40 ms·

If my countries healthcare professionals are willing to take it then I will. They're more qualified to judge the risk than anyone else.

CodeGlitch 6y ago
Upvoted. This is my general rule in life: do what the professionals do. Of course I have family members who are completely mistrusting of, say, medical professionals, and believe crap on the internet instead.
Eric_WVGG 6y ago
Yeah, that's the thing… > I can't imagine taking a vaccine for covid anytime soon, least of all as the first round. Well good for you, unless you're a doctor or nurse, you can’t. And by the time you ^are^ eligible, there will be millions of others who have the vaccine, and more data. Granted, not the months or years of data you usually see with a vaccine, but that’s as abnormal as everything else these days…
toast0 6y ago
Healthcare professionals may be more qualified to judge medical risks. But ultimately it's a decision taken with no long term data for either the status quo or the intervention. You can extrapolate long term data from SARS and MERS for tail risks of contracting COVID; but there's no other similar immunizations to extrapolate from. By the time a vaccine is available for me (not in any risk categories; fairly poor access to COVID testing in my county, which I assume would mean poor access to vaccines, too), I'd guess we would have a lot more data on any immediate negative effects, so there's some confidence building; but it's still a choice between an unknowable risk and an unknowable risk.
- dageshi 6y ago
  There would be immediate quantifiable benefits in terms of how people live their lives however. Being vaccinated is likely to allow society to move back to some level of normalcy. Balanced against long term unknowable personal health risk as you say. In the end my pov is it's better to get on with living now and if a vaccine offers that then I'll take it.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
odessacubbage 6y ago
they didn't judge the risks of oxycontin very well. as a general rule judgement is largely an evaluation made based on past results... do we have any precedent of a vaccine being fast tracked like this? presumably the safeguards in place exist for a reason, if not then why isn't every vaccine fast tracked?
- corin_ 6y ago
  You can never guarantee that in the future we won't realise an existing consensus won't be shown to be flawed, but without the benefit of hindsight is there any option more consistently reliable than following healthcare professionals & experts in related scientific fields?
- fsagx 6y ago
  Yes, In the US in 1976. https://www.history.com/news/swine-flu-rush-vaccine-election-year-1976 https://www.history.com/news/swine-flu-rush-vaccine-election... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_swine_flu_outbreak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_swine_flu_outbreak

CodeGlitch 6y ago

Upvoted. This is my general rule in life: do what the professionals do. Of course I have family members who are completely mistrusting of, say, medical professionals, and believe crap on the internet instead.

Eric_WVGG 6y ago

Yeah, that's the thing… > I can't imagine taking a vaccine for covid anytime soon, least of all as the first round. Well good for you, unless you're a doctor or nurse, you can’t. And by the time you ^are^ eligible, there will be millions of others who have the vaccine, and more data. Granted, not the months or years of data you usually see with a vaccine, but that’s as abnormal as everything else these days…

toast0 6y ago

Healthcare professionals may be more qualified to judge medical risks. But ultimately it's a decision taken with no long term data for either the status quo or the intervention. You can extrapolate long term data from SARS and MERS for tail risks of contracting COVID; but there's no other similar immunizations to extrapolate from. By the time a vaccine is available for me (not in any risk categories; fairly poor access to COVID testing in my county, which I assume would mean poor access to vaccines, too), I'd guess we would have a lot more data on any immediate negative effects, so there's some confidence building; but it's still a choice between an unknowable risk and an unknowable risk.

dageshi 6y ago
There would be immediate quantifiable benefits in terms of how people live their lives however. Being vaccinated is likely to allow society to move back to some level of normalcy. Balanced against long term unknowable personal health risk as you say. In the end my pov is it's better to get on with living now and if a vaccine offers that then I'll take it.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]

odessacubbage 6y ago

they didn't judge the risks of oxycontin very well. as a general rule judgement is largely an evaluation made based on past results... do we have any precedent of a vaccine being fast tracked like this? presumably the safeguards in place exist for a reason, if not then why isn't every vaccine fast tracked?

corin_ 6y ago
You can never guarantee that in the future we won't realise an existing consensus won't be shown to be flawed, but without the benefit of hindsight is there any option more consistently reliable than following healthcare professionals & experts in related scientific fields?
fsagx 6y ago
Yes, In the US in 1976. https://www.history.com/news/swine-flu-rush-vaccine-election-year-1976 https://www.history.com/news/swine-flu-rush-vaccine-election... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_swine_flu_outbreak https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_swine_flu_outbreak