Diyala Nick said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Gumby said:

---

KidDoc said:

---

Gordo14 said:

---

KidDoc said:

---

mRNA do not "manipulate DNA". Please don't add junk science and conspiracy theory to a good discussion.

We do not know the long term risk so if you do not want the vaccine don't get it.

We vaccinate older people and teens for whooping cough (as an example) to protect infants. The opposite is the case for COVID- we vaccinate younger people who are very likely to be exposed and transmit disease to protect the vulnerable elders.

I would be surprised if proof of vaccine is not going to be required for travel, concerts, several jobs.

So far 0 cases of GBS with vaccine or with COVID so likely a very low risk but I would discuss your personal risk with your physician.

---

I'd add if you look into the mechanism of the Pfizer vaccine or the moderna vaccine there really shouldn't be signficant long term risks. Well over 20,000 people have been vaccinated with both vaccines and monitored for months already. The impact of the actual vaccines is short as all they do is tell your body to make something that looks like the virus with genetic material that is temporary (your DNA has nothing to do with it, which is why it's temporary). The rest is your body's immune response without having the cellular invasion of the virus itself. At this point long term impacts from viral infection, known and unknown, should probably scare you more than the risks associated with the vaccine.

Why have we become such an anti-vax culture all the sudden? These vaccines are in the same ballpark as landing on the moon in 1969. Except these vaccines can stop 2000+ people a day from dying in America and allow everything to return to normal. But ultimately this depends on sufficient vaccination.

---

I totally understand the fear for non science people. We have never had a vaccine developed in under 5 years and they tend to compare it to the flu shot which is a VERY old shot tech- as old as vaccines period.

Most people do not understand how completely revolutionary mRNA vaccine technology is and how it is a true moonshot and will be looked upon as one of the true scientific miracles of the communication age.

---

I heard a medical professional say they were concerned that the vaccine might trigger an autoimmune disorder. Im not sure how credible that risk is but its very concerning if true. Autoimmune disorders can destroy peoples life.

To be honest, I would be much more comfortable taking a vaccine using the old technology even if it is somewhat less effective. I feel like we have a pretty good understanding of the risks of attenuated vaccines.

---

This is my stance. The long-term implications are what concern me. I understand this is new tech and the way of the future. I'm not anti-vax and I have a degree in science (granted it would be considered a "soft" science and I'm a long way from that degree at this point in my life).

My brother who works in pharma and recently attended a doctor's conference came back from that with this exact commentary. Many of the docs there are concerned with the autoimmune disorder risk/unknowns with this.

I would absolutely consider a non-genetic based vaccine. I'm just not going to be first in line for new tech.

---

Tha autoimmune risk should be dramatically lower with mRNA vaccines vs traditional vaccines. The mRNA approach is far more targeted, only acting on the binding and neutralizing portion on the virus, as opposed to other vaccines that create a cocktail of various antibodies (some of which are neutralizing and others of which aren't).

---

Ok. I will not claim to be an expert here so not going to argue it. I'm just going to let the rest of y'all get out in front, and I'll sit on the sidelines and see what happens.

Fenrir said:

---

SunrayAg said:

---

So my question is, as someone who had the virus and tested positive for the antibodies, do I need the vaccine?

---

From a health standpoint I would imagine not but good luck going anywhere once businesses start requiring proof of immunization to do anything.

---

I think this is fear porn.

Gumby said:

---

This article is particularly concerning because it discusses the possibility that the vaccine could make the disease more severe. And the author is a former professor at Harvard Medical School who founded research departments on cancer and HIV/AIDS.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risks-of-rushing-a-covid-19-vaccine/

---

Again, they've already done phase three trials. If there's a risk it's likely less than the risks associated with contracting COVID, which you love to tell me is completely insignificant.

Gordo14 said:

---

Gumby said:

---

This article is particularly concerning because it discusses the possibility that the vaccine could make the disease more severe. And the author is a former professor at Harvard Medical School who founded research departments on cancer and HIV/AIDS.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risks-of-rushing-a-covid-19-vaccine/

---

Again, they've already done phase three trials. If there's a risk it's likely less than the risks associated with contracting COVID, which you love to tell me is completely insignificant.

---

Unless the people in the Phase 3 trials were intentionally exposed to infectious viral loads then they would not have tested if the vaccine made the infection worse.

My personal COVID risk is statistically insignificant which is why I'm weighing it against the risk of an expiremental vaccine with no long term safety trials and no instances of success in human history.

I would be more comfortable with a vaccine that used a proven safe technology, even if that technology was dated.

KidDoc said:

---

Gumby said:

---

Gordo14 said:

---

Gumby said:

---

This article is particularly concerning because it discusses the possibility that the vaccine could make the disease more severe. And the author is a former professor at Harvard Medical School who founded research departments on cancer and HIV/AIDS.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risks-of-rushing-a-covid-19-vaccine/

---

Again, they've already done phase three trials. If there's a risk it's likely less than the risks associated with contracting COVID, which you love to tell me is completely insignificant.

---

Unless the people in the Phase 3 trials were intentionally exposed to infectious viral loads then they would not have tested if the vaccine made the infection worse.

My personal COVID risk is statistically insignificant which is why I'm weighing it against the risk of an expiremental vaccine with no long term safety trials and no instances of success in human history.

I would be more comfortable with a vaccine that used a proven safe technology, even if that technology was dated.

---

My personal risk is also rather low. My main reasons to try and get vaccinated earlier are so I can see my sick patients without wearing a full body condom.

Also I want to be able to travel and return to mass events like concerts and football games without concern.

Unless the government can get lawsuit protection in place I fully expect to see proof of vaccination or immunity as a requirement for travel or mass events in the near future. LIke it or not, companies don't want to get sued.

---

Then catch it, have your 3 or 4 days of allergies and week or so with no taste or smell, then you can live your life without concern for the virus.

They may not accept proof of prior infection in lieu of the vaccine. We shall see.

The_Fox said:

---

KidDoc said:

---

Gumby said:

---

Gordo14 said:

---

Gumby said:

---

This article is particularly concerning because it discusses the possibility that the vaccine could make the disease more severe. And the author is a former professor at Harvard Medical School who founded research departments on cancer and HIV/AIDS.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risks-of-rushing-a-covid-19-vaccine/

---

Again, they've already done phase three trials. If there's a risk it's likely less than the risks associated with contracting COVID, which you love to tell me is completely insignificant.

---

Unless the people in the Phase 3 trials were intentionally exposed to infectious viral loads then they would not have tested if the vaccine made the infection worse.

My personal COVID risk is statistically insignificant which is why I'm weighing it against the risk of an expiremental vaccine with no long term safety trials and no instances of success in human history.

I would be more comfortable with a vaccine that used a proven safe technology, even if that technology was dated.

---

My personal risk is also rather low. My main reasons to try and get vaccinated earlier are so I can see my sick patients without wearing a full body condom.

Also I want to be able to travel and return to mass events like concerts and football games without concern.

Unless the government can get lawsuit protection in place I fully expect to see proof of vaccination or immunity as a requirement for travel or mass events in the near future. LIke it or not, companies don't want to get sued.

---

Then catch it, have your 3 or 4 days of allergies and week or so with no taste or smell, then you can live your life without concern for the virus.

---

even with current decreased CDC guidelines that is 7-10 days off work. Like most docs I make what I do so that is a good bit of cash to lay around and be sick for a week! Plus lots of angry parents who want their kids seen.

KidDoc said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

KidDoc said:

---

Gumby said:

---

Gordo14 said:

---

Gumby said:

---

This article is particularly concerning because it discusses the possibility that the vaccine could make the disease more severe. And the author is a former professor at Harvard Medical School who founded research departments on cancer and HIV/AIDS.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risks-of-rushing-a-covid-19-vaccine/

---

Again, they've already done phase three trials. If there's a risk it's likely less than the risks associated with contracting COVID, which you love to tell me is completely insignificant.

---

Unless the people in the Phase 3 trials were intentionally exposed to infectious viral loads then they would not have tested if the vaccine made the infection worse.

My personal COVID risk is statistically insignificant which is why I'm weighing it against the risk of an expiremental vaccine with no long term safety trials and no instances of success in human history.

I would be more comfortable with a vaccine that used a proven safe technology, even if that technology was dated.

---

My personal risk is also rather low. My main reasons to try and get vaccinated earlier are so I can see my sick patients without wearing a full body condom.

Also I want to be able to travel and return to mass events like concerts and football games without concern.

Unless the government can get lawsuit protection in place I fully expect to see proof of vaccination or immunity as a requirement for travel or mass events in the near future. LIke it or not, companies don't want to get sued.

---

Then catch it, have your 3 or 4 days of allergies and week or so with no taste or smell, then you can live your life without concern for the virus.

---

even with current decreased CDC guidelines that is 7-10 days off work. Like most docs I make what I do so that is a good bit of cash to lay around and be sick for a week! Plus lots of angry parents who want their kids seen.

---

Not sure about other states, but in Colorado employers are required to pay up to 40 hrs for covid-related PTO in addition to regular PTO.

And if you work from home, 7-10 days isolation doesn't matter so long as you have someone to drop off groceries.

KidDoc said:

---

Gumby said:

---

Gordo14 said:

---

Gumby said:

---

This article is particularly concerning because it discusses the possibility that the vaccine could make the disease more severe. And the author is a former professor at Harvard Medical School who founded research departments on cancer and HIV/AIDS.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risks-of-rushing-a-covid-19-vaccine/

---

Again, they've already done phase three trials. If there's a risk it's likely less than the risks associated with contracting COVID, which you love to tell me is completely insignificant.

---

Unless the people in the Phase 3 trials were intentionally exposed to infectious viral loads then they would not have tested if the vaccine made the infection worse.

My personal COVID risk is statistically insignificant which is why I'm weighing it against the risk of an expiremental vaccine with no long term safety trials and no instances of success in human history.

I would be more comfortable with a vaccine that used a proven safe technology, even if that technology was dated.

---

My personal risk is also rather low. My main reasons to try and get vaccinated earlier are so I can see my sick patients without wearing a full body condom.

Also I want to be able to travel and return to mass events like concerts and football games without concern.

Unless the government can get lawsuit protection in place I fully expect to see proof of vaccination or immunity as a requirement for travel or mass events in the near future. LIke it or not, companies don't want to get sued.

---

Airlines are still operating while at the peak of covid spread without a vaccine. Not sure why things will suddenly change when a vaccine is available. They aren't getting sued now. Same with concerts and football stadiums. If you go to said event / or fly, it's your choice to get vaccinated prior to flying, just like with flu.

Gumby said:

---

They may not accept proof of prior infection in lieu of the vaccine. We shall see.

---

I don't care what they accept. I will not get vaccinated for an infection that I have already had.

KidDoc said:

---

Gumby said:

---

Gordo14 said:

---

Gumby said:

---

This article is particularly concerning because it discusses the possibility that the vaccine could make the disease more severe. And the author is a former professor at Harvard Medical School who founded research departments on cancer and HIV/AIDS.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risks-of-rushing-a-covid-19-vaccine/

---

Again, they've already done phase three trials. If there's a risk it's likely less than the risks associated with contracting COVID, which you love to tell me is completely insignificant.

---

Unless the people in the Phase 3 trials were intentionally exposed to infectious viral loads then they would not have tested if the vaccine made the infection worse.

My personal COVID risk is statistically insignificant which is why I'm weighing it against the risk of an expiremental vaccine with no long term safety trials and no instances of success in human history.

I would be more comfortable with a vaccine that used a proven safe technology, even if that technology was dated.

---

My personal risk is also rather low. My main reasons to try and get vaccinated earlier are so I can see my sick patients without wearing a full body condom.

Also I want to be able to travel and return to mass events like concerts and football games without concern.

Unless the government can get lawsuit protection in place I fully expect to see proof of vaccination or immunity as a requirement for travel or mass events in the near future. LIke it or not, companies don't want to get sued.

---

Can't speak for specific jobs (though I do think proof of vaccination will be required for some) or travel, my sister is an exec at one of the largest arenas in the country.

Her feedback has been from day 1 that events are largely shuttered until a vaccine is widely available. So far 2021 concerts look to be mainly shed type venues outdoors starting in the second half of 2021 with most acts hitting arenas in 2022. There is a potential to schedule in late 2021.

There are caveats for smaller events that are being experimented with to see where break even is to keep staff employed, etc.

Obviously depending on how the vaccination stuff goes things might accelerate.

For arenas she says it's ingress and egress of crowds and how deal with concessions even in socially distant searing models that keep them up at night. They can figure out the seating, getting them to and from the seats is a nightmare.

In regard to things like hockey or basketball there is a ton of debate on how to pull this off with some fans. Issue for hockey is those teams rely heavily on ticket sales and as such have laid off 75-90% of their staffs.

Basketball has also been effected but to a lesser extent.

Has never mentioned proof of vaccination as a viable option, but has always anchored in widespread availability of a vaccine. She is taking the vaccine as soon as possible for the same reasons as kiddoc, so she can get back to work.

Diyala Nick said:

---

Gumby said:

---

This article is particularly concerning because it discusses the possibility that the vaccine could make the disease more severe. And the author is a former professor at Harvard Medical School who founded research departments on cancer and HIV/AIDS.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risks-of-rushing-a-covid-19-vaccine/

---

You would have seen ADE in Phase III. Didn't happen. The risk with mRNA for ADE is also probably far lower the for the same reason autoimmune risk is lower (like a sniper rifle vs a shotgun).

---

I remain skeptical of this assumption. The Phase 3 studies were conducted in the context of unusual human behavior and interaction intended to suppress transmission. They were not designed to evaluate incidence of something like disease enhancement in a robust manner. The trial designs themselves required a minimum number of infections to appear before they could have confidence in the comparative results on efficacy between the groups. The results posted by Pfizer had less than 10 infections in the active group, so you'd need to find an incidence of more than 10% to even see it and it would still be inseparable from a random occurrence.

If you were concerned about something like a vaccine induced enhancement, as had been shown in previous SARS related coronaviruses, you would not be able to conclude that from what was presented yet. It's not absurd to hold reservations if you are not in a high risk group or interacting with those that are. To date, no human has had this in board for longer than a year.

SunrayAg said:

---

So my question is, as someone who had the virus and tested positive for the antibodies, do I need the vaccine?

---

I'm with you. Just getting over it and have the antibodies. Hoping they'll cover me well into the Spring so I don't need the vaccine until it's proven.

Muy said:

---

SunrayAg said:

---

So my question is, as someone who had the virus and tested positive for the antibodies, do I need the vaccine?

---

I'm with you. Just getting over it and have the antibodies. Hoping they'll cover me well into the Spring so I don't need the vaccine until it's proven.

---

If I had been infected I would not get vaccine unless required for work or fun.

I donate blood regularly so get titers regularly. If I had evidence of past infection I would just keep donating blood until/if my antibodies faded.

Somehow I am still negative despite working, travelling, eating out, etc. I guess washing hands and not chewing my nails helps!