The way that this Covid vaccine works is quite different from the flu shot. The Covid vax. is not a (dead) bacteria or virus being injected into your body. (With Pfizer & Moderna) RNA (called messenger RNA) that's been coded in a lab goes into your arm. The RNA has instructions, or a code, that gets deposited on the cell. The ribosomes of the cell make a spike protein. It looks similar to the spike protein on the surface of the actual Corona virus. Then your body is supposed to make antibodies (antigens) that goes after the spike protein and neutralize it.
The problem is that this has not been tested in any long-term studies, so, this is more of an experiment. We don't know whether or not the DNA gets permanently changed (possibly bad). We're talking about something that's not supposed to be in your body (made in a lab) that can bind to the surface of your cells and possibly may not be able to be reversed.
Also, since the drug is still being evaluated for long term adverse effects, pregnancy, etc., the FDA would not license the drug, but instead, put out as EUA... Emergency Use Authorization.
The answer to the question is "no." RNA is not capable of altering DNA. The tech is not new. It started development in 1989 and has been used to treat cancer. This is a new application of a technology that is over 30 years old.
If you decide not to get vaccinated then that is your choice, but quit fear mongering. Why is it 10% of the people who create 90% of the drama?
So, to the people on this thread who say that being young and fit will keep them safe. What are you going to do now? Your "youth" and alleged "fitness" isn't going to do you much good if that variant gets loose.
Go on, tell me it's only CNN, they are "fake news".
It's only CNN, they are "fake news." ?
Let's hope that this article is inaccurate and that a strain hasn't become more lethal.
Ummm, hold up. So I practice self sustenance on my land, as do many of my family members, we grow our own crops, we raise our own livestock..So, I really don't have make those choices at the "grocer", LOL like who even uses that terminology... Anyway though, as I said before, unless you have concrete evidence regarding long term effects then don't ding my notifications. If you can't come with that info than don't come at all.
Insert theme song from Twilight Zone here. I with AN would start a discussion area for RN's only so that we could have more a more scientific debate. Nursing has enough problems with it's own that need educatin'.
The answer to the question is "no." RNA is not capable of altering DNA. The tech is not new. It started development in 1989 and has been used to treat cancer. This is a new application of a technology that is over 30 years old.
If you decide not to get vaccinated then that is your choice, but quit fear mongering. Why is it 10% of the people who create 90% of the drama?
Specializes in Vents, Telemetry, Home Care, Home infusion.
6 hours ago, Robmoo said:
It's only CNN, they are "fake news." ?
Let's hope that this article is inaccurate and that a strain hasn't become more lethal.
FYI article IS accurate per other news and medical reports. Brazil hit over 300,000 deaths yesterday second only to the U.S --an increase of 50,000 deaths in just 28 days this past month.
Leading the morning medical meeting at an intensive care unit in Sao Paulo, Jaques Sztajnbok reviews his COVID-19 patients....
..."We're seeing a high prevalence of younger patients, with no pre-existing conditions, hospitalized with very severe cases," Sztajnbok, head of intensive care at Emilio Ribas Hospital, told AFP.
"The same trend is being reported at ICUs across Brazil."
In Brazil, like most of the world, severe cases and deaths from COVID-19 were mainly among the elderly during the first wave of the novel coronavirus last year.
Now, the country is dealing with a devastating resurgence of the virus, blamed partly on the emergence of a new strain known as "P1" or the "Brazil variant."
The recent surge has pushed hospitals across Brazil close to the breaking point, as the country's death toll has soared to 285,000—second only to the United States.
This time, the demographic profile of the victims is increasingly young.
Before the trend emerged last December, the 30- to 59-year-old age group represented 20 percent of COVID-19 deaths in Brazil.
In about three months, that figure increased to 27 percent, according to health ministry data.
Meanwhile, the share of the death toll for over-60s fell from 78 percent to 71 percent.
"Half the (COVID-19) patients hospitalized in our nursing wards are under 60," said Luiz Carlos Pereira Junior, the director of Emilio Ribas.
A year ago, at the start of the first wave in Brazil, that figure was 35 percent, he said....
22-year-old COVID-19 patient was first person in Sao Paulo to die waiting for an ICU bed
Brazil's President has been in denial like Trump over seriousness of COVID pandemic, minimal COVID-19 vaccines administered. Public health institute Fiocruz warned this week that the country of 212 million people is facing "the worst health care and hospital collapse" in its history. Average Brazil ICU stay, prior 15 days. has now doubled to 28 days.
Brazil began vaccinations January 17, starting with medical workers, the indigenous population and the elderly.. Brazil aims to buy 30 Million COVID-19 Vaccine doses From Russia, India in addition to increased amounts of current AstraZeneca/Oxford shot and China's CoronaVac.
It’s not really a personal choice when you’re a healthcare worker in my opinion. It’s not just about you, it’s about the community you work with. I’ve had both doses and absolutely no symptoms except a light fever and some fatigue that same day (normal, it’s an immune response- body is doing its job). Every medicine you take has the possibility to cause reaction, it’s just how probability works. I guess I can say that I’m grateful in hindsight that I had a virology researcher as my Microbiology teacher, no matter how difficult she made the class, she broke everything down; it’s so relevant today and helped me personally tell shady info from real info. The reason it took so little time is because governments and companies cut the red tape that usually causes so much time in between vaccine research, development, and release. Literally 1000s of researchers and scientists teamed up around the world and used shared platforms to share information and work together; I don’t think some of you realize how historic this is. Also, 1000s of human participants courageously volunteered as testing subjects. I’m not judging anyone but a simple Google search (obviously looking at legit articles) will produce this information for anyone.
Working in health care does not require giving up the worker's personal beliefs and values.
It's great that you had only a slight reaction. Some people have had blood clots or other serious reactions. Actually, maybe it would have been good if you had had a serious reaction. It might have opened your eyes to what others are going through.
Only time is going to tell with these rushed vaccines.
Covid will likely be required/recommended every year, like flu vax, due to the virus' Herculean effort to survive by mutating.
Sigh. Yes, it has been tested. I’m flabbergasted every time I come to this site anymore. I thought we all took Microbiology for our degrees. Do we actually have nurses with a degree in science not understanding DNA, RNA, and how immune systems and vaccines work?
They did testing. One of the bigger testing happening in my own state. The reason this vaccine came to market sooner than most was when production was allowed to begin. That was the difference. Stop acting like this is a mysterious drug that just randomly showed up. Thousands of people volunteered to be test subjects.
Please do not show contempt for a valid opinion. You CANNOT truthfully imply there are NO risks to this vaccine, nor ANY medication. A nurse should know THAT. My objection to the vaccine is its relatively high risk for only a short term effectiveness. It'd be a better gamble if it conferred permanent immunity, but it does not. It's effectiveness is "maybe a year" according to my physician. It seems natural immunity would be a better risk for me personally. Each person and patient must have the freedom to weigh facts, hear differing opinions, and give informed consent.
That is not true, the evidence does not show that.
“Moreover, because the vaccine is effective in preventing covid-19 disease, which in itself is a cause of blood clots, it likely reduces the risk of thrombotic events overall,”
Covid will likely be required/recommended every year, like flu vax, due to the virus' Herculean effort to survive by mutating.
Absolutely right, but then we still have the flu from 1918 in our yearly flu vaccinations.
51 minutes ago, NVBurch said:
It's effectiveness is "maybe a year" according to my physician.
And what's your point? If it's working for a year and everyone has the vaccine then the virus will die off in that year. You can get the "herd immunity" that every anti-vaxxer wants. It will just be included in the various versions that are the yearly flu jags. See what Kooky Korky said above.
51 minutes ago, NVBurch said:
My objection to the vaccine is its relatively high risk for only a short term effectiveness.
Please enlighten us about this "high risk". Millions of vaccines given in UK with only minor reactions reported.
"Conclusion
The increases in number of ADR reports reflects the increase in vaccine deployment as new vaccination centres have opened across the UK
The number and nature of suspected adverse reactions reported so far are not unusual in comparison to other types of routinely used vaccines
The overall safety experience with both vaccines is so far as expected from the clinical trials
Based on current experience, the expected benefits of both COVID-19 vaccines in preventing COVID-19 and its serious complications far outweigh any known side effects
As with all vaccines and medicines, the safety of COVID-19 vaccines is being continuously monitored."
? That’s exactly what my partner (an airline pilot) asked when I started rattling off Covid stats. Sorry for not getting back to you sooner. Thank you Rose_Queen for providing an excellent link ??
My objection to the vaccine is its relatively high risk for only a short term effectiveness. It'd be a better gamble if it conferred permanent immunity, but it does not.
Based on what? Relative to what?
To me it is pretty clear that the evidence available to us at this time shows that a Covid-19 infection is a much bigger risk than a vaccine so I’m curious on what facts you’ve based your conclusion?
4 hours ago, NVBurch said:
It seems natural immunity would be a better risk for me personally.
Why do you think natural immunity would be better? In order to become immune naturally you would first have to be sick with the risks that involves. Do you think immunity from an infection lasts longer than immunity from a vaccine? In case you do, based on what?
4 hours ago, NVBurch said:
You CANNOT truthfully imply there are NO risks to this vaccine, nor ANY medication.
Who on earth has said or even implied that? Name one thing in life that carries zero risk. Being alive is a risky business. Do you ask for/demand/expect zero risk in all other parts of your daily life? It’s impossible to claim that a vaccine has NO risk but after evaluating the available data it’s easy to say that a Covid-19 infection comes with risk, up to and including death for a not negligible portion of the population.
Please do not show contempt for a valid opinion. You CANNOT truthfully imply there are NO risks to this vaccine, nor ANY medication. A nurse should know THAT. My objection to the vaccine is its relatively high risk for only a short term effectiveness. It'd be a better gamble if it conferred permanent immunity, but it does not. It's effectiveness is "maybe a year" according to my physician. It seems natural immunity would be a better risk for me personally. Each person and patient must have the freedom to weigh facts, hear differing opinions, and give informed consent.
I will reiterate that no one said anything is 100% safe. I don't think you are a nurse since any nurse would know that in the medical world there are NO 0% as well as NO 100%. If you were doing any research on the average length of Covid immunity via natural immunity, you would know that the number is about 3 months whereas the immunity conferred by immunization is about a year. If you want 100% immunity forever, I propose that the only way to achieve it is through death.
Actually, maybe it would have been good if you had had a serious reaction. It might have opened your eyes to what others are going through.
Honestly, I find that to be a rather malevolent sentiment. I am very pro-vaccine in general and very happy about the speedy development of Covid-19 vaccines and grateful for having had the opportunity to get vaccinated. How would you feel if I told you that perhaps it would have been good if you’d have gotten a Covid infection that had necessitated a three-week stint in an ICU, so that your eyes would be properly opened to what others are going through? Not a particularly kind thought.
Robmoo, ADN, BSN, RN
164 Posts
The answer to the question is "no." RNA is not capable of altering DNA. The tech is not new. It started development in 1989 and has been used to treat cancer. This is a new application of a technology that is over 30 years old.
If you decide not to get vaccinated then that is your choice, but quit fear mongering. Why is it 10% of the people who create 90% of the drama?