- Joined
- Aug 18, 2020
- Posts
- 31,523
- Reaction score
- 19,266
- Bookie:
- $ 1,000.00
I think it's more that it was promoted as a vaccine when a lot of us only know of "vaccine" in one kind of light in which it gives you a bulletproof vest against that disease when instead it is more like the flu vaccine, which keeps you from getting really ill from the virus.The goal for proponents of this technology is to shift the paradigm to making us comfortable with such products in the same way that we have an annual flu shot. It’s widely acknowledged that previous versions aren’t going to be effective in providing any meaningful statistical immunity against emerging or future strains.
That it’s more of a “gene therapy” product than a traditional vaccine shouldn’t really matter, as long as the side effects are at least comparable and it provides protectiveness against the target antigen. COVID-19 vaccines have failed in that there’s little faith in the messaging; to many, the guidance seems weak and made up on the fly. Maybe it’s hysteria over the pandemic. If the users thought an mRNA vaccine was highly protective anyway, regardless of the need for regular boosters or continued alternative measures (e.g. masks, bug spray, etc.), then perhaps they’d be more convincing.
meanwhile, there is work being done to find a longer term solution to both COVID and Lymes Disease.