4 ms·
Intuitively, the risks of viral vector vaccines are well known because they have been used for at least a decade while mRNA are being used in large scale for th
by 627467 6y ago
Intuitively, the risks of viral vector vaccines are well known because they have been used for at least a decade while mRNA are being used in large scale for the first time only now.
- Exmoor 6y agoPerhaps previously, but at this point hundreds of millions of people have been injected with mRNA vaccines and the safety profile and efficacy seem much better than any other vaccine technology.
- riffraff 6y agoBut we haven't seen long term effects of mRNA vaccines. I am not expecting a "children of men" distopy, and I'd rather have an mRNA vaccine than any other, but it is possible there might be some unexpected issues in the long run.
- ummonk 6y agoWeren’t the first viral vector vaccines (for Ebola virus) only recently approved? As to track record, the first viral vector vaccines in widespread use (i.e. the COVID vaccines) will have killed hundreds (possibly even thousands) of people via blood clots. That’s a worthwhile trade off for a disease as deadly as COVID. But it would be less acceptable against less dangerous diseases, particularly if safer vaccine technologies are available.
- gus_massa 6y agoThe MMR vaccine contains "live" weakened virus. The kid sometimes get some small red points in the skin that disappear in a few days. The oral polio vaccine "Sabin" has "live" virus. It's stronger than the injectable polio vaccine, but there is a small risk that the virus can escape and mutate and after a year or so cause polio to another person. So countries without polio cases, only use the injectable version "Salk" that does not contain "live" virus. The first smallpox vaccine was just a similar virus for cows. The latest smallpox vaccine also used a "live" virus.
- meepmorp 6y agoNone of those are VVVs, though.