Heartfelt Covid-19 Vaccine Discussion

[Vegan4Ever]

We all know that none of the vaccines are currently vegan. I had hopes that the plant-based Medicago vaccine would be, but it turns out they tested on animals and are using the GSK adjuvant, which, as far as I've read, uses squalene from sharks. Please correct if I'm wrong.

So my questions is this:

Are any other vegans out there on the verge of an emotional breakdown over the Covid-19 vaccine?

I'm not against vaccines per se, but I just can't bring myself to get the vaccine knowing all the murder and suffering that has been perpetrated against all those innocent animals. Not to mention I don't want any animal by products in or on my body. The thought of also having to go through this emotional trauma every time I would need a booster shot is more than I can handle. In fact, from past experiences, I don't think I would ever get over it. I have shed many tears over this, because it is really messing up my life. I can't get a job either because I can't wear a mask for very long without feeling dizzy and nauseated due to lung issues and I don't want to go maskless either.

I'm an extremely empathetic, emotional and sensitive person. Even though they try, people can't seem to understand what I'm going through. I guess I'd just like to know if anybody out there is having a similar issue?

I would love to hear what other people are going through if anyone is willing to share.

 

[Lou]

I guess I'd just like to know if anybody out there is having a similar issue?

Not me.
I don't really want to get to deep into this because pretty quickly I start sounding like the anti-vegans who have this idea if you can't be a perfect vegan you are a hypocrite.
but the things is: you can't be that kind of perfect vegan.

Fortunately the guys who defined the word vegan must have known this and put in that clause: seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—.
the first keyword is seeks. Which in my book means intends. So unintentional things don't count. And then the possible and practical , in my book does NOT mean at all costs. That is what is relevant here.

these words are subjective and subject to interpretation. many of us have debated with others and ourselves about how we translate that into reality. In my mind its pretty clear that I will avoid exploding animals as much as possible. but certainly not if it meant endangering myself and others, as in the case of the vaccine.

I posted a good article a few months ago by that I think really helps lay it out.
Let me go see if I can find it.

 

[Lou]

here is the article I originally posted

Is The COVID-19 Vaccine Vegan? - Plant Based News

Many people have raised questions about the new vaccine - about its efficacy and safety. A major question is; is the covid vaccine vegan?

plantbasednews.org

I just found this one and I think I like it better.

Should ethical vegans get the COVID-19 vaccine?

Should ethical vegans get the COVID-19 vaccine? Jordi Casamitjana walks us through the arguments of getting vaccinated as ethical vegans Should ethical vegans get the Covid-19 vaccine? This is going to be the key vegan question of

www.veganlifemag.com

What I really like about the above article is that it doesn't give you The Answer. Here is how it ends
After all this careful reasoning using the available evidence, I made my mind and acted accordingly. As ethical vegans, this is the only thing we are expected to do.

Here is what PETA has to say.

Can Vegans Get a COVID-19 Vaccine? | PETA Australia

Vaccines against coronavirus could start rolling out in Australia as soon as February.

www.peta.org.au

 

[Jeremy Delvarr]

Not me.
I don't really want to get to deep into this because pretty quickly I start sounding like the anti-vegans who have this idea if you can't be a perfect vegan you are a hypocrite.
but the things is: you can't be that kind of perfect vegan.
Fortunately the guys who defined the word vegan must have known this and put in that clause: seeks to exclude—as far as is possible and practicable—.
the first keyword is seeks. Which in my book means intends. So unintentional things don't count. And then the possible and practical , in my book does NOT mean at all costs.
these words are subjective and subject to interpretation. many of us have debated with others and ourselves about how we translate that into reality. In my mind its pretty clear that I will avoid exploding animals as much as possible. but certainly not if it meant endangering myself and others, as in the case of the vaccine.

I posted a good article a few months ago by a vegan health care worker that I think really helps lay it out.
Let me go see if I can find it.

"Fortunately the guys who defined the word vegan..."

Please Lou define it for yourself. Our personal philosophy must be one we decide upon for ourself and we owe nothing to anybody in the past, present or future to allow them to define our use of language. I agree with you that we must compromise much of the time and be pragmatic. But recognise, nonetheless that we make our own choices and are ultimately accountable. I shall not be getting vaccinated because I am opposed to the very principle of vaccination on moral and on scientific grounds. Similarly, for exactly the same reasons, my family refuse vaccinations. However, my elder daughter, who is a biomedical scientist and biologist, has had to take vaccinations because she is now a mature medical student and works in hospitals. This was imposed upon her as it is on members of the armed forces and police in many countries. We can only oppose the system so far—try not paying taxes on principle! My daughter undertook a course of prophylactic homeopathic remedies to counter the effect of the vaccinations. I recommend these to anybody not swayed by Big Pharma's blandishments.

 

[Lou]

"Fortunately the guys who defined the word vegan..."

Please Lou define it for yourself.

I'm glad I don't live in a world where I have to define words for myself and can accept the definitions made by others.

the vegan society's def does allow for interpretation and some subjectiveness. so people do have to figure out what it means to them. I'm not a fan of dogma. Thats why I like how the author ended her article, After all this careful reasoning using the available evidence, I made my mind and acted accordingly. As ethical vegans, this is the only thing we are expected to do.

 

[Vegan4Ever]

here is the article I originally posted

Is The COVID-19 Vaccine Vegan? - Plant Based News

Many people have raised questions about the new vaccine - about its efficacy and safety. A major question is; is the covid vaccine vegan?

plantbasednews.org

I just found this one and I think I like it better.

Should ethical vegans get the COVID-19 vaccine?

Should ethical vegans get the COVID-19 vaccine? Jordi Casamitjana walks us through the arguments of getting vaccinated as ethical vegans Should ethical vegans get the Covid-19 vaccine? This is going to be the key vegan question of

www.veganlifemag.com

What I really like about the above article is that it doesn't give you The Answer. Here is how it ends
After all this careful reasoning using the available evidence, I made my mind and acted accordingly. As ethical vegans, this is the only thing we are expected to do.

Here is what PETA has to say.

Can Vegans Get a COVID-19 Vaccine? | PETA Australia

Vaccines against coronavirus could start rolling out in Australia as soon as February.

www.peta.org.au

I'm glad I don't live in a world where I have to define words for myself and can accept the definitions made by others.

the vegan society's def does allow for interpretation and some subjectiveness. so people do have to figure out what it means to them. I'm not a fan of dogma. Thats why I like how the author ended her article, After all this careful reasoning using the available evidence, I made my mind and acted accordingly. As ethical vegans, this is the only thing we are expected to do.

I personally don't define myself as an ethical vegan, because it's not accurate enough for me. To me, vegan is a broad term with many different subcategories and I like to let people define themselves however they prefer. Nothing is stagnant and the term vegan is from the 1940's. Veganism has changed a lot since then.

I have yet to come up with a term to define myself, but hopefully I will someday.

 

[Emma JC]

In a perfect world..........

and that's the kicker isn't it?

This world is imperfect in so many ways and many of us are trying our best to make it a better more joyous place, and others, for various reasons, have different ideas about what that perfect world looks like. For some it is full of money or power and it is those people that tend to be in power and who run companies. If I tried to live my life, not consuming any items that were made by people/companies that weren't racist or carnivorous or planet destroying, I would be hiding in the woods trying to live off the land (which is not a bad plan).

I could go on and on about oil companies and Big Food and Big Pharma and Big Clothing but you all know these things already and somehow manage to overlook most of these things because it is practical and convenient, as do I. Would I rather that vaccines were not tested on animals? of course I would and hopefully one day we will get there.

What I do not intend to do is to die because of a wet market whether it be in China or on a factory factor farm in North American. As Dr Greger states very plainly in his How To Survive a Pandemic, zoonotic diseases have sparked some of the worst pandemics in history and so if I have to take a vaccine that was tested on animals in order to stay alive to help fight wet markets/factory farms/animal abuse then I will do so and continue to try to make the world a better place in my own small way.

As @Lou states, "we can't be perfect" and even if we could, ha, we are surrounded by imperfection.

Emma JC
Find your vegan soulmate or just a friend. www.spiritualmatchmaking.com

 

[Lou]

Cool. Let's not get vaccinated.

Then, if we get sick and go to the hospital, we'll be given medicines (also tested on animals).

If we die, people can shake their heads and say, "They died because of their weak vegan immune systems".

Sounds like a win.
.

I am a big fan of satire too and I agree with your sentiment. but perhaps its not appropriate here. the poster appears to be vulnerable and looking for support.

 

[David3]

I am a big fan of satire too and I agree with your sentiment. but perhaps its not appropriate here. the poster appears to be vulnerable and looking for support.

.
Agreed, but our friend says that he/she opposes vaccination on scientific grounds. I'm afraid they've been listening to anti-vaxxer rhetoric.
.

 

[Lou]

I personally don't define myself as an ethical vegan, because it's not accurate enough for me.

It seems like I am spending to much time on the definition of a vegan lately.
but I don't call myself an ethical vegan either. All vegans are ethical vegans so the ethical part is just redundant.

To me, vegan is a broad term with many different subcategories and I like to let people define themselves however they prefer. Nothing is stagnant and the term vegan is from the 1940's.

The word was coined in the 1940s. but the concept is much older. although the word was coined in the 1940s, the definition of that word has steadily evolved. At first it was essentilally a diet. but by the 50s it had expanded to not exploiting animals at all. And the vegan society has continuously tweaked the definition. I think the present definition is from the 90s.

I have yet to come up with a term to define myself, but hopefully I will someday.

I would encourage you not to come up with term for yourself. Although your first and last name could be used. that is pretty specific. but if no one knows what you are then a label doesn't really serve much purpose. I think its good that the definition of vegan is inclusive, itallows for various degrees. I love that "Possible and Practicable" clause. It allows each person to choose how vegan they need or want or can be. I also like that it has the word "strive" in it. In my book it makes "transitioning vegan" redundant. If you are trying to be vegan you are vegan. Its a process - not a product. We are not making vegans. we are being compassionate.

one of the best (maybe the only) purpose of a label is to save words. Like if I'm in a restaurant (or a doctor's office) I can just say I'm vegan. Here in California everyone knows what that means. and here in California most people I meet and tell them I'm vegan are accommodating.

I realize that is not true everywhere.

Then again saving words may not be what you want to do. Maybe you want to engage in a conversation. That is cool too. But then you really need to come up with cool label. I stole one from Woody Allen. when asked about philosophy I tell people that I am a Geographical Existentialist. When they say what is that, I explain that is where you believe there is intelligence that exists throughout the universe except for certain portions of New Jersey.

 

[Lou]

.
Agreed, but our friend says that he/she opposes vaccination on scientific grounds. I'm afraid they've been listening to anti-vaxxer rhetoric.
.

Did she? I just read it again and I don't see that. but I haven't finished my first cup of coffee....
Regardless I think her opposition is mostly empathic. which we all have to respect. however...
Emma has already explained this.

 

[Jeremy Delvarr]

.
Agreed, but our friend says that he/she opposes vaccination on scientific grounds. I'm afraid they've been listening to anti-vaxxer rhetoric.
.

You may be using the term 'rhetoric' in its new debased and perjorative connotation. Some of us 'anti-vaxxxers' are not quite as stupid or credulous as we may appear to the those imbued with conventional wisdom. We might even have high-level qualifications and a scientific background and decades of experience in research operations. We might be senior public health professionals (I am) but we just don't buy into THEIR 'rhetoric' because IT does not hold up medically, statistically, ethically, or otherwise. I am sure the new saviour of mankind (Mr BG) will push hard to have us all vaccinated and vaccine-passported in some grand MS scheme. Maybe you will be going along with him and his ilk but you had better check up on his record in Africa and India before you do. If you just accept everything you read that promotes vaccination and decries those who persist in objecting to it, you cannot hope to form a balanced view or be properly informed. I don't expect you have the time to research, any more than most people do, but I would ask you to be a tad more tolerant and a little less disrespectful of those who disagree with you on what is, after all, a highly technical matter requiring a knowledge of physiology, statistics and most importantly the psychology and methodology of manipulation. Vaxxxers might be better off reading Bernays than hoping to obtain a rapid education in immunology from the main stream media. They would certainly learn something about how things operate in this our so-called democratic society.

 

[Freesia]

I know that feel, i also had problems wearing a mask, to the point where i realised it would be impossible. What i ended up doing is avoiding situations where masking is mandatory and shielding as they say in the disability community... dont be afraid to order things from home or work from home if you are worried about being out... its ok to do so...

 

[Freesia]

Unpopular opinion: i think that it would be good if animal labs are abolished altogether. We have done hundreds of years of animal testing now so why keep doing it? im sure there is enough knowledge amassed now and enough is enough in my opinion,

 

[David3]

You may be using the term 'rhetoric' in its new debased and perjorative connotation. Some of us 'anti-vaxxxers' are not quite as stupid or credulous as we may appear to the those imbued with conventional wisdom. We might even have high-level qualifications and a scientific background and decades of experience in research operations. We might be senior public health professionals (I am) but we just don't buy into THEIR 'rhetoric' because IT does not hold up medically, statistically, ethically, or otherwise. I am sure the new saviour of mankind (Mr BG) will push hard to have us all vaccinated and vaccine-passported in some grand MS scheme. Maybe you will be going along with him and his ilk but you had better check up on his record in Africa and India before you do. If you just accept everything you read that promotes vaccination and decries those who persist in objecting to it, you cannot hope to form a balanced view or be properly informed. I don't expect you have the time to research, any more than most people do, but I would ask you to be a tad more tolerant and a little less disrespectful of those who disagree with you on what is, after all, a highly technical matter requiring a knowledge of physiology, statistics and most importantly the psychology and methodology of manipulation. Vaxxxers might be better off reading Bernays than hoping to obtain a rapid education in immunology from the main stream media. They would certainly learn something about how things operate in this our so-called democratic society.

My parents both lived through the polio scare of the 1950s. Millions of people were saved by the Salk vaccine. Your verbose vocabulary doesn’t substantiate your opinions. Show us data from peer-reviewed studies.

 

[David3]

Unpopular opinion: i think that it would be good if animal labs are abolished altogether. We have done hundreds of years of animal testing now so why keep doing it? im sure there is enough knowledge amassed now and enough is enough in my opinion,

.
I don't like animal tests either, but previously-amassed knowledge may not be enough when a brand-new disease comes along (like COVID-19).
.

 

[anarchist100]

.
I don't like animal tests either, but previously-amassed knowledge may not be enough when a brand-new disease comes along (like COVID-19).
.

Why not just test on consenting humans?
Because 1: If the medicine is for humans not only would it be better to test it on humans scientifically, but why should non-human animals suffer for something that only benefits humans?
2: Humans can consent, animals can't, I'm sure that you will find no shortage of willing human test subjects if you agree to pay them.

 

[shyvas]

Why not just test on consenting humans?
Because 1: If the medicine is for humans not only would it be better to test it on humans scientifically, but why should non-human animals suffer for something that only benefits humans?
2: Humans can consent, animals can't, I'm sure that you will find no shortage of willing human test subjects if you agree to pay them.

I strongly suggest that you address your queries to a medical virologist, if you want valid answers.

Coronavirus vaccine clinical trial starting without usual animal data- STAT

www.statnews.com

 

[Lou]

I strongly suggest that you address your queries to a medical virologist, if you want valid answers.

Coronavirus vaccine clinical trial starting without usual animal data- STAT

www.statnews.com

according to that article and some stuff I also heard last year, the urgency of the vaccine led to less animal testing.

Most animal testing is somewhat unnecessary so hopefully this is going to become a trend.

 

[shyvas]

according to that article and some stuff I also heard last year, the urgency of the vaccine led to less animal testing.

Most animal testing is somewhat unnecessary so hopefully this is going to become a trend.

Yes, to the first sentence. I really have no idea, to the second.