Originally Posted by TLO:
What side effects have been reported that have you concerned?
Before you answer with "well this vaccine has only been around for 5 months or so", please tell me the last vaccine candidate that only started showing major side effects 5 months after people started getting it.
I haven't heard of any side effects.
It's just my natural paranoia that leads to my position. It also has to do with my low risk rate. Some people are at high risk and they should take it immediately regardless. [Reply]
Originally Posted by JakeF:
I haven't heard of any side effects.
It's just my natural paranoia that leads to my position. It also has to do with my low risk rate. Some people are at high risk and they should take it immediately regardless.
I'm also low risk - but I work with a high risk population. I've also been following the progression of the vaccine every step of the way.
Like I said, let's see the data - and if it looks good, let's roll. [Reply]
Originally Posted by TLO:
I'm also low risk - but I work with a high risk population. I've also been following the progression of the vaccine every step of the way.
Like I said, let's see the data - and if it looks good, let's roll.
One thing that I didn't realize until talking to my friend about the Pfizer vaccine is that the sample size was intentionally skewed (as most of them are from what I can tell). It wasn't 22k people who got it and 22k who didn't - it was more like 40k who got it and 4k who got the placebo (all very rough numbers). It's a pretty solid dataset for the short term.
And as for the long-term, the concerns there strike me as being akin to the whole "people are getting COVID multiple times" thing. Is is possible [that there will be negative impacts down the road]? Sure. But we don't see much evidence that it's at all LIKELY. [Reply]
People are concerned about mRNA vaccines because of their novel mechanism. mRNA has been used in oncology therapy for years. It is a perfectly safe.
They will continue to perform stability studies on the vaccines in the coming months. I would bet that storage requirements relax as they test excursions at higher temperatures.
Oxford:
This is more of a traditional vaccine. The two dose schedule that has proven 90 percent effective requires one half-strength dose followed by a full-strength dose. Its storage requirements are easier to follow as well.
Side Effects:
Around 100 thousand doses of these have been given so far. The safety data will be extremely illuminating because the sample sizes are so large. It also bears repeating that vaccines are the safest medications regularly given. You can get hyperchloremic metabolic acidosis from normal saline if infused rapidly.
This will not be version 1.0. That was already done in Phase I. This isn't software development, and you aren't beta testers. The standards are much higher.
Regarding vaccination in general: most flu cases are asymptomatic, meaning you can have it, exhibit no symptoms, and spread it to others. For that reason alone you should always get a flu shot. [Reply]
Originally Posted by 'Hamas' Jenkins:
mRNA has been used in oncology therapy for years. It is a perfectly safe.
I'm not arguing with anything you posted, you are clearly more knowledgeable about stuff like this than just about anyone here but that part does not help your argument. Chemo and radiation have been used in oncology therapy for years as well, neither are perfectly safe. [Reply]
Originally Posted by candyman:
I'm not arguing with anything you posted, you are clearly more knowledgeable about stuff like this than just about anyone here but that part does not help your argument. Chemo and radiation have been used in oncology therapy for years as well, neither are perfectly safe.
I didn't say they were, but oncovaccines are remarkably safe. [Reply]
The information people have to work with is pretty ****ed up.
Are the long term effects of the virus itself known? No, because it hasn't been around long enough for there to be a period of time that would constitute "long term." The similarities of it to MERS and SARS1 suggests there will be long term effects to some, but not all, of the people who contract SARS2. SARS2's effects positively correlate with age. I'm not at the age where getting royally fucked by SARS is at its maximum probability.
In the short term whatever vaccines have been developed thus far meet the criteria but nobody also knows the long term effects of any specific SARS2 vaccination.
Better the devil you know than the angel you don't, IMO. [Reply]
Originally Posted by candyman:
Not true. I'm not an anti-vaxxer at all, I just dont need a vaccine for a virus with a 99+% survival rate. If some horrible plague happened with a much lower survival rate I'd damn sure be camping out in line for that vaccine.
YOU may believe you don't.
The people you interact with in society DO. Same thing with every other vaccination that's out there. [Reply]
Originally Posted by duncan_idaho:
YOU may believe you don't.
The people you interact with in society DO. Same thing with every other vaccination that's out there.
I wash and sanitize my hands PROFUSELY, probably excessively. I have no choice but to wear a mask everywhere I go. Even with a mask on if I have to cough/sneeze I turn my head and do it in my elbow out of habit. The people I interact with in society are at no risk from me, vaccine or not. [Reply]