TomC
Bless Your Heart!
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2020
- Messages
- 9,877
- Location
- Midwestern USA
- Gender
- Faggot
- Basic Beliefs
- Agnostic deist
Is that ethical? I’m down with it, but is it medically ethical?
What do you mean by ethical, in this post?
Tom
Is that ethical? I’m down with it, but is it medically ethical?
Is that ethical? I’m down with it, but is it medically ethical?
Like a liver transplant patient that refuses to quit drinking? They're not going to get that new liver.
Is that ethical? I’m down with it, but is it medically ethical?
What do you mean by ethical, in this post?
Tom
Is that ethical? I’m down with it, but is it medically ethical?
Is that ethical? I’m down with it, but is it medically ethical?
Like a liver transplant patient that refuses to quit drinking? They're not going to get that new liver.
They won’t?
If there are no ICU beds "available" they should definitely start triaging COVID cases in un-vaccinated people for being an avoidable choice.
Nobody chooses to get in a car crash or have a heart attack. People have had 6 months to see this coming and do something about it.
“Stupidity cannot be cured. Stupidity is the only universal capital crime; the sentence is death. There is no appeal, and execution is carried out ..
R Heinlein*
*and thanks to Cheerful Charlie for bringing up that quote!
You don't have to be anti-vax to wonder about the possible long term side effects of a vaccine that's been rushed through the process of testing. Sure, catching 'long covid' may well be worse than possible long-term side effects of the vaccine. It seems like a balancing act using opposing sets of inadequate information.
You don't have to be anti-vax to wonder about the possible long term side effects of a vaccine that's been rushed through the process of testing. Sure, catching 'long covid' may well be worse than possible long-term side effects of the vaccine. It seems like a balancing act using opposing sets of inadequate information.
The immunologists say that vaccine side effects typically show up in the first few weeks after getting a vaccine. Even I the production was "rushed" we now have millions upon millions of people who have been vaccinated for months and months, so there should be good data out there about the potential side effects.
Have there been vaccines which appeared fine initially but then had long term effects?
Do you have an example?Have there been vaccines which appeared fine initially but then had long term effects?
There have been vaccines with long term side effects, which may drive hesitancy regardless of anything else. It's a matter of perception and possibility, not necessarily reality. Plus there have been side effects, clotting, etc, albeit with minimal risk to date.
So, rightly or wrongly, the mere possibility of long term harm may be enough to drive hesitancy for some people. Which is clearly the case.
Have there been vaccines which appeared fine initially but then had long term effects?
There have been vaccines with long term side effects, which may drive hesitancy regardless of anything else. It's a matter of perception and possibility, not necessarily reality. Plus there have been side effects, clotting, etc, albeit with minimal risk to date.
So, rightly or wrongly, the mere possibility of long term harm may be enough to drive hesitancy for some people. Which is clearly the case.
Can you please cite the Louisiana claim?In other news, Louisiana is discovering that people who were previously infected with COVID and were asymptomatic or had mild symptoms, are not well protected against the Delta variant.
(Another right wing trope that has served as an excuse to forego vaccination, bites the dust.)
In that state, pediatric infection rates have also risen exponentially, from 4% testing positive to 24% in just a few months.
Do you have an example?Have there been vaccines which appeared fine initially but then had long term effects?
There have been vaccines with long term side effects, which may drive hesitancy regardless of anything else. It's a matter of perception and possibility, not necessarily reality. Plus there have been side effects, clotting, etc, albeit with minimal risk to date.
So, rightly or wrongly, the mere possibility of long term harm may be enough to drive hesitancy for some people. Which is clearly the case.
In 1955, some batches of polio vaccine given to the public contained live polio virus, even though they had passed required safety testing. Over 250 cases of polio were attributed to vaccines produced by one company: Cutter Laboratories. This case, which came to be known as the Cutter Incident, resulted in many cases of paralysis. The vaccine was recalled as soon as cases of polio were detected.
The Cutter Incident was a defining moment in the history of vaccine manufacturing and government oversight of vaccines, and led to the creation of a better system of regulating vaccines. After the government improved this process and increased oversight, polio vaccinations resumed in the fall of 1955.
No. While my sister was on the liver transplant list, they tested her for alcohol and drugs frequently. When she fell off the wagon, they removed her as a potential liver recipient. She died at 48 from liver failure a couple years later.Is that ethical? I’m down with it, but is it medically ethical?
Like a liver transplant patient that refuses to quit drinking? They're not going to get that new liver.
They won’t?