3 ms·

> Also, even if we disregard the expedited process, the release (the rate of production and administering it) is faster than you'd expect normally, which in its

> Also, even if we disregard the expedited process, the release (the rate of production and administering it) is faster than you'd expect normally, which in itself imposes a greater financial/business risk by exposing more people quicker to the same amount of risk. All this seems to dance around the fact that it's the first vaccine of its kind. It induces side effects that are not normal. And the process has been greatly expedited far beyond the usual liberal sentiment that the FDA is indispensable and we should be taking extraordinary amounts of time to approve medicines, etc. Perhaps there is an asymmetric aggregated risk "exposure" for pharmaceuticals. But I still don't see a huge upside to someone like me who's relatively young, fit and who's had tons of relatives, friends, etc. who've gotten the virus and not only survived but really didn't notice any lasting effects.

atleta 6y ago
> it's the first vaccine of its kind. It induces side effects that are not normal. It wasn't clear that you were specifically talking about the mRNA vaccines (or maybe just the Pfizer vaccine) as the comment I was replying to mentioned both this and the AstraZeneca one. Also, I'm not sure what non-normal side effects you are talking about WRT the mRNA vaccines. Israel basically ran a huge trial for Pfizer with several million people. I'm pretty sure we know (or will have the data very soon) for all the possible side effects. > But I still don't see a huge upside to someone like me who's relatively young, fit and who's had tons of relatives, That's a different question. As I said (maybe in a different comment) you should calculate the probabilities yourself. What you feel doesn't matter. Also, what you see around yourself doesn't matter. What you call a huge upside is up to you, but it's hard to imagine that there is anyone who doesn't get at least a 10x upside. But again, look at the statistics, there are some that tell you how likely you are to die from covid based on your age. I don't know how old you are, I don't remember all the numbers, but e.g. with the AstraZeneca vaccine in the UK they estimate that 40 out of 17M people had blood clotting problems. (And it's being investigated, which is good.) I don't think there is a single age group with lower COVID mortality than that. Definitely not among adults. So it's worth checking the numbers. A second thing is that since the vaccines don't provide a 100% immunity, it's never just about yourself, of course, and the circulating virus can (and does) mutate and it may do so in the wrong direction. (It may also mutate towards a simple common cold.) But since older people have a higher risk of dying from covid, the younger you are the longer you can wait, which means the better you will know the safety because the more people will get it before you. So your best strategy is convincing older people to take the vaccine, because it's what's best for them and you. And then if a few months you'll know better. (I'm pretty sure it will take months until you can get a vaccine if you are that young and healthy. Wherever you live.)
- donovanian 6y ago
  I guess I've been of the opinion that the largest at-risk segment of the population are the chronically ill and frail and that includes the overweight and obese. They should take the vaccine. The elderly should definitely take the vaccine. But once they're taken care of - I cannot really fathom most people accepting draconian measures in the absence of extraordinary deaths. For me though the idea that the vaccine is the only option brings to mind the question: why does the public health establishment prefer advanced technology over something that's immediately actionable and dead simple like advising people to lose weight? To me it seems like a system that's caught in a death spiral, sustaining an illusion that people can completely disregard their health and still be healthy.

atleta 6y ago

> it's the first vaccine of its kind. It induces side effects that are not normal. It wasn't clear that you were specifically talking about the mRNA vaccines (or maybe just the Pfizer vaccine) as the comment I was replying to mentioned both this and the AstraZeneca one. Also, I'm not sure what non-normal side effects you are talking about WRT the mRNA vaccines. Israel basically ran a huge trial for Pfizer with several million people. I'm pretty sure we know (or will have the data very soon) for all the possible side effects. > But I still don't see a huge upside to someone like me who's relatively young, fit and who's had tons of relatives, That's a different question. As I said (maybe in a different comment) you should calculate the probabilities yourself. What you feel doesn't matter. Also, what you see around yourself doesn't matter. What you call a huge upside is up to you, but it's hard to imagine that there is anyone who doesn't get at least a 10x upside. But again, look at the statistics, there are some that tell you how likely you are to die from covid based on your age. I don't know how old you are, I don't remember all the numbers, but e.g. with the AstraZeneca vaccine in the UK they estimate that 40 out of 17M people had blood clotting problems. (And it's being investigated, which is good.) I don't think there is a single age group with lower COVID mortality than that. Definitely not among adults. So it's worth checking the numbers. A second thing is that since the vaccines don't provide a 100% immunity, it's never just about yourself, of course, and the circulating virus can (and does) mutate and it may do so in the wrong direction. (It may also mutate towards a simple common cold.) But since older people have a higher risk of dying from covid, the younger you are the longer you can wait, which means the better you will know the safety because the more people will get it before you. So your best strategy is convincing older people to take the vaccine, because it's what's best for them and you. And then if a few months you'll know better. (I'm pretty sure it will take months until you can get a vaccine if you are that young and healthy. Wherever you live.)

donovanian 6y ago
I guess I've been of the opinion that the largest at-risk segment of the population are the chronically ill and frail and that includes the overweight and obese. They should take the vaccine. The elderly should definitely take the vaccine. But once they're taken care of - I cannot really fathom most people accepting draconian measures in the absence of extraordinary deaths. For me though the idea that the vaccine is the only option brings to mind the question: why does the public health establishment prefer advanced technology over something that's immediately actionable and dead simple like advising people to lose weight? To me it seems like a system that's caught in a death spiral, sustaining an illusion that people can completely disregard their health and still be healthy.