3 ms·

I'm not confident I have a full understanding of the tradeoffs / I will be doing more research once I can actually access either / availability will probably be

by gpm 6y ago

I'm not confident I have a full understanding of the tradeoffs / I will be doing more research once I can actually access either / availability will probably be the deciding factor anyways, but with that said: As I understand the state of things I'd be more comfortable getting the AZ/oxford vaccine than the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine because the underlying technology is less novel, and therefore there is less potential for unknown long term side effects (of the unknown unknowns variety).

tempestn 6y ago
The nice thing about the mRNA vaccines is that while that tech hasn't been used in an approved vaccine before, it has been used in other treatments, and there's no real mechanism for there to be long term side effects. The vaccine and the proteins it causes to be produced are only in your system for a limited time period. Long term side effects are more of a concern for medications that are taken on an ongoing basis. Currently if I had the choice I'd go for the Pfizer vaccine hands down, given the superior efficacy in testing. (That said, beggars can't be choosers, so I'd take any approved vaccine I could get...)
hn_throwaway_99 6y ago
I'm the exact opposite - given how the technology works (and I think mRNA vaccines are truly ingenious and amazing), it seems the potential for negative side effects would be much greater (but, to emphasize, still not that high) with a modified-adenovirus-vector vaccine than an mRNA vaccine. I mean, the pathway for the AZ vaccine is to get a modified chimp adenovirus to infect your cells where they will generate spike proteins. The mRNA vaccines really are just snippets of RNA wrapped in lipids - they're about as simple and direct a mechanism as you can get.
- doktorhladnjak 6y ago
  There was an HIV vaccine trial a few years ago that was adenovirus based, where patients who got the vaccine ended up with a _higher_ rate of infection than those in the control group. It was a major disaster. The mechanism was believed to be those who'd had the adenovirus previously were at increased risk. The AZ vaccine uses a modified chimp adenovirus people have not been exposed to in order to reduce this kind of risk, but the Russian vaccine uses the same adenovirus as the failed HIV vaccine trial.
  - Jabbles 6y ago
    You should include your sources to distinguish your comment from the anti-vax noise: HIV original vaccine: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2585831/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2585831/ As relates to Covid: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7571904/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7571904/

by gpm 6y ago

tempestn 6y ago

The nice thing about the mRNA vaccines is that while that tech hasn't been used in an approved vaccine before, it has been used in other treatments, and there's no real mechanism for there to be long term side effects. The vaccine and the proteins it causes to be produced are only in your system for a limited time period. Long term side effects are more of a concern for medications that are taken on an ongoing basis. Currently if I had the choice I'd go for the Pfizer vaccine hands down, given the superior efficacy in testing. (That said, beggars can't be choosers, so I'd take any approved vaccine I could get...)

hn_throwaway_99 6y ago

I'm the exact opposite - given how the technology works (and I think mRNA vaccines are truly ingenious and amazing), it seems the potential for negative side effects would be much greater (but, to emphasize, still not that high) with a modified-adenovirus-vector vaccine than an mRNA vaccine. I mean, the pathway for the AZ vaccine is to get a modified chimp adenovirus to infect your cells where they will generate spike proteins. The mRNA vaccines really are just snippets of RNA wrapped in lipids - they're about as simple and direct a mechanism as you can get.

doktorhladnjak 6y ago
There was an HIV vaccine trial a few years ago that was adenovirus based, where patients who got the vaccine ended up with a _higher_ rate of infection than those in the control group. It was a major disaster. The mechanism was believed to be those who'd had the adenovirus previously were at increased risk. The AZ vaccine uses a modified chimp adenovirus people have not been exposed to in order to reduce this kind of risk, but the Russian vaccine uses the same adenovirus as the failed HIV vaccine trial.
- Jabbles 6y ago
  You should include your sources to distinguish your comment from the anti-vax noise: HIV original vaccine: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2585831/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2585831/ As relates to Covid: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7571904/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7571904/