Are you getting the vaccine? - Absolute trashfire thread, please enter with caution

I do not, unless one has a history of allergies to vaccines or was told by a medical doctor (not chiropractor or ND, they're quacks) to not get it. The odds of an adverse reaction from it are far, far, far lower than from covid itself.

Then there's the whole societal reason, for herd immunity and to help prevent new strains from mutating

Somebody didn't pay attention in high school at their biology class.
Strains mutate when they face a wall, it's the vaccinated that are responsible for virus mutating since the vaccine doesn't actually protect you from the virus (unlike the polio or measles vaccine).
Just like in case of the flu, and its efficacy of only 50%, yearly vaccines are needed.
Yet again your dumbass fell for media propaganda of the unvaccinated being responsible for nEw vArIanTs

I see that now, I edited my post to reflect that. It seems that is a term sometimes used.

This isn't really just the government, though. Scientists are pushing it, too, and they know a lot more about this stuff than you, me and everyone in this thread combined by a huge margin

Scientists in the 1940s have been pushing for, and actively participating in the extermination of the Jews.

You cant seem to make a distinction between scientific knowledge and moral compass.
 
Somebody didn't pay attention in high school at their biology class.
Strains mutate when they face a wall, it's the vaccinated that are responsible for virus mutating since the vaccine doesn't actually protect you from the virus (unlike the polio or measles vaccine).
Just like in case of the flu, and its efficacy of only 50%, yearly vaccines are needed.
Yet again your dumbass fell for media propaganda of the unvaccinated being responsible for nEw vArIanTs
That's ironic since you are 100% wrong. Please tell me you're trolling because this is very possibly the stupidest post written on this forum. Mutations happen at random and the more potential opportunities an organism has to mutate, the more it is likely to mutate.

The statement that mutations are random is both profoundly true and profoundly untrue at the same time. The true aspect of this statement stems from the fact that, to the best of our knowledge, the consequences of a mutation have no influence whatsoever on the probability that this mutation will or will not occur. In other words, mutations occur randomly with respect to whether their effects are useful. Thus, beneficial DNA changes do not happen more often simply because an organism could benefit from them. Moreover, even if an organism has acquired a beneficial mutation during its lifetime, the corresponding information will not flow back into the DNA in the organism's germline. This is a fundamental insight that Jean-Baptiste Lamarck got wrong and Charles Darwin got right.

However, the idea that mutations are random can be regarded as untrue if one considers the fact that not all types of mutations occur with equal probability. Rather, some occur more frequently than others because they are favored by low-level biochemical reactions. These reactions are also the main reason why mutations are an inescapable property of any system that is capable of reproduction in the real world. Mutation rates are usually very low, and biological systems go to extraordinary lengths to keep them as low as possible, mostly because many mutational effects are harmful. Nonetheless, mutation rates never reach zero, even despite both low-level protective mechanisms, like DNA repair or proofreading during DNA replication, and high-level mechanisms, like melanin deposition in skin cells to reduce radiation damage. Beyond a certain point, avoiding mutation simply becomes too costly to cells. Thus, mutation will always be present as a powerful force in evolution

The flu has always mutated, even before there was a vaccine. It's just a virus that mutates more than other viruses.

And yes, the vaccine does protect against the virus. It's not 100%, but nothing in life is.

Does it matter? Russia does a lot of things half-assedly, how does that reflect on the situation re: communication on COVID?
You said it did in your previous post.

Russia is trying to get people to be anti-vax in the west in an effort to sew mistrust into the government and weaken the west to benefit them. So basically in trying to not be a government shill when you decide to trust the 1% of scientists because you think they are less likely to be corrupted than the 99% for some reason, you are falling for Russian propaganda
 
You said it did in your previous post.

Russia is trying to get people to be anti-vax in the west in an effort to sew mistrust into the government and weaken the west to benefit them. So basically in trying to not be a government shill when you decide to trust the 1% of scientists because you think they are less likely to be corrupted than the 99% for some reason, you are falling for Russian propaganda
Let me rephrase that for a better understanding.

If we are to assume that the negative information regarding global vaccination campaign is propagated by Russia for one reason or another, wouldn't it be better to address the weak points of communication between the government entities and their respective populaces? This would reduce propaganda's efficiency, would it not?
 
Let me rephrase that for a better understanding.

If we are to assume that the negative information regarding global vaccination campaign is propagated by Russia for one reason or another, how does that influence weak points of communication between the government entities and their respective populaces?
It does because it takes advantage of people who are poorly educated and are easily influenced

For example, in the US, the Trumpers hate Fauci because he went against their Dear Leader. Fauci says to get the vaccine. Hence, the Trumpers won't want the vaccine because Fauci said they should get it. Russia exploits this with anti-vax propaganda
 
It does because it takes advantage of people who are poorly educated and are easily influenced
Okay, propaganda does that, I agree. Would you say it's a more logical choice to just point out that vaccine hesitancy is a product of Russian agitprop or invest in materials that attempt to explain to the relevant populations with intelligence relevant lingo about the positives of vaccination?

It can be done and back in the middle of the XXth century, PSAs/public awareness films used to have a plain and concise language to educate (or indoctrinate, depending on the perspective) target audience about the subject matter. Recently, however, it seems like this skill was lost. It's either stuff for kids, cringe attempts a-la "how do you do fellow X" or high-powered lingo without proper explanation.
 
Somebody didn't pay attention in high school at their biology class.
Strains mutate when they face a wall, it's the vaccinated that are responsible for virus mutating since the vaccine doesn't actually protect you from the virus (unlike the polio or measles vaccine).
Just like in case of the flu, and its efficacy of only 50%, yearly vaccines are needed.
Yet again your dumbass fell for media propaganda of the unvaccinated being responsible for nEw vArIanTs
Bruh, you didn’t pay attention. Mutations happen all the time in viruses, because they replicate very quickly. They also take bits of DNA out of their hosts which further scrambles their genetics over time. The more successful a virus is, the more it replicates, the more it will mutate. Anything that slows the spread of a virus is going to slow down the mutation rate. Vaccination reduces the chances of any infection being able to actually spread by a high amount, as the virus has difficulty replicating enough to ensure it’s spread to a new host. This means that any mutations it develops while in this host are more likely to be a dead end, and not form a new strain. Meanwhile, brainlets like yourself are prime breeding grounds for the virus. It replicates more, spreads more, and mutates more, becoming better and better at spreading from host to host, increasing the chance it DOES mutate to the point vaccines run into difficulties dealing with it because the virus is just different enough the vaccinated immune system doesn’t immediately recognize it.
 
Somebody didn't pay attention in high school at their biology class.
Strains mutate when they face a wall, it's the vaccinated that are responsible for virus mutating since the vaccine doesn't actually protect you from the virus (unlike the polio or measles vaccine).
Are you so seriously fucking retarded you think viruses think "hey we hit a wall, time to mutate?" It's completely fucking random you idiot. The more copies of a virus there are, the more chances there are for random shit to happen. Jesus Christ speaking of walls, you're like talking to one.
 
Okay, propaganda does that, I agree. Would you say it's a more logical choice to just point out that vaccine hesitancy is a product of Russian agitprop or invest in materials that attempt to explain to the relevant populations with intelligence relevant lingo about the positives of vaccination?
I'd say both, to be honest.

It can be done and back in the middle of the XXth century, PSAs/public awareness films used to have a plain and concise language to educate (or indoctrinate, depending on the perspective) target audience about the subject matter. Recently, however, it seems like this skill was lost. It's either stuff for kids, cringe attempts a-la "how do you do fellow X" or high-powered lingo without proper explanation.
I have seen those 1950s films and do agree, those were pretty effective.

Also lol that @PepsiVanilla is going through my post history and mass-negrating me and has his profile as hidden. He's still seething mad that I don't have an elderly obese man fetish like him
 
Neither of those has the slightest thing to do with the rate of mutation of actual viruses. The first doesn't even mention mutation at all, even once, and the second has nothing to do with live viruses. Mutation is completely random and simply has to do with how many copies of the virus are out there. The more times you roll dice, the more often they'll come up with snake-eyes.

Christ you retards are stupid.
 
Bruh, you didn’t pay attention. Mutations happen all the time in viruses, because they replicate very quickly. They also take bits of DNA out of their hosts which further scrambles their genetics over time. The more successful a virus is, the more it replicates, the more it will mutate. Anything that slows the spread of a virus is going to slow down the mutation rate. Vaccination reduces the chances of any infection being able to actually spread by a high amount, as the virus has difficulty replicating enough to ensure it’s spread to a new host. This means that any mutations it develops while in this host are more likely to be a dead end, and not form a new strain. Meanwhile, brainlets like yourself are prime breeding grounds for the virus. It replicates more, spreads more, and mutates more, becoming better and better at spreading from host to host, increasing the chance it DOES mutate to the point vaccines run into difficulties dealing with it because the virus is just different enough the vaccinated immune system doesn’t immediately recognize it.
Vaccination isn't enough to stop influenza. This thing replicates exponentially faster (10 to the negative 2nd power, versus 10 to the negative 5th), there is no fucking way vaccination will be able to suppress COVID.

Secondly, this ignores selection. Mutation is random, but selection is not.
Selection is directly tied to environmental pressures, for example a Sceloporous lizard's patterns come from random mutations, but the presence of predators which will have an easier time picking off any individual that stands out from its surface actively (albeit not consciously or intentionally) guides the selection of mutations which results in the lizard's coloration looking exactly like the bark surfaces they are found on, to the point where different species have adapted to different tree communities.
Now the presence of vaccinated potential hosts don't cause the virus to mutate in reaction, they simply give a competitive advantage to the mutations that are already there. (And unlike the lizard which needs to find a mate to pass on his/her improved camouflage mutation, the virus is basically self-replicating).

You aren't wrong, but you're not entirely right either.

As I said before, mutation is random but selection is not. The virus doesn't "hit a wall" and suddenly decide to evolve like its a Pokemon, rather the high rates of vaccination create an environment where the vaccine-resistant lineages are given a competitive advantage while those that can't infect a vaccinated host are not.

There were melanistic (black) peppered moths before the Industrial Revolution and there was penicillium (beta-ring) resistant bacteria before the over-prescription of Penicillin; the aforementioned events just created an environment where those traits had an advantage over their conspecifics.
 
Why not? Trying to point that the Russians are influencing the schizos can't hurt, and obviously educating people is good.
Why not just educating the people, lessening the window of opportunity for any adversary who's interested in sowing discord in the West? Schizos would be schizos anyway, so what is the logical reason for pointing out that it's Russia specifically?
 
Why not just educating the people, lessening the window of opportunity for any adversary who's interested in sowing discord in the West? Schizos would be schizos anyway, so what is the logical reason for pointing out that it's Russia specifically?
They've tried and a lot of people are gonna believe conmen and schizos because a career grifter told them that scientists can't be trusted
 
They've tried and a lot of people are gonna believe conmen and schizos because a career grifter told them that scientists can't be trusted
Have they? No single entity in my experience has not attempted to explain the reasoning behind vaccines besides YOU MUSSSSSST or TAKE IT OR YOU'RE STUPID.

People might be stupid, I grant you that but con-men and grifters prosper exactly because they have charisma and understandable messaging. I really don't want to derail this (already trash fire) thread but can we avoid discussing Trump? Or do you really think he's relevant to this conversation?
 
Vaccination isn't enough to stop influenza. This thing replicates exponentially faster (10 to the negative 2nd power, versus 10 to the negative 5th), there is no fucking way vaccination will be able to suppress COVID.
Depends on how it evolves. Some of the covid vaccinations have been effective against the new mutations. Slowing the number of chances it has to mutate will greatly help stop it. If it doesn't mutate, that is good. Unfortunately, it probably won't matter because people are still refusing to get vaccinated because they're selfish retards who think they know more than scientists and doctors about a virus

Have they? No single entity in my experience has not attempted to explain the reasoning behind vaccines besides YOU MUSSSSSST or TAKE IT OR YOU'RE STUPID.
Plenty of people have. Just because you put your fingers in your ears and ignore it doesn't mean it's not there.
People might be stupid, I grant you that but con-men and grifters prosper exactly because they have charisma and understandable messaging. I really don't want to derail this (already trash fire) thread but can we avoid discussing Trump? Or do you really think he's relevant to this conversation?
He is relevant. He told his cult that Fauci and scientists couldn't be trusted because they contradicted what he said. His cult will believe anything he says, so thus, it's lead to a low vaccination rate amongst his cult. It's ironic, too, because he was the one who did Operation Warp Speed and was then tardraging because he didn't get credit for the vaccine.
 
Just because you put your fingers in your ears and ignore it doesn't mean it's not there.
Would it be possible for you to provide me with examples of such messaging? There's no need to get adversarial about this, just because I haven't seen anything like that doesn't mean I specifically avoided seeing relevant information. Mind you, I'm talking about messaging from public authority figures and not reasoning behind vaccination in general.

He is relevant. He told his cult that Fauci and scientists couldn't be trusted because they contradicted what he said. His cult will believe anything he says, so thus, it's lead to a low vaccination rate amongst his cult. It's ironic, too, because he was the one who did Operation Warp Speed and was then tardraging because he didn't get credit for the vaccine.
Do you think it is relevant with regards to the rest of the world? Granted, American politics are broadcasted and spoonfed to us, the rest of the world, almost 24/7 but do you think it's relevant for countries outside of the United States?
 
Back