3 ms·

> Fortunately I don't need to though, because soon we'll probably have 2 great vaccines to choose from. Indeed! And I'll be going with the adenoviral route whi

> Fortunately I don't need to though, because soon we'll probably have 2 great vaccines to choose from. Indeed! And I'll be going with the adenoviral route which has been used for more than fifty years, rather than the brand new, first time ever mRNA product.

aphextron 6y ago
>Indeed! And I'll be going with the adenoviral route which has been used for more than fifty years, rather than the brand new, first time ever mRNA product. Interesting, I feel the exact opposite. I can't wait to take a mRNA vaccine, but the adenovirus ones seem sketchy given that Sinovac, J&J, and AstraZeneca have all seen serious adverse events in their trials, while Pfizer and Moderna have seen none, along with much higher efficacy. I wasn't aware there were any adenoviral vaccinations approved for human use? What are you referring to?
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- floatingatoll 6y ago
  Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG): https://medlineplus.gov/druginfo/meds/a682809.html https://medlineplus.gov/druginfo/meds/a682809.html
  - xiphias2 6y ago
    Isn't it using a bacterium?
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- phillc73 6y ago
  I think Zabdeno (Ad26.ZEBOV) and Mvabea (MVA-BN-Filo) for ebola vaccination is the most recent example. Also from Janssen (J&J).
xiphias2 6y ago
What are your main concerns with the mRNA product? Are you afraid of long term side effects? We already know that it has less short term side effects than the adenoviral vaccine. Actually I'd like to see deeper thinking about it from professionals.
- phillc73 6y ago
  I'm not a medical doctor, but I do work in pharma and I have tried to inform myself. Still, I could be quite wrong. Yes, I do have some concerns regarding long term effects of mRNA based vaccines. As you said, I would also like to see some deeper thinking about this. I feel that other delivery vectors may be better known and have an existing track record. I also understand that mRNA treatments have had some excellent outcomes in cancer patients. However, these treatments have been highly personalised, based on the patient's own DNA. Therefore, I also wonder about the general medium and longer term effectiveness of mRNA for coronavirus vaccination. I'm in no way an anti-vaxer. I'm completely vaccinated for all the common things (MMR etc). As is my child. No problems with something that's been around for a long time and is well known. I would just like to make my own choice regarding which brand new, accelerated testing regime, vaccine I decide to inject.
  - xiphias2 6y ago
    > I also understand that mRNA treatments have had some excellent outcomes in cancer patients One interesting thing is that I was quite worried that in April/May all these experimental treatments have been stopped, because all the most interesting companies were forced to redirect their focus to COVID (the only reason you could use a lab). I'm relieved, that at least we got something in return: derisking mRNA as a delivery method, and showing that it's far superior to older ones. You're right that we don't have medium / long term data yet, but this article is quite relevant: https://www.jpost.com/health-science/could-an-mrna-vaccine-be-dangerous-in-the-long-term-649253 https://www.jpost.com/health-science/could-an-mrna-vaccine-b... Linial explained that “mRNA is a very fragile molecule, meaning it can be destroyed very easily... If you put mRNA on the table, for example, in a minute there will not be any mRNA leftover. This is as opposed to DNA, which is as stable as you get.” She said that this fragility is true of the mRNA of any living thing, whether it belongs to a plant, bacteria, virus or human. As such, she said the worry should not be that the mRNA won’t get into the cells and instead will stay outside, floating in the body and causing some kind of reaction. Rather the concern should be that if it doesn’t enter the cells, it will disintegrate and therefore be ineffective.
roel_v 6y ago
Maybe this is a good place to tag on a question that someone reading this might be able to answer - while I know it hasn't bee tried yet so we don't 'know' yet, are there any theories on what would happen if you take multiple vaccines? Would that provide extra protection, could they react to each other negatively, or would it have (theoretically) no effect?
- xiphias2 6y ago
  I think it's better not to experiment with it. It would take too much effort, especially as the Moderna vaccine has much better stability profile (it looks like the clear winner for hot climates / places where refrigerating is hard)

aphextron 6y ago

>Indeed! And I'll be going with the adenoviral route which has been used for more than fifty years, rather than the brand new, first time ever mRNA product. Interesting, I feel the exact opposite. I can't wait to take a mRNA vaccine, but the adenovirus ones seem sketchy given that Sinovac, J&J, and AstraZeneca have all seen serious adverse events in their trials, while Pfizer and Moderna have seen none, along with much higher efficacy. I wasn't aware there were any adenoviral vaccinations approved for human use? What are you referring to?

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
floatingatoll 6y ago
Bacillus Calmette-Guerin (BCG): https://medlineplus.gov/druginfo/meds/a682809.html https://medlineplus.gov/druginfo/meds/a682809.html
- xiphias2 6y ago
  Isn't it using a bacterium?
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
phillc73 6y ago
I think Zabdeno (Ad26.ZEBOV) and Mvabea (MVA-BN-Filo) for ebola vaccination is the most recent example. Also from Janssen (J&J).

xiphias2 6y ago

What are your main concerns with the mRNA product? Are you afraid of long term side effects? We already know that it has less short term side effects than the adenoviral vaccine. Actually I'd like to see deeper thinking about it from professionals.

phillc73 6y ago
I'm not a medical doctor, but I do work in pharma and I have tried to inform myself. Still, I could be quite wrong. Yes, I do have some concerns regarding long term effects of mRNA based vaccines. As you said, I would also like to see some deeper thinking about this. I feel that other delivery vectors may be better known and have an existing track record. I also understand that mRNA treatments have had some excellent outcomes in cancer patients. However, these treatments have been highly personalised, based on the patient's own DNA. Therefore, I also wonder about the general medium and longer term effectiveness of mRNA for coronavirus vaccination. I'm in no way an anti-vaxer. I'm completely vaccinated for all the common things (MMR etc). As is my child. No problems with something that's been around for a long time and is well known. I would just like to make my own choice regarding which brand new, accelerated testing regime, vaccine I decide to inject.
- xiphias2 6y ago
  > I also understand that mRNA treatments have had some excellent outcomes in cancer patients One interesting thing is that I was quite worried that in April/May all these experimental treatments have been stopped, because all the most interesting companies were forced to redirect their focus to COVID (the only reason you could use a lab). I'm relieved, that at least we got something in return: derisking mRNA as a delivery method, and showing that it's far superior to older ones. You're right that we don't have medium / long term data yet, but this article is quite relevant: https://www.jpost.com/health-science/could-an-mrna-vaccine-be-dangerous-in-the-long-term-649253 https://www.jpost.com/health-science/could-an-mrna-vaccine-b... Linial explained that “mRNA is a very fragile molecule, meaning it can be destroyed very easily... If you put mRNA on the table, for example, in a minute there will not be any mRNA leftover. This is as opposed to DNA, which is as stable as you get.” She said that this fragility is true of the mRNA of any living thing, whether it belongs to a plant, bacteria, virus or human. As such, she said the worry should not be that the mRNA won’t get into the cells and instead will stay outside, floating in the body and causing some kind of reaction. Rather the concern should be that if it doesn’t enter the cells, it will disintegrate and therefore be ineffective.

roel_v 6y ago

Maybe this is a good place to tag on a question that someone reading this might be able to answer - while I know it hasn't bee tried yet so we don't 'know' yet, are there any theories on what would happen if you take multiple vaccines? Would that provide extra protection, could they react to each other negatively, or would it have (theoretically) no effect?

xiphias2 6y ago
I think it's better not to experiment with it. It would take too much effort, especially as the Moderna vaccine has much better stability profile (it looks like the clear winner for hot climates / places where refrigerating is hard)