3 ms·

Age is a risk factor. Many European countries recommend AZ only above age 50 (Britain above 30) because of the risk/reward profile. Also, the Pandemrix history

Age is a risk factor. Many European countries recommend AZ only above age 50 (Britain above 30) because of the risk/reward profile. Also, the Pandemrix history teaches us that although adverse effects manifest within 2 months, it can take over a year to figure out problems (spoiler: pandemrix was touted as safe including by Fauci but was associated with 5X increase in Narcolepsy, a deveatatig life altering disease. There is a suspected mechanism but no certainty, so you can’t even say “we incorporated the lessons from that”)

kurthr 5y ago
The problem with this angle is that, if antibodies to the spike protein cause an immune response related disorder... what do you think the virus will do? It presents many more (and likely much less stable/useful) immune response targets any number of which might cause life altering diseases, even in young people! The H1N1 disease would have almost certainly had similar effects on autoimmune disorders (as Pandemris) since it looks like this was a genetic predisposition. There is a fundamental problem with all of the hesitancy/risk issues, which is that the risk of not being vaccinated is much higher, unless you can personally count on never getting exposed to the virus, which at this point (for people alive now) seems highly unlikely. The classic example is the blood disorders for J&J, which are about as risky as driving 20-100mi (depending on where). It's not that driving is so dangerous (it's certainly not perfectly safe), but that the issues are so rare, and the alternative is worse.
- beagle3 5y ago
  That’s making an awful lot of assumptions, and is contradicted by a counter example with Pandemrix. There is no equivalence between naturally getting it and artificially getting it. Almost everything is different about the process. And everything you say had been said about pandemrix at the time, including the chance of getting the disease vs the vaccine - and historically was wrong.

kurthr 5y ago

The problem with this angle is that, if antibodies to the spike protein cause an immune response related disorder... what do you think the virus will do? It presents many more (and likely much less stable/useful) immune response targets any number of which might cause life altering diseases, even in young people! The H1N1 disease would have almost certainly had similar effects on autoimmune disorders (as Pandemris) since it looks like this was a genetic predisposition. There is a fundamental problem with all of the hesitancy/risk issues, which is that the risk of not being vaccinated is much higher, unless you can personally count on never getting exposed to the virus, which at this point (for people alive now) seems highly unlikely. The classic example is the blood disorders for J&J, which are about as risky as driving 20-100mi (depending on where). It's not that driving is so dangerous (it's certainly not perfectly safe), but that the issues are so rare, and the alternative is worse.

beagle3 5y ago
That’s making an awful lot of assumptions, and is contradicted by a counter example with Pandemrix. There is no equivalence between naturally getting it and artificially getting it. Almost everything is different about the process. And everything you say had been said about pandemrix at the time, including the chance of getting the disease vs the vaccine - and historically was wrong.