Nobel Prize goes to scientists behind mRNA Covid Vaccines
 

Congratulations to the pioneers.........

Nobel Prize goes to scientists behind mRNA Covid vaccines - BBC News

I coulda come up with a vaccine that doesn’t lower transmission or symptoms. Where’s my prize. LOL

Oh no, the vaccine deniers will come out again!

They deserve the award for the work they did and the lives they saved

I would comment but don’t want lengthy time out for posting my opinion. Run forest run :crap2:

Having an opinion that differs from yours doesn't make one a "denier". Based on my experience I don't believe the vaccine is effective and I question it's safety.

First: been in biotech for 27 years. When Trump said they'd have a vaccine in a year I said that was impossible. We couldn't even get through Phase I clinical trials in a year. Nevermind develop the vaccine plus get production launched, and trials started. Simply impossible.

Second: There are common cold viruses that are also coronaviruses. Yet we have never had a vaccine that was in the least bit effective. It's simply a difficult thing to vaccinate against. mRNA vaccines are a new tech that may (in the future) be able to do something for these viruses, but at the Covid 19 time we didn't have any working.

Third: personally I didn't get Covid until after I was vaccinated. I had no choice but to get vaccinated because work required it. I wasn't really concerned over the safety of the vaccine back then. I didn't have a full understanding of how mRNA vaccines worked. Now I'm quite simply afraid of them. Too many people with too many heart problems after the vaccine.

The vaccine wasn't tested appropriately for safety. The vaccine didn't reduce transmission rates, it didn't reduce the chances of getting sick from the virus. So what did it do?

The only argument to be made now is that perhaps it reduced the severity of the symptoms. But that can be debated. The lethality of the virus followed normal evolution of many viruses. From a survival standpoint, viruses become less virulent over time. Simply put, it doesn't make sense for a virus to kill it's host. That results in less chance of transmission. The common cold is an expert at continuing survival. Get people sick but don't kill them, so they can transmit to another person.

Anyhow, this stuff is debatable. We could talk about it, present different studies to support our opinion, etc. Instead they have us trashing each other with words like "deniers".

I can totally understand people not believing what I believe based on their experience and evidence. No need for us to be derogatory to each other. I have friends on the totally opposite side of the aisle on many different topics. We have a beer, we debate, we present evidence. We agree to disagree and then we hug and go home.

So I would suggest if this thread does turn into a debate (and doesn't get nuked from orbit) that everyone be respectful of each other. There are valid points on both sides of the issue.

The Nobel Prize. What a sham.

Perhaps not, but ...

... denying that the vaccine is effective does.

The fact is that using the term denier is meant to be derogatory. It’s an attempt to stir an emotional response rather than a discussion. It’s a bully tactic basically.

My initial comment was meant to be a lighthearted jab at the Nobel prize. It is a well known fact, admitted by all of the scientific community that transmission was not lowered by the vaccine. As far as symptoms, yeah we could debate but there’s no scientific consensus at this point.

If the vaccine is effective and the virus is still so dangerous then why have the mandates been dropped almost everywhere (including the company I work).

Both sides have been presented.