4 ms·
That's a pretty crazy hypothetical you've got there. Any reason you think that might be remotely possible, despite the months of trials the COVID vaccines went
by yaomtc 6y ago
That's a pretty crazy hypothetical you've got there. Any reason you think that might be remotely possible, despite the months of trials the COVID vaccines went through?
- beckingz 6y agoThe burden of proof is on the vaccine makers. Unfortunately, waiting to see if the vaccine has long term side effects means that we would not get the health benefits of a widespread rollout. Tough situation. Vaccination is probably the way to go.
- toast0 6y agoMonths of trials won't show effects that take years to notice.
- GloriousKoji 6y agoSame could be said of contracting COVID.
- toast0 6y agoYes, the option with the most safety data is to not contract a novel disease and not be admininstered a novel vaccine (of a novel type). Any option involving contracting the disease or being administered the vaccine has unknowable long term risks; and it's foolish to argue otherwise. That doesn't mean you can't argue about short and medium term risks; but if someone is worried about long term risks, pointing to the months of studies doesn't help at all. Given the known short and medium term risks, vaccination seems like a good plan, at least where there is community spread. In areas where the disease is controlled, the unknowable long term risks dominate, IMHO, and would make it a harder decision. Of course, lack of supply moots that question for now, there's more than enough people to vaccinate in areas with major caseload, so we don't have to think about vaccinations in places that are under control.
- Tycho 6y agoI'm not worried especially about this vaccine, I'm worried about the future state where we get too clever by half.