There might also be ulterior motives at play, such as continued non-pharmaceutical interventions being justified by a lack in vaccine uptake or politicians whose views on the matter hinge on demonstrably false statements such as the claim that vaccines will provide long-term protection against contracting the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

However, all that doesn't mean that mRNA vaccines don't work or that one shouldn't get vaccinated for these reasons. mRNA vaccines are a tremendous technological achievement, generally very safe, and a boon for mankind.

Getting vaccinated shouldn't be a political decision, but entirely depend on an individual's personal decision and be motivated by medical and individual risk considerations alone.

For by far the most people that simply means getting vaccinated, much more so for individuals who are at a higher risk of severe complications from a SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Interestingly, as a side note and since you mentioned that particular risk factor, obesity is associated with a similarly increased risk (about ten times) of severe COVID-19 symptoms as not being vaccinated.

However, very little is being done to motivate people to lose weight to improve their potential outcome when contracting COVID-19. That, in turn, tells a lot about our healthcare systems and the political decisions driving those.

The problem is that they are entirely unqualified to make medical risk considerations. If they were capable of making them, they would already know the answer.

They won't learn anything from asking us. Most of the people replying are themselves not qualified. Even for those who give the right answer, the asker isn't in a position to tell.

The best advice I could give is to ask their doctor, who knows both their specific case and the latest information on the state of the disease. They're not an epidemiological expert, but they're far more qualified in both the general case and this instance.

Except that you and I already know what their doctor is going to tell them: get the vaccine. It's the only answer that makes even the tiniest bit of sense: very low risk, very high reward, and no amount of "maybe I'm an edge case" is anywhere near enough to overcome that very basic answer.

And therefore my advice would automatically be dismissed by those who disagree. It would amount to saying "Don't believe me, believe that other person, who I happen to know will agree with me." Those who disagree will challenge me on that, and I don't really have a reply that they will accept.

But now doctors can't even tell you their opinion in some states.

https://archive.ph/x62lm - "California Approves Bill to Punish Doctors Who Spread False Information" [NYTIMES]

I'm all for stopping the spread of false information - but who decides what is false information ? Before you answer - think about how often the first answer that came to mind have been wrong in the past.

In most jurisdictions, physicians are certainly allowed and able to state their personal opinion on a medical matter when talking to their patients personally. There just may be limitations as to what they can say publicly, especially when evoking the impression that their opinion represents an official guideline or scientifically accepted fact.

Sometimes, doctors aren't even that well-informed themselves either. Your doctor's statement that Covid vaccines are untested and long-term side effects are largely or even wholly unknown is patently false, for example.

COVID-19 vaccines have been thoroughly tested before having been administered to the general public. Furthermore, since COVID-19 vaccines are among the most widely used drugs in medical history, any long-term side effects would be known by now due to the huge sample size.

'Long-term effect' in this respect doesn't mean "effect that will only occur in the long run" but "effect that will manifest relatively shortly after administration but have a lasting effect on the patient".

https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/

Anecdata: Do you feel like your health has gotten overall better or worse since starting your covid vaccine regime?

Reading your comments you come off as having some type of guilt about "red pills" or other culture war type stuff - Look how many qualifiers you added to this post ("controversial question" , "not shaming", etc.)

There's nothing to feel guilty about and you can skip all the emotional stuff. Here is reality: Meta is laying off 11,000 workers today many of whom no doubt complied with the covid vaccine mandates. You need to zoom out and ask yourself if the values of mandated vaccines are in alignment with your values, which seems to be an equal question you are asking along with the medical advice.

I hope this comment can help you come to a decision.

mRNA vaccines are essentially a form of genetic engineering but their safety record is better than basically all other forms of immunization so if you've already had 3 boosters and no negative side-effects then getting another one isn't going to hurt you any more than the previous shots.

You should also quit smoking and start exercising since that's better than whatever else you could do for your health and general well-being.

The cell starts production of viral protein by copying the mRNA again and keeps doing so for while. Then it somehow stops... What exactly stops this process, except for heat shock?

Are the cells injected with the mRNA gobbled up by the immun system or does it stop on its own to produce the viral protein?

How does the viral protein leave the cell after it is produced inside of it? For a production of a virus it would stay inside until the virus is fully assembled. Is there a trick to the mRNA stuff, that makes the cell produce the viral particles outside of itself so the immun system can get to it?

Or is the cell bursting at some point when it is completely overloaded with viral protein?

Good luck.

PS: Sorry for baiting my questions with anti Justin rhetoric but I think it will trigger the right...or wrong individuals for answering my question honestly!

Thankyou for taking the time to respond.

Be well.

It has not (necessarily), and it is not. There is no evolutionary pressure on a virus becoming milder over time, it can go both ways. What you see in action is the vaccines working, they were conceived to reduce the risk of death, and they did so successfully, hence you see lower deaths. Unfortunately, death is neither the only, nor maybe the most serious outcome of COVID.

We do seem to be in a situation where the acute phase of the disease is somewhat less hefty for many people, but even with the last BA.5 waves we have seen quite many hospitalizations, so the risk is definitely not low for everyone. While this is for the acute phase, the long term effects of the disease, so called LongCovid, can be absolutely devastating and we have not yet seen the real long term effects (e.g. a HIV infection also only becomes serious after ~7 years). But so far we know the disease can seriously affect cardiovascular and pulmonary health, and seems to be inducing autoimmune reactions.

Sudden cardiac deaths, just like ischemic strokes, in young healthy adults are a symptom of how much damage COVID can do. A more serious source like https://www.medrxiv.org might be a better source of information than social media videos. A good search term for what you're looking for is "post-acute sequelae SARS-Cov-2". Some papers have images which leave nothing to the imagination, even for people not trained in medicine.

Unfortunately this has become an extremely contentious subject and most people have moved far beyond the simple concept of not getting sick with an extremely serious disease.

With your health situation, I'd take the fourth shot, and remain careful when it comes to the risk of getting infected. Not getting sick is the best course of action.

TYVM

https://theethicalskeptic.com/

https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/a-guide-to-my-excess-morta...