7 ms·
You're correct in principle, but when weighing the "unknown long term risks" of a vaccine versus the "unknown long term risks" of COVID itself it really needs t
by Exmoor 6y ago
You're correct in principle, but when weighing the "unknown long term risks" of a vaccine versus the "unknown long term risks" of COVID itself it really needs to be an apple to apples comparison.
We know both the virus and the vaccine will be out of your system within a short period of time. So any long term effects would have to be derived from what happens while they're in your system. The vaccine generates a few proteins, which your immune system learns to fight off in short order. The virus generates similar proteins, but continues to replicate many times over, attacking your cells and triggering a much more severe immune response as it goes.
So while there are unknown long-term risks for both, I think it is pretty safe to say the number of vectors for long term consequences are much more numerous with the virus.
- gorkish 6y agoI think my original comment was maybe misconstrued. I stated plainly that COVID could cause lasting damage just as any other virus. It just doesn't seem there is much to support that it causes damage above and beyond that of other viruses are capable of and for which long term therapies and treatments exist and are well understood. Certainly there isnt anything that I have seen which substantiates that COVID itself can persist in the body and continue to wreck havoc after the body is able to clear the infection, but no doubt it can do serious and potentially lasting damage. I absolutely cannot agree more strongly that the long term consequences of any of the COVID vaccines will be far fewer than those of the virus itself.