4 ms·

It's not hard to imagine that rushed trials, rushed production and pressured approvals might not lead to the best process. Next to that: Over the last 50-60 ye

by toshk 6y ago

It's not hard to imagine that rushed trials, rushed production and pressured approvals might not lead to the best process. Next to that: Over the last 50-60 years approved medicines with the backing of more extensive clinical trials have been withdrawn. So the whole process in itself isn't flawless. I'm not saying the vaccines are unsafe or all the processes are wrong, but many people who are wary are often put in a corner of conspiracy theorists and I don't think this is fair.

atleta 6y ago
It's not flawless. But the point is not that it is flawless or that it should be (because, I don't think such a complex process can ever be). The point is that it gives you the best possible result as of now. Meaning, you have the highest chance for survival/avoiding a permanent health damage (which COVID can cause too) is taking an EMA/FDA approved vaccine. > but many people who are wary are often put in a corner of conspiracy theorists and I don't think this is fair. I think think this happens for at least two reasons. First, they are often simply conspiracy theorists who just try to phrase their thoughts in a way that doesn't seem like conspiracy theory at first. I've talked to a lot of people (mostly online) and I can tell you that it happens a lot. And the same people will start the same conversations again and again along the same patterns, pretending they are not conspiracy theorists or anti-vaxxers for that matter but go down the same path and show themselves if you engage in a discussion. Second, because of the above phenomenon, some people will just jump to the conclusion that anyone who raises concerns are indeed conspiracy theorists. (Again, because a lot of them will pretend that they are indeed sane people having sane questions.) It's not ideal, but not surprising either.
treesprite82 6y ago
> rushed trials, rushed production Fast doesn't mean rushed. The trials were fast because it was easy to gather huge numbers of participants, and the phases were carried out in parallel rather than sequentially (normally, to save money/resources, phase II would only start after a successful phase I). > and pressured approvals Immense pressure to make sure it's safe, too. Like this precautionary pause for what seems like a lower blood-clot rate than would be expected just by chance in that size of population.
- pjo90 6y ago
  The leak here seems to indicate that it was also just rushed: https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1371862891696156678 https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1371862891696156678
logicchains 6y ago
> It's not hard to imagine that rushed trials, rushed production and pressured approvals might not lead to the best process. Fun fact: thalidomide, the drug that caused birth defects, would have passed the trials that the Moderna vaccine's been though, because pregnant women weren't included in the study participants.

by toshk 6y ago

atleta 6y ago

It's not flawless. But the point is not that it is flawless or that it should be (because, I don't think such a complex process can ever be). The point is that it gives you the best possible result as of now. Meaning, you have the highest chance for survival/avoiding a permanent health damage (which COVID can cause too) is taking an EMA/FDA approved vaccine. > but many people who are wary are often put in a corner of conspiracy theorists and I don't think this is fair. I think think this happens for at least two reasons. First, they are often simply conspiracy theorists who just try to phrase their thoughts in a way that doesn't seem like conspiracy theory at first. I've talked to a lot of people (mostly online) and I can tell you that it happens a lot. And the same people will start the same conversations again and again along the same patterns, pretending they are not conspiracy theorists or anti-vaxxers for that matter but go down the same path and show themselves if you engage in a discussion. Second, because of the above phenomenon, some people will just jump to the conclusion that anyone who raises concerns are indeed conspiracy theorists. (Again, because a lot of them will pretend that they are indeed sane people having sane questions.) It's not ideal, but not surprising either.

treesprite82 6y ago

> rushed trials, rushed production Fast doesn't mean rushed. The trials were fast because it was easy to gather huge numbers of participants, and the phases were carried out in parallel rather than sequentially (normally, to save money/resources, phase II would only start after a successful phase I). > and pressured approvals Immense pressure to make sure it's safe, too. Like this precautionary pause for what seems like a lower blood-clot rate than would be expected just by chance in that size of population.

pjo90 6y ago
The leak here seems to indicate that it was also just rushed: https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1371862891696156678 https://twitter.com/AlexBerenson/status/1371862891696156678

logicchains 6y ago

> It's not hard to imagine that rushed trials, rushed production and pressured approvals might not lead to the best process. Fun fact: thalidomide, the drug that caused birth defects, would have passed the trials that the Moderna vaccine's been though, because pregnant women weren't included in the study participants.