4 ms·

There are valid concerns and a difficult risk benefit analysis for some cohorts, I think. What are your thoughts on this? Put yourself in her shoes: "I held of

There are valid concerns and a difficult risk benefit analysis for some cohorts, I think. What are your thoughts on this? Put yourself in her shoes: "I held off on a COVID vaccine because I wanted to wait for data with positive signals for both pregnancy in the short term and long-run fertility. I’m trying to get pregnant, and those are the two things I care about most. Vaccine data is so politicized that it’s actually somewhat difficult to find full studies, results discussions or data sets as a layman, because every search term redirects you to “yes, get vaccinated right now, your concerns are merely ignorance” The other study that concerns me shows that the vaccine’s lipid nanoparticles— which carry the RNA instructions for the spike protein — move beyond the deltoid muscle they’re injected into and accumulate in other tissues, and seem to accumulate in ovarian tissue preferentially. That study looked at a very small sample, but given what we think we know about the spike protein — it likely causes some degree of tissue damage on its own, independent of the virus — it’s something that definitely demands further study Anyway, I feel like I need to come clean at this point. For a long time I was avoiding the vaccine because I wanted to hold out for more data. Now I’m actively choosing not to get it because what I’ve seen is providing the opposite of a positive safety signal for my purposes. It’s really important that I clarify I’m not at a high risk of exposure. I generally don’t work or even socialize outside my home. Lockdown life frankly doesn’t look that different from my preferred lifestyle. If I were a high exposure risk I would think about this differently I’m in the process of getting a prescription for prophylactic ivermectin, which has also become extremely politicized — to the point of becoming a censored topic on some platforms. I’m not giving advice, here. I’m not making broader efficacy claims. I’m just trying to be honest COVID is no joke. You do not want to get COVID. “Long COVID” symptoms should concern you even if you don’t think an infection would kill you. But the vaccines are very new and skipped a great deal of otherwise required safety testing, and some of this data is really worrisome." https://mobile.twitter.com/webdevMason/status/1405649896212819975 https://mobile.twitter.com/webdevMason/status/14056498962128...

bruce343434 5y ago
> data is worrisome I'd love to learn more about this but run into the walls your described about everyone dismissing your worries. Where is this data?
xwolfi 5y ago
You're right in a way but I think these people are still a tad wrong. It's not that everyone deny there can be side effects, on pregnancy or otherwise. It's that if nobody does the sacrifice, and everybody has his little thing he wants to protect (you want to get pregnant, I want to keep on working, my wife wants to be there for our kid, our parents have diabetes, etc etc) then nobody gets the vaccine. Get it, whatever it cost you, because it's your duty.
- takeda 5y ago
  I was also on the fence about vaccine, but what made me take is realization that there isn't only side effects of vaccine, but also side effects of catching covid. Media made us obsessed about deaths, but majority of people survive and among of them small portion get side effects. From what I remember it was about 1 every 10 people that had some kind of issue that lasted after recovering. Even the blood clots that were found with AZ and J&J are happening with the virus itself at higher rate. So it's just a simply choosing lesser risk.
  - incrudible 5y ago
    If the risk of (serious) DVT is lower with the vaccine, why did Norway come to the opposite conclusion and ban AZ?
    - takeda 5y ago
      Because the whole pandemic became politicized, and majority decisions are actually driven by politics. The countries are going against the narrative that they are purposefully trying to kill people with vaccines as a method of population control. There was also heavy disinformation campaign against AZ because AZ was the only non-profit vaccine made and its presence was standing in the way of Sputnik V being introduced into EU[1]. J&J has similar issues and it wasn't affected as much. Pfizer[2][3] was also targeted similarly, but the problem was that not much could be found on mRNA vaccines. I guess the worst one was some inflammation of hart in young people that resolves on its own. [1] https://www.biospace.com/article/russia-sees-opportunity-in-europe-as-astrazeneca-s-covid-19-vaccine-falters/ https://www.biospace.com/article/russia-sees-opportunity-in-... [2] https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-pfizer-covid-disinformation-serebryanskaya-murky-vaccine-influencers/31277170.html https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-pfizer-covid-disinformation-s... [3] https://www.euronews.com/2021/04/29/eu-slams-russia-and-china-for-western-vaccines-disinformation-campaign https://www.euronews.com/2021/04/29/eu-slams-russia-and-chin...
peter422 5y ago
The vaccines did not skip any safety tests, they just compressed the schedule because millions of people were dying of a preventable disease. At this point hundreds of millions of people have taken the various vaccines. There clearly are no major short or medium term effects (other than the reported, rare side effects). Also you can literally read all the documents provided to the FDA concerning the efficacy and safety of the vaccines. There isn't a giant conspiracy, all the original studies and data are in the open.
- mikem170 5y ago
  The parent never mentioned a conspiracy. They did mention running into a lot of glibly dismissive dead ends researching their concerns. I don't think their decision is unreasonable. I'm personally not looking at the same factors, and think of covid vaccination differently. I'm guessing you do, also. I personally don't see a problem with that. Who am I to tell force someone else to my way of thinking?
  - jdhendrickson 5y ago
    That philosophy is fine when the resulting issues only harm the person taking that attitude, herd immunity, viral mutation due to more hosts, and a plethora of other reasons don't allow us to take the live and let live attitude about vaccinations this time around.
    - mikem170 5y ago
      But it's still a heavy thing to force other people into something. We live in quasi-democracies and a significant percentage of people feel differently than you do. There's also a significant percentage of people, me included, who are willing to respect that people have different understandings of the risks. Lots of things harm us as a group, and we accept them. We don't, and can't, aim for zero risk.
    - lagadu 5y ago
      I'll be getting downvoted but it doesn't matter: it's you. You and people like you are the reason I'm not getting vaccinated. I'm from a time when having and exercising autonomy over what one does or does not with their own body was something celebrated, however now society has normalized insulting and bullying people for making their own choices. I will not tolerate a society that does this, fortunately I'm in a position to hurt it by simply not getting vaccinated. I have no doubts that it's perfectly safe and I'd be fine, with the bonus of being more protected. So yes. You are the reason I'm doing my part to ensure we'll never achieve herd immunity. Good job.
faeriechangling 5y ago
I haven't found it exceedingly hard to find data supportive or critical of vaccination despite the fact that the pro-vaxxers feel morally entitled and even obligated to censor the planet. Where there isn't censorship there is forced editorialization or often both. Such things aren't unusual though and I predicted it before it happened based on the known correlation between disease outbreaks and authoritarianism. Mind that you have to know how to FIND uncensored communities of anti-vax cranks who will gladly shove the most plausible theories they can devise in your face. The fact that the lab leak hypothesis stopped being a heterodoxy despite long being censored by big social media networks by non-medical professionals pretending that by citing politifact they were proxy medical professionals was shrugged off and censorship didn't even pause. Negative feedback has no effect on the strategy even when it reveals a stunning lack of expertise on the part of the censors. We even saw papers like WaPo just quietly retroactively correcting headlines and continuing to dish out Pinocchio ratings. I don't find the data to convince me of the anti-vax argument at all, save for potential arguments that there might be an angle to freeride at least short term off other people mitigating covid through vaccination and non-vaccination measures.
majgr 5y ago
> The other study that concerns me shows that the vaccine’s lipid nanoparticles— which carry the RNA instructions for the spike protein — move beyond the deltoid muscle they’re injected into and accumulate in other tissues, and seem to accumulate in ovarian tissue preferentially. This is really nasty, I'm inhaling litres of it per year while vaping.

bruce343434 5y ago

> data is worrisome I'd love to learn more about this but run into the walls your described about everyone dismissing your worries. Where is this data?

xwolfi 5y ago

You're right in a way but I think these people are still a tad wrong. It's not that everyone deny there can be side effects, on pregnancy or otherwise. It's that if nobody does the sacrifice, and everybody has his little thing he wants to protect (you want to get pregnant, I want to keep on working, my wife wants to be there for our kid, our parents have diabetes, etc etc) then nobody gets the vaccine. Get it, whatever it cost you, because it's your duty.

takeda 5y ago
I was also on the fence about vaccine, but what made me take is realization that there isn't only side effects of vaccine, but also side effects of catching covid. Media made us obsessed about deaths, but majority of people survive and among of them small portion get side effects. From what I remember it was about 1 every 10 people that had some kind of issue that lasted after recovering. Even the blood clots that were found with AZ and J&J are happening with the virus itself at higher rate. So it's just a simply choosing lesser risk.
- incrudible 5y ago
  If the risk of (serious) DVT is lower with the vaccine, why did Norway come to the opposite conclusion and ban AZ?
  - takeda 5y ago
    Because the whole pandemic became politicized, and majority decisions are actually driven by politics. The countries are going against the narrative that they are purposefully trying to kill people with vaccines as a method of population control. There was also heavy disinformation campaign against AZ because AZ was the only non-profit vaccine made and its presence was standing in the way of Sputnik V being introduced into EU[1]. J&J has similar issues and it wasn't affected as much. Pfizer[2][3] was also targeted similarly, but the problem was that not much could be found on mRNA vaccines. I guess the worst one was some inflammation of hart in young people that resolves on its own. [1] https://www.biospace.com/article/russia-sees-opportunity-in-europe-as-astrazeneca-s-covid-19-vaccine-falters/ https://www.biospace.com/article/russia-sees-opportunity-in-... [2] https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-pfizer-covid-disinformation-serebryanskaya-murky-vaccine-influencers/31277170.html https://www.rferl.org/a/russia-pfizer-covid-disinformation-s... [3] https://www.euronews.com/2021/04/29/eu-slams-russia-and-china-for-western-vaccines-disinformation-campaign https://www.euronews.com/2021/04/29/eu-slams-russia-and-chin...

peter422 5y ago

The vaccines did not skip any safety tests, they just compressed the schedule because millions of people were dying of a preventable disease. At this point hundreds of millions of people have taken the various vaccines. There clearly are no major short or medium term effects (other than the reported, rare side effects). Also you can literally read all the documents provided to the FDA concerning the efficacy and safety of the vaccines. There isn't a giant conspiracy, all the original studies and data are in the open.

mikem170 5y ago
The parent never mentioned a conspiracy. They did mention running into a lot of glibly dismissive dead ends researching their concerns. I don't think their decision is unreasonable. I'm personally not looking at the same factors, and think of covid vaccination differently. I'm guessing you do, also. I personally don't see a problem with that. Who am I to tell force someone else to my way of thinking?
- jdhendrickson 5y ago
  That philosophy is fine when the resulting issues only harm the person taking that attitude, herd immunity, viral mutation due to more hosts, and a plethora of other reasons don't allow us to take the live and let live attitude about vaccinations this time around.
  - mikem170 5y ago
    But it's still a heavy thing to force other people into something. We live in quasi-democracies and a significant percentage of people feel differently than you do. There's also a significant percentage of people, me included, who are willing to respect that people have different understandings of the risks. Lots of things harm us as a group, and we accept them. We don't, and can't, aim for zero risk.
  - lagadu 5y ago
    I'll be getting downvoted but it doesn't matter: it's you. You and people like you are the reason I'm not getting vaccinated. I'm from a time when having and exercising autonomy over what one does or does not with their own body was something celebrated, however now society has normalized insulting and bullying people for making their own choices. I will not tolerate a society that does this, fortunately I'm in a position to hurt it by simply not getting vaccinated. I have no doubts that it's perfectly safe and I'd be fine, with the bonus of being more protected. So yes. You are the reason I'm doing my part to ensure we'll never achieve herd immunity. Good job.

faeriechangling 5y ago

I haven't found it exceedingly hard to find data supportive or critical of vaccination despite the fact that the pro-vaxxers feel morally entitled and even obligated to censor the planet. Where there isn't censorship there is forced editorialization or often both. Such things aren't unusual though and I predicted it before it happened based on the known correlation between disease outbreaks and authoritarianism. Mind that you have to know how to FIND uncensored communities of anti-vax cranks who will gladly shove the most plausible theories they can devise in your face. The fact that the lab leak hypothesis stopped being a heterodoxy despite long being censored by big social media networks by non-medical professionals pretending that by citing politifact they were proxy medical professionals was shrugged off and censorship didn't even pause. Negative feedback has no effect on the strategy even when it reveals a stunning lack of expertise on the part of the censors. We even saw papers like WaPo just quietly retroactively correcting headlines and continuing to dish out Pinocchio ratings. I don't find the data to convince me of the anti-vax argument at all, save for potential arguments that there might be an angle to freeride at least short term off other people mitigating covid through vaccination and non-vaccination measures.

majgr 5y ago

> The other study that concerns me shows that the vaccine’s lipid nanoparticles— which carry the RNA instructions for the spike protein — move beyond the deltoid muscle they’re injected into and accumulate in other tissues, and seem to accumulate in ovarian tissue preferentially. This is really nasty, I'm inhaling litres of it per year while vaping.