5 ms·

yes you are correct that we don't really know until we know, but there is good reason to believe that mRNA vaccines are actually safer than traditional methods

• cm2187 6y ago
  The conversation is about the respective merits of one vaccine over another. The fact that one is a new approach with no long term data on humans whether the other is a traditional approach is relevant.
  • selectodude 6y ago
    J&J and AZ adenovirus-vector covid vaccines are highly novel vaccines that are very similar to mRNA vaccines, just with a different delivery mechanism.
    • hef19898 6y ago
      Adeno virus based vector vaccines are a pretty old idea.
      • Imnimo 6y ago
        I was under the impression that adenovirus vaccines have only been been approved in the past year or two - a few for Ebola and the new ones for Covid. Are there others that have been around before that? It doesn't seem like it really matters if adenovirus vector vaccines is an "old idea" - after all, the idea of using MRNA has also been around for a long time. But if we've only started actually using them recently, how different is our knowledge of long-term effects?
        • JamisonM 6y ago
          Your impression is correct. The fact that it is an "old idea" is indeed unimportant, but what is very, very important is that large scale study over long periods has already been performed on that vaccination platform so we really do know a lot about it. That means that the similarity to mRNA is a good thing in terms of any worries about unexpected consequences. Of course it also means that we know that the risk of any unexpected consequences for adenovirus vaccines is also very low.
        • hef19898 6y ago
          They are tested and researched since at least 2004. Not for Covid-19 of course.
          • saurik 6y ago
            And mRNA vaccines were first tested in the 90s and started getting more substantial research in 2008: the timelines seem similar?
    • modularform123 6y ago
      They may be similar in that they induce expression of the SARS-COV-2 spike protein, but they are very different in that the former contain full adenovirus particles which appear to be someone causing the autoimmune clotting problems.
• bmj 6y ago
  Also I'm not really sure what saying "we don't know the long term effect are" accomplishes. It's not really adding much to the conversation. You are making the claim that there may not be any long term effects to the vaccine, but the information you cite has nothing to do with mRNA-based vaccines. I'm simply suggesting we don't have the data yet to make such claims.
  • shlant 6y ago
    the link I posted was to provide a list of known vaccine adverse reaction events throughout history to show that none of them occurred months after vaccination. Adverse events are almost always acute so the fact that we haven't seen widespread serious side effects after 6+ months means they are very likely incredibly safe.
• randomsearch 6y ago
  They’re saying “we don’t have any data on long term studies of such vaccines”, which is an important point. There is a risk there, and there’s no obvious way to manage it.