There was a guy who made a similar statement, though after I asked him for more details, he also claimed that a doctor had attributed it directly to the vaccine in both cases, and then he subsequently claimed that "they" refused to let him report it to VAERS. So then I asked him what the report ID was, so he claimed that there was none because "they" wouldn't let the doctor report it. So I kindly referred him to the VAERS report form, and showed him that literally anybody can report literally anything to VAERS, as I myself had already self-reported numerous times (they literally made a web app for that, which takes all of about 4 minutes to answer.) If you reported that it made your dick fly off and land on mars, they'd accept that report without question, because as is common among idiots like him, he really had no idea what the purpose of VAERS even was, even though its intended purpose is even in the damn name.
After that he backtracked a ton, then he made several other statements that contradicted previous ones, and it soon became obvious to anybody who isn't a moron that he made the whole thing up. He was cross-posting it all over reddit, so my guess is he was paid to post disinformation. Nobody else would bother repeating the same easily disprovable story after they'd been shot down so badly already.
The question is, who is paying you?
Re: (Score:3)
Coincidence isn't science. And I doubt you really had 2 people you know who had the attacks within 3 days. People would be all over that. My guess is that either these people you "know" were people you heard about on the conspiracy networks, or you're just making it up to support your misinformation crusade.
I know someone who died of covid within 2 weeks of catching it, two and a half weeks after I last talked to him. Sure, he was older, but he'd be alive if it weren't for covid.
Re: If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Funny)
The most horrible common side effect I heard complained about was that the vaccine made it so that people would have to go back to and stay at work. No long vacations, if you can call a few weeks coughing your lungs out a vacation.
Re:If anyone still thinks... (Score:4, Insightful)
They didn't turn into raving lunatics with Palin and raving fascistic lunatics with Trump... they just learned from Palin and Trump that there's no need to say the quiet part quietly any more. And we... we learned that there are so many more awful people out there than we thought.
Re:If anyone still thinks... (Score:5, Insightful)
Mark my word, if and when these preachers get control of the [Republican] party, and they're sure trying to do so, it's going to be a terrible damn problem. Frankly, these people frighten me. Politics and governing demand compromise. But these Christians believe they are acting in the name of God, so they can't and won't compromise. I know, I've tried to deal with them.
-Barry Goldwater
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There isn't wokism, it's just a bogey man to get the far right voters out to the polls. There's always a bogey man created to scare the masses and this is one of them.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Gotta be pretty dumb at this point to still believe Trump is playing four dimensional chess.
Stunts like this... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Stunts like this... (Score:4, Informative)
TL;DR: There aren't.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Stunts like this... (Score:5, Insightful)
But here's the point: The GOP are so incredibly awful that even a mediocre bunch like the Democrats look fantastic by comparison.
Re: (Score:3)
Supported by this girl? Uneducated hick from the Confederacy calls for splitting up the country again [nbcnews.com]
It's really hard to take you people seriously.
Re:Stunts like this... (Score:5, Interesting)
The transgressions of Democrats are like getting a parking ticket compared to Republicans driving down the highway blind drunk on the wrong side of the road in a rainstorm at night with no headlights or brakes.
The Republican Party is a death cult. They literally want people dying in the streets. This piece of crap legislation is nowhere near peak Republican stupid: remember the Trump-hole saying people should be injecting themselves with bleach?
Re: (Score:3)
"They literally want people dying in the streets. This piece of crap legislation is nowhere near peak Republican stupid: remember the Trump-hole saying people should be injecting themselves with bleach?"
Interesting! First I don't believe Trump ever said people should inject bleach, the actual quote was "I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside or almost a cleaning..." but we all can't have perfect hearing. Anyway I ski
Re: (Score:3)
Which transgressions? If you mean personal ethics, you might have a point. If you're talking about something else, then it's a lot less clear. They're just different transgressions. NONE of them have acted to get lobbying money out of politics. NONE of them have acted to reduce the centralized power of the federal government. (One can argue that a lot of things the states should be doing have fallen to the feds because the states have abdicated their duties, but partially that's because the feds have
If it wasn’t for their lust for power (Score:4, Informative)
I'd honestly imagine some of these politicians would find it preferable to live in an Amish community. No more of that pesky God-angering newfangled technology stuff, and they could live a simple life milking cows, bailing hay, and praying that they don't become sick - because even the Amish rely on modern medicine these days. *grin*
Re: (Score:3)
The Amish actually believe in their lifestyle, and make personal sacrifices to adhere to it.
The guys in this article are just pretending to be as retarded as their marks.
Re: (Score:3)
And the Sikhs are no longer sky clad. When you immerse a groups in a modern society, with it's taxes, roads, etc. they end up needing to make compromises. FWIW I've been told that most of the workers who built Amana refrigerators were Amish. It's an economic necessity. You need enough money or you lose your land. Orthodox Jews in the US make lots of concessions that are against the traditional rules, too. Believing you should act in a particular way doesn't mean you CAN act that way when external cond
Frankly, my dear (Score:3)
Frankenfoods
Frankencorn
Frankenhumans
You have to wait for those who feed your echo chambers to find out what you think.
GOP hypocrisy on display (Score:4, Insightful)
The bill is sponsored by Sen. Tammy Nichols of Middleton and Rep. Judy Boyle of Midvale, both staunch conservatives who say they stand for freedom and the right to life
They're so much for freedom that they'll take away a person's right to seek out medical care which could save their life.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
By "freedom", they mean freedom to regulate your body.
Re:GOP hypocrisy on display (Score:5, Funny)
You can't fix stupid... (Score:3)
Fortunately it may be a self-correcting problem.
Unfortunately they may hurt a lot of others along the way.
viagra (Score:3)
Well then the GOP should make viagra illegal. It has more side effects that mRNA
https://www.webmd.com/drugs/2/drug-7417/viagra-oral/details
Re:viagra (Score:5, Informative)
Well then the GOP should make viagra illegal. It has more side effects that mRNA
https://www.webmd.com/drugs/2/drug-7417/viagra-oral/details
Just wait until the read about all the possible side effects from aspirin [imgur.com].
Oh, and because they are of course so "god fearin", they can't take a whole bunch of medications because of the use of fetal cells [arstechnica.com] in their development.
Re:viagra (Score:5, Funny)
Pffft... Viagra and Aspirin are small-potatoes. The real danger is Dihydrogen Monoxide [dhmo.org], which kills tens of thousands of people a year.
Re:viagra (Score:4, Funny)
I have looked into this. It seems that pretty much everyone who gets cancer is a user of dihydrogen monoxide. Coincidence? You decide...
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and because they are of course so "god fearin", they can't take a whole bunch of medications because of the use of fetal cells in their development.
Personally find it curious products introduced to market before cell lines in question ever existed can be tainted in such a manner. On the surface this appears as if it would violate causality.
Sounds like a problem (Score:4, Interesting)
In fact, let's pass a law dictating that without full immunizations your insurance company has no obligation to pay for your healthcare and help accelerate the process.
Re: (Score:2)
In fact, let's pass a law dictating that without full immunizations your insurance company has no obligation to pay for your healthcare and help accelerate the process.
Yes, because clearly solution to a partisan idiocy is another partisan idiocy but from a different political side.
Re: (Score:3)
In fact, let's pass a law dictating that without full immunizations your insurance company has no obligation to pay for your healthcare and help accelerate the process.
Yes, because clearly solution to a partisan idiocy is another partisan idiocy but from a different political side.
How is it partisan idiocy? A person has made the choice not to be vaccinated. Why should the insurance company pay for hospital treatment which, in all likelihood, could have been prevented if the person was vaccinated?
The person made their choice. They should have to live with the consequences. Isn't that what all those "freedom" lovin yokels keep screaming? Their body, their choice?
Ban mRNA! (Score:2)
How about they ban it for themselves only? Anything with mRNA they can't have. Including the recently successful cancer breakthrough that's uses mRNA. And all human blood, since it naturally contains mRNA. So no blood infusions for them.
Re: (Score:2)
How about they ban it for themselves only?
That's not how it works. If they can't have it, neither can you. If they can't watch porn, you can't either. If they can't read a particular book, neither can you.
You know, because of freedom.
Political stunt (Score:4, Insightful)
MRNA vaccines have shown so much promise against.. (Score:2)
..cancers. I think the confusion is elementary schools don't teach about the difference between DNA and RNA. That's really a shame for the less well educated.
Re: (Score:2)
They can't even remember whatever boogeyman Fox News was scaring them about 6 months ago, so how are they ever going to consider anything from all the way back in elementary school contradicts the latest compelling political talk show drama?
GOP bills like this are designed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
under Idaho law yes, you can work at 14, and at age 16 if you can read or write a simple sentence it seems your good to go (hell if school is out your good for 2 weeks starting at the age of 12
https://legislature.idaho.gov/... [idaho.gov]
https://legislature.idaho.gov/... [idaho.gov]
now for accusing someone of being of a nationality or not, you sir high horse, should know by now its dependent on the state, but your too busy being right to care aren't you?
What if... (Score:2)
What if I load the nRNA vaccine in to an AR-15 and fire it at people. Huh? HUH???
The GOP has become a caricature of itself. It would be hilarious if it weren't so serious. These are the people who are supposed to be in charge of educating your children and ensuring public safety.
I must laugh, if for no other reason than to avoid heavy drinking.
Not helpful (Score:2, Informative)
Using the legal system to ban everything you dislike only erodes freedom and legitimacy.
I personally think there is some merit to cooling our collective jets on MRNA. More research seems to be warranted yet blanket bans on entire approaches is unwarranted and misguided.
There is evidence of heart issues caused by vaccine that isn't caused by disease.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
There is direct lab evidence of MRNA vaccine induced injury to heart and brain tissue.
https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccin... [doi.org]
There is
Re:Not helpful (Score:5, Informative)
The title of the study this link:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
points to is:
"The Incidence of Myocarditis and Pericarditis in Post COVID-19 Unvaccinated Patients"
Wherever you got your info from, check more thoroughly before posting.
Plus a huge safety study (Score:3)
With about 884,000 people in each group, vaccinated and control, this has the power to tease out N per million side effects. Everyone should read it and draw their own conclusions.
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/... [nejm.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Using the legal system to ban everything you dislike only erodes freedom and legitimacy.
I personally think there is some merit to cooling our collective jets on MRNA. More research seems to be warranted yet blanket bans on entire approaches is unwarranted and misguided.
There is evidence of heart issues caused by vaccine that isn't caused by disease.
Vaccines induce an immune response, immune responses occasionally go too far and cause problems, that's not an mRNA thing that's a vaccine thing. You never wondered why they ask you to stay for 15 minutes after getting your flu shot?
The thing is that the benefits vastly outweigh the risks.
As for the myocarditis, yes that is a possible side effect of the COVID vaccines, as well as COVID itself.
The best theory I heard is one of the COVID proteins looks a bit like a protein in the heart, so when the body manuf
Good and this is why: (Score:3)
They cannot be reasoned with so if their choices will kill some number off I approve of the experiment.
Not joking. Dead enemies are good news and dead fools are hilarious good news.
Better solution (Score:3)
Get all the fucking goverment out of all health care matters. Leave it to people who have scientific degrees in this shit. Very, very few people in government are qualified to make health decisions....so fucking get them out.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm sure you're right.
At the beginning of the pandemic my father decided he was against lockdowns. They'd ruin the economy. I told him I agreed with him, not locking down would be wonderful for the economy. The death rate among senior citizens would free up a lot of medical and care resources, put assets in younger hands more likely to use them productively, and save an awful lot of pension money.
Oddly, he changed his mind.