4 ms·
And yet it's fewer deaths than due to overly cautious vaccine approvals.
by the8472 6y ago
And yet it's fewer deaths than due to overly cautious vaccine approvals.
- Arnt 6y agoHow do you know that before the cautious testing and approval procedure? The EU recently approvied and has bought 200M J&J vaccines, I don't remember numbers of the other vaccines. If that vaccine were about as harmful as thalidomide, about 3000 babies would die during birth, and a considerably larger number would be born without an arm or similar.
- the8472 6y agoWithout hindsight we can still see that countries differed in approval timelines by a month even though they should have the same information available at the same time. Which means either one is taking more risks than necessary or another one is wasting time (and thus lives). And that's just approval, then there's the whole issue with the EU taking too long to negotiate lower prices instead of pre-paying for faster production ramp-up.
- hef19898 6y agoVaccines are not that different just because they are for different sickness. And there are no vaccines with any of these side effects, so there is no reason to believe the COVID vaccines will cause anything even close to that. Besides the normal stuff every drug has.
- Arnt 6y agoThat begs the question: For which kind of medicine is there a reason to believe that they may cause anything even close to that?
- hef19898 6y agoContagan, which is part of the reason why we have the drug approval process we have. And ever since, we didn't have anything comparable. At least not that I remember.
- Arnt 6y agoI don't think that answers the question. The question was "for which kind of…". Naming one specific past product doesn't answer that, because surely you don't mean that no future candidate warrants can pose similar risk. Contergan (thus spelt) is thalidomide, BTW. Thalidomide is the name of the active agent, which is used in products named contergan (as well as several other names).