4 ms·
In therory, the mRNA vaccines should be extremely safe, as they are so specific and only require a carrier but no other substances in the vaccine. In practise,
by _ph_ 6y ago
In therory, the mRNA vaccines should be extremely safe, as they are so specific and only require a carrier but no other substances in the vaccine. In practise, you still need to test. There is always a small risk of something unexpected happening. Like the vaccine from Australia which has been completely abandoned - not sure whether it also was mRNA or some other kind of vaccine. It didn't cause any health problem, but the vaccinated people were tested as HIV-positive. Of course they were not, but the vaccination caused those false positive. So while no direct heahlt impact, it is quite a disaster if one couldn't test people for HIV any more.
- skissane 6y ago> So while no direct heahlt impact, it is quite a disaster if one couldn't test people for HIV any more. It only invalidated certain types of HIV tests. The impact would be that some subset of existing HIV tests would have to be abandoned. That would impose a cost on the health system. The real issue is that there were other vaccines being developed that were equally effective but which did not have this drawback. If this was the only vaccine available, the health system would have worn the burden of changing HIV test regimes; given several other effective vaccines are becoming available, it wasn't clear that the cost of imposing massive changes on HIV testing regimes was justified.