Here
and
Now

opinions

We may soon have a COVID-19 vaccine. But will enough people take it?

11 Comments
By John Miller and Kate Kelland

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

© Thomson Reuters 2020.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

11 Comments
Login to comment

Considering the low death rate and the increasing herd immunity, I don't think the vaccine is all that important.

If they purchase enough doses do vaccinate everyone, they'll end up throwing much of it away.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

The magic word is transparency here. As there are different types of vaccines on the way. Nobody or only a very few nerds want to become genetically altered themselves, something what a certain part of those vaccines has in store, while most other vaccines follow another concept that is easier to accept by all people. There have to be some explanations and details have to be early communicated beforehand, not one minute with only a few words before the injection at the doctor’s.

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Pfizer's vaccine will require cold storage at -70 C and will have a short shelf life. Those are the major hurdles in making it available for all.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Call it the Darwin effect. Those who choose not to immunize, under any circumstances, are reducing their chances to pass on their genetic material.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Call it the Darwin effect. Those who choose not to immunize, under any circumstances, are reducing their chances to pass on their genetic material.

Nah, the Darwin effect has been in effect for billions of years. We have evolved to handle viruses, if you follow a natural lifestyle.

-6 ( +1 / -7 )

I'd have it without a pause, and only the most ardent anti-vaxers or conspiracy nuts would refuse.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

I'll have it, of course.

Nobody likes taking medicine, but what's the alternative?

4 ( +5 / -1 )

I'd have it without a pause, and only the most ardent anti-vaxers or conspiracy nuts would refuse.

Or perhaps only the most ardent complicity nuts would accept it...

-7 ( +0 / -7 )

Considering the low death rate and the increasing herd immunity, I don't think the vaccine is all that important.

It is common that people that have only a distorted idea about reality have the opposite opinion from the professionals, Every health organization of the world coincides that a vaccine is extremely necessary and that the pandemic is a very serious public health problem.

Nobody or only a very few nerds want to become genetically altered themselves, something what a certain part of those vaccines has in store

There is no vaccine that includes DNA that can be integrated in the genome, you are as likely to be "genetically altered" by any of the current candidaes as you would be by drinking water.

People have all the access to the information about vaccines that is necessary, the main point is that every single approved vaccine right now reduces the risk of health problems very importantly. Other details can be found out easily without having to wait to go to the doctor. The only care you must have is not to fall into one of the antivaxxer sites full of lies, so at least it is necessary to consult any of the multiple health care organizations that provide that information.

We have evolved to handle viruses, if you follow a natural lifestyle.

As an species our main strategy is to let a big chunk of the population die from them, something that modern medicine has made completely unnecessary. Some people are completely fine with thousands or millions of unnecessary deaths, people that dedicate their lives to protect the health of others don't.

Anybody has the right to refuse all kinds of health interventions, but nobody has the right to spread information they know is mistaken or false. People fall prey of that information and end up with completely unnecessary anxiety about something that is less risky than going to the market once.

You want to choose irrationally the more risky option? completely fine, but if you want to trick others to do the same misleading them making it appear as if it was less risky then you are no longer free to do it.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

You want to choose irrationally the more risky option? completely fine, but if you want to trick others to do the same misleading them making it appear as if it was less risky then you are no longer free to do it.

Indeed, I am completely fine with you risking your health with a rushed vaccine. But I wish you'd stop making misleading claims that all vaccines are safe and effective.

For healthy people, it is less risky to get covid than to get any of these rushed vaccines.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Indeed, I am completely fine with you risking your health with a rushed vaccine. But I wish you'd stop making misleading claims that all vaccines are safe and effective.

Both things are false, current leading vaccine candidates are in a clinical trial schedule perfectly on line with what has been used before without any problem in either safety nor efficacy. Calling them rushed is simply false.

*For healthy people, it is less risky to get covid than to get any of these rushed vaccines.*

Sorry, but imaginary risks are not part of a valid argument. How much risk are you imagining the vaccines have? because obviously you have no data to prove anything.

None of the vaccines currently approved for use in humans have even a comparable risk with the natural infection. This has no reason to change for COVID-19. Saying that the vaccine can only be more risky than the viral infection is not only misleading, it is false. As sure as you have nothing you can use to prove it.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

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