health

EU drug regulator OKs booster doses of Moderna's COVID shot

15 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

15 Comments
Login to comment

Burning Bush

Two shots work fine for at least six months. Green pass justified. After that, vaccine resistance may wane but a vaccinated person is still better protected against COVID than an unvaccinated person. Using your logic, an unvaccinated person should never get any kind of green pass, anywhere, anytime. You cannot nitpick from the sidelines, which is where you’re going to be permanently unless you come to your senses, and expect to have any credibility on this issue.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

Using my logic, nobody gets a green pass unless their fully compliant with all their 6 month booster shoots for the rest of their lives.

But your "logic" is not based on science, which says that for most of the population vaccines as recommended right now continue to offer enough protection even after 10 months of the first inoculations. This completely contradicts your conclusions. You are not following the science just misrepresenting what the science says. This is very clear in the information provided in this same article.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

Using my logic, nobody gets a green pass unless their fully compliant with all their 6 month booster shoots for the rest of their lives.

If Covid-19 continues to be the same kind of threat that it is today, I agree with you entirely. But thanks to improving vaccines and ongoing advances in medical technology, that almost certainly won't be necessary.

Anybody who gets tired of playing the jab me game after 6 or 7 shots get booted back into unvaccinated statues with the rest of us.

If Covid-19 continues to be the same kind of threat that it is today, I agree with you entirely. The physical safety of everyone, including the unvaccinated, depends on it.

Follow the science, it's the only way.

Once again, I agree with you entirely.

1 ( +6 / -5 )

Having access to a computer can make you an expert in virology and vaccines according to some experts here.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

Some follows blindly the science and accept blindly everything what the science is saying.

Some follows logical human intellect.

Everybody can choose...

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Some follows blindly the science and accept blindly everything what the science is saying.

Some follows logical human intellect.

And some follows logical human intellect blindly down a dead-end street, believing their own intellect to be more logical than it actually is.

Everybody can choose...

Make sure you choose wisely.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Having access to a computer can make you an expert in virology and vaccines according to some experts here.

For non-experts, i.e. most of us, the only way to know anything about virology and vaccines is to read and follow and trust the opinions of actual experts. Not the opinions of anyone with a computer, which is what most who reject the opinions of experts seem to prefer to do.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

Some follows logical human intellect.

As long as "logical human intellect" do not actually mean "what I like and is convenient for me, even if it can be proved false". Science in escence is just the method to find out what is actually happening controlling for well known sources of error so the results are much more likely to be true.

Everybody can choose...

That always applies, you can choose to follow what professionals trained in researching things have found out, or what your personal experience full of biases tells you. The first option is much more likely to be correct, but not everybody have the actual disposition to accept when something they want to believe may not be true according to the evidence.

For non-experts, i.e. most of us, the only way to know anything about virology and vaccines is to read and follow and trust the opinions of actual experts. Not the opinions of anyone with a computer, which is what most who reject the opinions of experts seem to prefer to do.

Exactly, anybody can easily see what the experts have to say about something even without being one, trying to contradict them based only on your personal opinion is what would mean trying to pretend to be one.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

Some follows blindly the science and accept blindly everything what the science is saying.

Some follows logical human intellect.

Everybody can choose...

Science is using logical human intellect.

Accepting blindly what " science is saying" is not science

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

The EU?

Aren't they just a bunch of brown bag bureaucrats?

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

If the science shows that 3 shots is better than 2 than the definition of fully vaccinated must therefore be changed from 2 to 3.

why flu vaccine is a yearly shot.

Follow the science, it's the only way.

yep its the safest way

far better than the pseudoscience practiced by a minority of the population

4 ( +5 / -1 )

ian

Accepting blindly what " science is saying" is not science

Actually, by definition, it is.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

What if the science is bias? Why believe an article from Japan today? Grant money is hard to come by and people would say anything to keep the money moving. I am curious as to when the people who accepted the first two shots will get tired of taking another after another....I can only imagine the side effects after a 4th or 5th.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites