Jump to content

33% of Americans Would Refuse a Free Covid Vaccination


Recommended Posts

From the recent Axios article of the same title: https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-vaccine-poll-age-race-8a9d6384-aa63-4c29-9b33-1c0ad4f4fd9f.html

 Gallup Poll direct link: https://news.gallup.com/poll/317018/one-three-americans-not-covid-vaccine.aspx

 

The question was posed to people as to whether they'd get a future Covid-19 vaccine were it made freely available to them:

84% of Dems would get the vaccine

46% of Republicans would get it

57% of Independents would get it

 

Other stats:

  • White Americans reported 67% willingness to get vaccinated, while non-white Americans reported a 59% likelihood.
  • 76% of 18-29-year-olds reported willingness to receive a vaccine, as well as 70% of those 65 and older
  • Middle-aged Americans between 30-49 years old and 50-64-year-olds reported only 64% and 59% willingness, respectively.

 

This is goddamn horrifying. Even if the vaccine was only partially effective, what's the harm from taking it if it's free? Bill Gates' microchips certainly can't hurt that much...

 

I remember there was talk of Trump trying to buy all the potential vaccine stocks before any other country could... well, if these numbers hold true, it looks like there'll be at least 100 million unused doses to go around after Americans have taken all they are willing to take.

 

Are you going to take your bitter medicine? Worried about microchips?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Commercial Boater said:

 

 

This is goddamn horrifying. Even if the vaccine was only partially effective, what's the harm from taking it if it's free?

 

I think you have not been paying attention to the credentials of the agency that would pass on the safety of such a vaccine if it magically appeared over the next three months.  Given the past 3 years' events and el presidente's clear priorities, do you really think the head of the FDA gives a flying fuck whether a 'vaccine' gives 50M americans cancer in a year?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

I think you have not been paying attention to the credentials of the agency that would pass on the safety of such a vaccine if it magically appeared over the next three months.  Given the past 3 years' events and el presidente's clear priorities, do you really think the head of the FDA gives a flying fuck whether a 'vaccine' gives 50M americans cancer in a year?

I think it's only slightly less ridiculous to think that the FDA would allow the release of a vaccine that is actively & massively dangerous to public health than to think that the liberals are in cahoots with doctors and the media to suppress knowledge about HCQ effectiveness. Both theories seem much more conspiratorially-minded than the apparent reality. "Warp Speed" or no, the FDA is so medically conservative (or organizationally dysfunctional) that it seems like a long time coming before we ever see vaccines available, by which time they've hopefully worked out any kinks.

 

Now, whether that vaccine is affordable and effective remains a matter of some scientific and economic debate. But "vaccines can cause cancer" is one of the big "arguments" behind people not getting polio shots, for example.

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Commercial Boater said:

Even if the vaccine was only partially effective, what's the harm from taking it if it's free?

I think all vaccinations are only partially effective. For example for polio,

The IPV that has been used in the United States since 1987 is as effective as OPV for preventing polio. Two doses of IPV provides 90% immunity (protection) to all three types of poliovirus; 3 doses provides at least 99% immunity.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vpd/polio/public/index.html

But with a large percentage of the population getting immunized, the herd immunity goes way up. However if dumbfuck elk don't get immunized then there's still a risk to the non-dumbfuck society.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Commercial Boater said:

I think it's only slightly less ridiculous to think that the FDA would allow the release of a vaccine that is actively & massively dangerous to public health than to think that the liberals are in cahoots with doctors and the media to suppress knowledge about HCQ effectiveness.

You think it is ridiculous to think that the FDA, which has been filled by Trump with dozens of political appointees across the supervisory levels of all its subagencies, would approve something that is dangerous, or not what it says it is, if they think it will win them an election? 

Be careful if someone tries to sell you a bridge.

the FDA is so medically conservative (or organizationally dysfunctional) that it seems like a long time coming before we ever see vaccines available, by which time they've hopefully worked out any kinks.

It doesn't take organizational functionality for Alex Azar to approve a drug.  All he has to do is tell Hahn to say it is approved or lose his job.  It's not like anyone still left in the Trump admin has the courage or stomach to quit rather than killing people.  Do you remember what Azar is most famous for?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

That delta between D, I & R is pretty fucking impressive, and a massive indictment of the media treating everything as sports coverage of politics (it’s D vs R, not truth)

Not all media sources are as apt to do this. Here's an interesting breakdown on how people have been primed to doubt facts of the Covid pandemic based on their preferred media source--you can actually see that Fox News promotes greater skepticism than is present among people who don't consume any news at all, which is pretty amazing if you think about it.

 

https://www.axios.com/axios-ipsos-poll-gop-skeptics-growing-deaths-e6ad6be5-c78f-43bb-9230-c39a20c8beb5.html

 

 

Screenshot_20200810-133843.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Commercial Boater said:

I think it's only slightly less ridiculous to think that the FDA would allow the release of a vaccine that is actively & massively dangerous to public health than to think that the liberals are in cahoots with doctors and the media to suppress knowledge about HCQ effectiveness. Both theories seem much more conspiratorially-minded than the apparent reality. "Warp Speed" or no, the FDA is so medically conservative (or organizationally dysfunctional) that it seems like a long time coming before we ever see vaccines available, by which time they've hopefully worked out any kinks.

 

Now, whether that vaccine is affordable and effective remains a matter of some scientific and economic debate. But "vaccines can cause cancer" is one of the big "arguments" behind people not getting polio shots, for example.

You mean like the 35 drugs that are ruled dangerous and pulled by the FDA after being given approval? https://prescriptiondrugs.procon.org/fda-approved-prescription-drugs-later-pulled-from-the-market/ or the 4,500 drugs pulled from shelves every year because the were given approval too early? https://www.drugwatch.com/fda/recalls/

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, badlatitude said:

You mean like the 35 drugs that are ruled dangerous and pulled by the FDA after being given approval? https://prescriptiondrugs.procon.org/fda-approved-prescription-drugs-later-pulled-from-the-market/ or the 4,500 drugs pulled from shelves every year because the were given approval too early? https://www.drugwatch.com/fda/recalls/

I'm not saying the FDA is flawless or even a good organization, or that any eventual Covid vaccine will be perfect. I've been on at least 1 of those listed medicines later deemed dangerous. But I don't believe that FDA fumbling of the Covid vaccine release will lead to 50,000,000 cancer cases in the USA as per Clean's post which prompted the response of mine you're quoting here.

 

I would even go so far as to say that it's vanishingly rare for any vaccine to cause any forms of cancer, and that said argument is most often used in anti-vaxxer circles to justify not getting vaccines, rather than as a serious medical objection to public release of a vaccine. A radical statement, I know.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Commercial Boater said:

I'm not saying the FDA is flawless or even a good organization, or that any eventual Covid vaccine will be perfect. I've been on at least 1 of those listed medicines later deemed dangerous. But I don't believe that FDA fumbling of the Covid vaccine release will lead to 50,000,000 cancer cases in the USA as per Clean's post which prompted the response of mine you're quoting here.

 

I would even go so far as to say that it's vanishingly rare for any vaccine to cause any forms of cancer, and that said argument is most often used in anti-vaxxer circles to justify not getting vaccines, rather than as a serious medical objection to public release of a vaccine. A radical statement, I know.

Okay, so what is an acceptable number of deaths to you? If not cancer, are heart or kidney problems acceptable?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, badlatitude said:

Okay, so what is an acceptable number of deaths to you? If not cancer, are heart or kidney problems acceptable?

That's actually two interesting philosophical and medical questions.

 

The first one, a medical question I'm personally not fully equipped to answer, is about potential vaccine side effects and formulation. How dangerous can vaccines be? Will any Covid vaccine be substantially different from (and therefore potentially more dangerous than) existing vaccines? The chemical components of vaccines are not very dangerous and do not vary hugely between vaccine types, but perhaps there could be some complications with the nullified nCov-19 strain that are as yet unforeseen. Thousands of people smarter than I are working on this and the current status seems to be that this vaccine is not extraordinarily dangerous: https://www.healthline.com/health-news/heres-exactly-where-were-at-with-vaccines-and-treatments-for-covid-19#Vaccines

 

The second question you're asking, the philosophical one, is one for utilitarian ethics. We have 5 million confirmed cases and approximately 165,000 deaths. The CDC says that's more likely to be 50 million total cases (https://www.bostonherald.com/2020/07/21/the-latest-cdc-antibody-tests-show-virus-rates-10x-higher/), leaving about 300 million potential covid infections. Our case fatality ratio based on 5 million infections is just over 3% (https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/08/05/899365887/charts-how-the-u-s-ranks-on-covid-19-deaths-per-capita-and-by-case-count), so we can knock that to 0.3% with the CDC's prediction.

 

A 0.3% death rate in 300,000,000 total infected people is 900,000 deaths. So, to answer what I'm sure what was a rhetorical or flippant question on your behalf, it should result in less than 900,000 deaths to be deemed "worth it."

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Commercial Boater said:

I would even go so far as to say that it's vanishingly rare for any vaccine to cause any forms of cancer, and that said argument is most often used in anti-vaxxer circles to justify not getting vaccines, rather than as a serious medical objection to public release of a vaccine. A radical statement, I know.

I think you misunderstand my apprehension.

If Belgium, or Switzerland, or France, or Denmark, or Uruguay, or Canada, or the UK, or another country with any remaining credibility approve a vaccine, I'll happily stand in line for my shots.  If the US, Brazil, Russia, India, China, or Belarus (inside joke) come up with a virus, I'm not going near it.

I do not believe vaccines typically cause cancer.  I do however believe anything that comes out of an agency run by Alex Azar is likely not what he says it is, and has a good chance of being as poisonous as Alex Azar is.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

I think you misunderstand my apprehension.

If Belgium, or Switzerland, or France, or Denmark, or Uruguay, or Canada, or the UK, or another country with any remaining credibility approve a vaccine, I'll happily stand in line for my shots.  If the US, Brazil, Russia, India, China, or Belarus (inside joke) come up with a virus, I'm not going near it.

I do not believe vaccines typically cause cancer.  I do however believe anything that comes out of an agency run by Alex Azar is likely not what he says it is, and has a good chance of being as poisonous as Alex Azar is.

 

 

 

In this light I agree with you. Azar and any other of the current cronies in power can suck it. I'm hoping one of the EU vaccines comes out first and the FDA never gets a chance to get their grubby paws on it

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Commercial Boater said:

That's actually two interesting philosophical and medical questions.

 

The first one, a medical question I'm personally not fully equipped to answer, is about potential vaccine side effects and formulation. How dangerous can vaccines be? Will any Covid vaccine be substantially different from (and therefore potentially more dangerous than) existing vaccines? The chemical components of vaccines are not very dangerous and do not vary hugely between vaccine types, but perhaps there could be some complications with the nullified nCov-19 strain that are as yet unforeseen. Thousands of people smarter than I are working on this and the current status seems to be that this vaccine is not extraordinarily dangerous: https://www.healthline.com/health-news/heres-exactly-where-were-at-with-vaccines-and-treatments-for-covid-19#Vaccines

 

The second question you're asking, the philosophical one, is one for utilitarian ethics. We have 5 million confirmed cases and approximately 165,000 deaths. The CDC says that's more likely to be 50 million total cases (https://www.bostonherald.com/2020/07/21/the-latest-cdc-antibody-tests-show-virus-rates-10x-higher/), leaving about 300 million potential covid infections. Our case fatality ratio based on 5 million infections is just over 3% (https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/08/05/899365887/charts-how-the-u-s-ranks-on-covid-19-deaths-per-capita-and-by-case-count), so we can knock that to 0.3% with the CDC's prediction.

 

A 0.3% death rate in 300,000,000 total infected people is 900,000 deaths. So, to answer what I'm sure what was a rhetorical or flippant question on your behalf, it should result in less than 900,000 deaths to be deemed "worth it."

The medical question has no real answer. The fastest drug to come to market in a public health emergency, was the drug for Mumps, it took four years to get to market.That was 1967, so I cannot translate that into a current time-schematic. I think it's fair to say that we are somewhere in that time factor. Whether it is sooner or later remains unknown, and the only reason there is a race, is to cash in on fame and wealth, although that cannot be for everyone trying to rescue humanity.

I believe the last projection for possible total death in the United State is 1.6 to 2.4 million. That is a worst case scenario. I can't tell you if our mitigation attempts are successful or not, we seem to excel at failure in this matter. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Commercial Boater said:

Screenshot_20200810-133843.png

HOLY SHIT...

What a terrifying graph; it didn't go down, for any network?  

The Media's been doing a way worse job that I'd realized, making people notice the undercount.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, frenchie said:

HOLY SHIT...

What a terrifying graph; it didn't go down, for any network?  

The Media's been doing a way worse job that I'd realized, making people notice the undercount.

 

no that's an analysis only of the percent who believe in the undercount

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

no that's an analysis only of the percent who believe in the undercount

Read the title again.  People who think the actual number is lower than the official number: it's people who think there's an OVER count.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Commercial Boater said:

Not all media sources are as apt to do this. Here's an interesting breakdown on how people have been primed to doubt facts of the Covid pandemic based on their preferred media source--you can actually see that Fox News promotes greater skepticism than is present among people who don't consume any news at all, which is pretty amazing if you think about it.

 

https://www.axios.com/axios-ipsos-poll-gop-skeptics-growing-deaths-e6ad6be5-c78f-43bb-9230-c39a20c8beb5.html

 

 

Screenshot_20200810-133843.png

200,000 excess US deaths mar/jul.

Data released by CDC. Texas is 13k vs official 8k.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, badlatitude said:

Okay, so what is an acceptable number of deaths to you? If not cancer, are heart or kidney problems acceptable?

It's a tricky math and moral issue.

Math: If fewer deaths/disabilities due to vaccine vs catching Covid? Then take the vaccine.

Moral: Does it matter that DIFFERENT people will be affected? Maybe one of the vaccine recipients die, whereas she wouldn't have been affected by Covid? Is that moral?  I can't answer that.

 

I can look at the math though, and if it looks to be effective and safe in original trials, my family and I will take the shots.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Commercial Boater said:

From the recent Axios article of the same title: https://www.axios.com/coronavirus-vaccine-poll-age-race-8a9d6384-aa63-4c29-9b33-1c0ad4f4fd9f.html

 Gallup Poll direct link: https://news.gallup.com/poll/317018/one-three-americans-not-covid-vaccine.aspx

 

The question was posed to people as to whether they'd get a future Covid-19 vaccine were it made freely available to them:

84% of Dems would get the vaccine

46% of Republicans would get it

57% of Independents would get it

 

Other stats:

  • White Americans reported 67% willingness to get vaccinated, while non-white Americans reported a 59% likelihood.
  • 76% of 18-29-year-olds reported willingness to receive a vaccine, as well as 70% of those 65 and older
  • Middle-aged Americans between 30-49 years old and 50-64-year-olds reported only 64% and 59% willingness, respectively.

 

This is goddamn horrifying. Even if the vaccine was only partially effective, what's the harm from taking it if it's free? Bill Gates' microchips certainly can't hurt that much...

 

I remember there was talk of Trump trying to buy all the potential vaccine stocks before any other country could... well, if these numbers hold true, it looks like there'll be at least 100 million unused doses to go around after Americans have taken all they are willing to take.

 

Are you going to take your bitter medicine? Worried about microchips?

 

 

Yea and he will profit from the surplus after the fact, africa will need them right, Probably has the extras sold off already, na We won't need em based on todays poll.  The brown people can now use our surplus at a 100% markup....  Winning bigley.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

It's a tricky math and moral issue.

Math: If fewer deaths/disabilities due to vaccine vs catching Covid? Then take the vaccine.

Moral: Does it matter that DIFFERENT people will be affected? Maybe one of the vaccine recipients die, whereas she wouldn't have been affected by Covid? Is that moral?  I can't answer that.

 

I can look at the math though, and if it looks to be effective and safe in original trials, my family and I will take the shots.

It gets even more confusing when you consider that the young and healthy have the least to gain from risking a rushed to production vaccine, yet (at least in my state) are the most prolific spreaders. 
 

I’ll certainly get vaccinated at some point, but don’t exactly trust a product rushed through the system. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raz'r said:

It's a tricky math and moral issue.

Math: If fewer deaths/disabilities due to vaccine vs catching Covid? Then take the vaccine.

Moral: Does it matter that DIFFERENT people will be affected? Maybe one of the vaccine recipients die, whereas she wouldn't have been affected by Covid? Is that moral?  I can't answer that.

 

I can look at the math though, and if it looks to be effective and safe in original trials, my family and I will take the shots.

In a normal political environment I would take a shot. I Honestly, don't trust Trump enough to risk my safety on something he needs desperately for political points. I'll stay safe until I have some confidence in our delivery system.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, badlatitude said:

In a normal political environment I would take a shot. I Honestly, don't trust Trump enough to risk my safety on something he needs desperately for political points. I'll stay safe until I have some confidence in our delivery system.

There won't be a safe vaccine until Joe is inaugurated. Not because Joe does anything, it just takes 6+ months to test out a vaccine. There's no way a "Safe" vaccine will be ready by Nov 3. There may be A vaccine, but it can't be deemed "Safe" for quite awhile yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

There won't be a safe vaccine until Joe is inaugurated. Not because Joe does anything, it just takes 6+ months to test out a vaccine. There's no way a "Safe" vaccine will be ready by Nov 3. There may be A vaccine, but it can't be deemed "Safe" for quite awhile yet.

Correct. But Trump will do his damndest to make it sound legitimate, and will have dozens of sycophants telling us it is safe.Millions of Trumpsters will be in line, and I hope the side effects aren't bad.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't see why there is so much interest in the vaccine, which will be very beautiful, and created by your favorite president, when we already have the answer.  HYDROXYCHLORIQUINE. 

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, badlatitude said:

In a normal political environment I would take a shot. I Honestly, don't trust Trump enough to risk my safety on something he needs desperately for political points. I'll stay safe until I have some confidence in our delivery system.

I’m with you. Clearly political views aren’t in play. I’m not injecting myself with something rushed to meet a deadline. Period. 
 

I am not anti-vax or a conspiracy nut job. I make my living in manufacturing. If there’s one thing I’ve learned that’s unavoidable, it’s that rushing a product to market leads to recalls. That isn’t acceptable to me if it’s going to be injected in to my body. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Monkey said:

I’m with you. Clearly political views aren’t in play. I’m not injecting myself with something rushed to meet a deadline. Period. 
 

I am not anti-vax or a conspiracy nut job. I make my living in manufacturing. If there’s one thing I’ve learned that’s unavoidable, it’s that rushing a product to market leads to recalls. That isn’t acceptable to me if it’s going to be injected in to my body. 

Couldn’t agree more.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any vaccine that I personally directed to be used to defeat this China virus will be powerful and beautiful.  There is no risk, although I think everyone should take hydroxychloroquine and sit on very power lights.  Just to be safe.  And don't exercise, it reduces the number of heart beats you have been given.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...