FDA issues full approval for Pfizer COVID vaccine - does that change any opinions?

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

Matthew Rogers

Ejection Handle Pulled
Joined
Dec 1, 2017
Messages
1,325
Display Name
Display name:
Matt R
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine

So now that there is a COVID-19 vaccine that has gone through the full FDA approval process, does that make any differences for the opinions and actions of not-yet-vaxxers?

I know that my local university requires vaccines for all students, but was delaying the implementation of the policy until the full approval went through. So now that has happened, it is mandatory for on-campus attendance.
 
Matthew Rogers said:
So now that there is a COVID-19 vaccine that has gone through the full FDA approval process, does that make any differences for the opinions and actions of not-yet-vaxxers?
Click to expand...
It opens the door for employers to require vaccination. I'm sure "no jab = no job" will change some opinions.
 
Sluggo63 said:
I agree. I have a lot of coworkers who are (have been) using the "bUt It'S eXpErImEnTaL" excuse. I'm sure the goalposts are in the process of being moved as we speak.
Click to expand...
I've been amused by those who cited lack of full approval as a reason not to vax, but then advocated hydrochloraquine, horse dewormer, etc. as cures.
 
I'm not by any means an 'anti vaxxer' although I do fall in to the small category of people that probably should not be getting one as I do have a predisposition for blood clots.

That aside, I don't understand vaccine mandates. I mean, if you have a weak immune system, go for it, it's probably a good idea. But, if I understand correctly, the argument for healthy, vaccinated individuals to continue to wear masks is that they can still spread covid regardless of vaccination status. And that to me takes a lot of the steam out of the argument for mandatory vaccinations.

As to the question of whether FDA approval changes my opinion, no, not particularly.
 
asicer said:
It opens the door for employers to require vaccination. I'm sure "no jab = no job" will change some opinions.
Click to expand...

Sure, like how badly do they need employees. Short staffing, in general, is a big issue around here.
 
Kansas Flyer said:
My level of trust in government institutions is low in the best of times and it's sitting at the bottom of the Marianas Trench currently so that's a big fat nope for me.
Click to expand...

If the real question is, "do I trust the federal government?" The answer would be the same as is has been for many years, "I don't think so Skippy!"
 
Daleandee said:
If the real question is, "do I trust the federal government?" The answer would be the same as is has been for many years, "I don't think so Skippy!"
Click to expand...
I don't trust the federal government either, but I do trust the medical professionals I know, as well as my own knowledge of biology, all of which support getting vaccinated. That the government happens to agree with them doesn't change that either way.
 
Kansas Flyer said:
My level of trust in government institutions is low in the best of times and it's sitting at the bottom of the Marianas Trench currently so that's a big fat nope for me.
Click to expand...
What is it they say about steingar getting it right a blind squirrel finding a nut?
 
Sac Arrow said:
...That aside, I don't understand vaccine mandates. I mean, if you have a weak immune system, go for it, it's probably a good idea. But, if I understand correctly, the argument for healthy, vaccinated individuals to continue to wear masks is that they can still spread covid regardless of vaccination status. And that to me takes a lot of the steam out of the argument for mandatory vaccinations....
Click to expand...
There is the still the problem of filling up hospitals to such a degree that care for other conditions has become unavailable in some areas. Currently a very high percentage of covid hospitalizations are among the unvaccinated.

My understanding is that contageon is not "regardless of vaccination status," but that the protection is not 100%. That doesn't mean that the protection is zero. The same is true for masks. If you apply two partially-effective measures, that improves the overall reduction of transmission.

However if requiring both is still deemed offensive to some, maybe a middle ground (if that's still legal in this country) would be to give people a choice: either get vaccinated, or wear at least a procedure mask over the nose and mouth when in close proximity to others.
 
Last edited:
Sac Arrow said:
Sure, like how badly do they need employees. Short staffing, in general, is a big issue around here.
Click to expand...
Yeah, the "no jab = no job thing" is going to depend on a number of factors.
 
Does the approval allow for liability law suits for side effects?
That is the big thing for me. If they won't stand behind their product with buckets of money for ill effects.............
Regards,
Randy
 
The same people who pointed to the absence of full government approval as a reason not to get the vaccine will also tell you that they dont believe any of the numbers the government puts out about the scope of the epidemic. Funny how that works.

The only change will be that there will be a different set of excuses. 'Oh but it hasn't been tested in low earth orbit.' or 'bbbut religious freedom !!' and 'It was a rush-job, its lacking the decades of safety data that I personally require.'

If this thing wasn't so infectious and via breakthrough infections harmful to normal people, I would just say that we need to allow natural selection take its course.
 
Dana said:
I don't trust the federal government either, but I do trust the medical professionals I know, as well as my own knowledge of biology, all of which support getting vaccinated. That the government happens to agree with them doesn't change that either way.
Click to expand...
I believe in Darwin, and he seems to have the winning hand at the moment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top