5 ms·

This is the EudraVigilance web [1]: European database of suspected adverse drug reaction reports. On this website you can view data on suspected drugs side-effe

This is the EudraVigilance web [1]: European database of suspected adverse drug reaction reports. On this website you can view data on suspected drugs side-effects, COVID vaccines included. This is the Med Alerts web [2]: The U.S. Government database incidents of adverse health events that follow the administration of a vaccine. [1] https://www.adrreports.eu/en/index.html https://www.adrreports.eu/en/index.html [2] https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=CAT&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19 https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=...

fsh 5y ago
Pretty much any possible medical problem has a non-zero background rate in the population. When you vaccinate hundreds of millions of people, you probably sample all of those at least once. One needs to do a proper statistical analysis to determine if there is any causal link to the vaccination.
- kaskakokos 5y ago
  I agree with you, and with all this uncertainty, does anyone know if: Covid-associated problems > Vaccine-associated problems? I imagine that this is not so easy, probably we can split the response by age, previous medical issues, etc. An also I am sure that Covid-associated problems (including dead) have been decreasing since it was first discovered in humans. So, which is the status?
  - fsh 5y ago
    The clinical studies clearly show that the benefit from getting the vaccine outweighs the possible risks. Otherwise the regulatory agencies would not have approved them. Why don't you simply look up the reports from the approval agency of your choice if you want to know the details?
    - kaskakokos 5y ago
      I am not sure that this is accurate. For me it is like a coin: - One side shows the benefits of the vaccine, and let's not forget that this side is promoted by the vaccine sellers. No problem with that, they do their job, in a few months we will see a 3rd and 4th dose being promoted to ensure immunity. - The other side shows the cons of the vaccine, but as you said it is not sufficiently studied. It seems to me insufficient to make decisions.
      - fsh 5y ago
        This is not at all what I said! Before conditional approval, possible risks have been extensively studied in very large phase 3 trials with a few ten thousand participants. For reference, the phase 3 study of the conventional TBE vaccine I recently got had just a few thousand participants. Like for any other medication, regulatory agencies have used this safety and efficacy data to judge whether the vaccine is beneficial or not. I strongly suggest you look up the corresponding reports for the various COVID-19 vaccines if you are interested in the details. Most countries' agencies post them publicly on their websites. Due to the limited number of participants, is not possible to detect extremely rare side effects in a clinical trial. This is why most countries have adverse effect reporting systems. If they detect statistically significant anomalies (e.g. rare thromboses in vector vaccines), they then update their recommendations taking into account the new data. This is again standard procedure for all medications.
        kaskakokos 5y ago
        Thank you for your response, it seems you know a lot about this, no irony :) I understand your point, and I have read some papers (not recently, but in the first months of the vaccines invention). Also I understood your words (probably my bad) "One needs to do a proper statistical analysis to determine if there is any causal link to the vaccination" as "not sufficiently studied". Lets be clear, I am not antiVax (I have all of their recommended / required vaccinations and am very aware & grateful for the protection they provide), I have questions (the same kind of critical questions I do my self when choosing between mortgages or where spend my holidays). Then, which are my doubts? - This vaccines has been manufactured within a fraction of the normal time frame, I understand they may be used within vulnerable groups, but for the healthy ones... I am not in a hurry, let allow the test of time... - Pharmaceutical companies are seeking indemnification against any adverse consequences from vaccines... It will be not the first time the seller of a drug hide adverse hide-effects. It looks like asymmetric to me, no responsibilities in one side, my health on the other. - Without looking into details (details=lives), vaccination as a strategy has as little regard for human life / well-being and is just as reckless as herd immunity. Lets put 3 examples: 1) I have 2 kids, almost zero possibilities of being badly affected by covid, should I vaccine them bearing in mind the points above? 2) My wife has a rare disease, should she vaccine? 3) I am an healthy 37 man, should I vaccine? Do you see the grey areas?
  - kmos17 5y ago
    Covid associated problems: 600k dead in the US alone Vaccine associated problems: none even remotely approaching that kind of scale if any. What uncertainty is there?
    - kaskakokos 5y ago
      See my comment above please. Not black, not white, my point is on the grey areas. Note 1: I remember covid had a fatal rate of ~3% during the worst months. In the the Med Alerts web (see link above) the death rate of vaccines is 2.37%. It is the same scale. If I am misinterpreting it, I am happy to learn. Note 2: Only as example (but you can iterate), lets analyse it from age perspective: Covid fatal rate has this [1] distribution by age, Would you recommend everybody vaccine given the probable hiden-effects of the vaccine? [1] https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/20860.jpeg https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/20860.jpeg
      - kmos17 5y ago
        It's not clear to me what this data you are linking to means or that it is being correctly interpreted, but I think it is pretty safe to assume that if the vaccines had a 2.37% death rate we would know about it! 162M people in the US alone have been fully vaccinated, with a 2.37% death rate it would have resulted in 3.8M deaths!! Come on, please use some common sense.
        kaskakokos 5y ago
        Thank you. Yes, it seems a lot to me, that's why I think it might be misinterpreted, but I don't know how to interpret it. If anyone knows I'd be grateful for help. Regarding the polio argument, yes, I agree, but it also works the other way around, how many healthy people have to be harmed for the others to survive? We can argue about this ad infinitum, but this is about numbers and I don't see the whole picture.
        kmos17 5y ago
        See I think right there is where the problem starts, if you can't interpret it then you have to trust the experts to do it, or get a degree in immunology or whatever scientific field is required to properly be able to interpret this data. Why should you a non-expert want to interpret it on your own, or expect to be able to without properly studying this. This is a tech site, and any of us would laugh off a non-programmer taking a peak at code and drawing a conclusion from it. And the science we are talking about here is far more advanced than just programming. So removing this completely useless speculation based on ignorance, you have to look at the big picture and the hard facts. 600k deaths vs. no measurable negative impact of vaccines, and virtually complete protection against hospitalization and death, using a very established science (vaccines are safe and effective, and have a very long proven track record, and even mRNA is not that new.) The numbers are very clear and available, if you don't see the whole picture it's because you don't want to.

fsh 5y ago

Pretty much any possible medical problem has a non-zero background rate in the population. When you vaccinate hundreds of millions of people, you probably sample all of those at least once. One needs to do a proper statistical analysis to determine if there is any causal link to the vaccination.

kaskakokos 5y ago
I agree with you, and with all this uncertainty, does anyone know if: Covid-associated problems > Vaccine-associated problems? I imagine that this is not so easy, probably we can split the response by age, previous medical issues, etc. An also I am sure that Covid-associated problems (including dead) have been decreasing since it was first discovered in humans. So, which is the status?
- fsh 5y ago
  The clinical studies clearly show that the benefit from getting the vaccine outweighs the possible risks. Otherwise the regulatory agencies would not have approved them. Why don't you simply look up the reports from the approval agency of your choice if you want to know the details?
  - kaskakokos 5y ago
    I am not sure that this is accurate. For me it is like a coin: - One side shows the benefits of the vaccine, and let's not forget that this side is promoted by the vaccine sellers. No problem with that, they do their job, in a few months we will see a 3rd and 4th dose being promoted to ensure immunity. - The other side shows the cons of the vaccine, but as you said it is not sufficiently studied. It seems to me insufficient to make decisions.
    - fsh 5y ago
      This is not at all what I said! Before conditional approval, possible risks have been extensively studied in very large phase 3 trials with a few ten thousand participants. For reference, the phase 3 study of the conventional TBE vaccine I recently got had just a few thousand participants. Like for any other medication, regulatory agencies have used this safety and efficacy data to judge whether the vaccine is beneficial or not. I strongly suggest you look up the corresponding reports for the various COVID-19 vaccines if you are interested in the details. Most countries' agencies post them publicly on their websites. Due to the limited number of participants, is not possible to detect extremely rare side effects in a clinical trial. This is why most countries have adverse effect reporting systems. If they detect statistically significant anomalies (e.g. rare thromboses in vector vaccines), they then update their recommendations taking into account the new data. This is again standard procedure for all medications.
      - kaskakokos 5y ago
        Thank you for your response, it seems you know a lot about this, no irony :) I understand your point, and I have read some papers (not recently, but in the first months of the vaccines invention). Also I understood your words (probably my bad) "One needs to do a proper statistical analysis to determine if there is any causal link to the vaccination" as "not sufficiently studied". Lets be clear, I am not antiVax (I have all of their recommended / required vaccinations and am very aware & grateful for the protection they provide), I have questions (the same kind of critical questions I do my self when choosing between mortgages or where spend my holidays). Then, which are my doubts? - This vaccines has been manufactured within a fraction of the normal time frame, I understand they may be used within vulnerable groups, but for the healthy ones... I am not in a hurry, let allow the test of time... - Pharmaceutical companies are seeking indemnification against any adverse consequences from vaccines... It will be not the first time the seller of a drug hide adverse hide-effects. It looks like asymmetric to me, no responsibilities in one side, my health on the other. - Without looking into details (details=lives), vaccination as a strategy has as little regard for human life / well-being and is just as reckless as herd immunity. Lets put 3 examples: 1) I have 2 kids, almost zero possibilities of being badly affected by covid, should I vaccine them bearing in mind the points above? 2) My wife has a rare disease, should she vaccine? 3) I am an healthy 37 man, should I vaccine? Do you see the grey areas?
- kmos17 5y ago
  Covid associated problems: 600k dead in the US alone Vaccine associated problems: none even remotely approaching that kind of scale if any. What uncertainty is there?
  - kaskakokos 5y ago
    See my comment above please. Not black, not white, my point is on the grey areas. Note 1: I remember covid had a fatal rate of ~3% during the worst months. In the the Med Alerts web (see link above) the death rate of vaccines is 2.37%. It is the same scale. If I am misinterpreting it, I am happy to learn. Note 2: Only as example (but you can iterate), lets analyse it from age perspective: Covid fatal rate has this [1] distribution by age, Would you recommend everybody vaccine given the probable hiden-effects of the vaccine? [1] https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/20860.jpeg https://cdn.statcdn.com/Infographic/images/normal/20860.jpeg
    - kmos17 5y ago
      It's not clear to me what this data you are linking to means or that it is being correctly interpreted, but I think it is pretty safe to assume that if the vaccines had a 2.37% death rate we would know about it! 162M people in the US alone have been fully vaccinated, with a 2.37% death rate it would have resulted in 3.8M deaths!! Come on, please use some common sense.
      - kaskakokos 5y ago
        Thank you. Yes, it seems a lot to me, that's why I think it might be misinterpreted, but I don't know how to interpret it. If anyone knows I'd be grateful for help. Regarding the polio argument, yes, I agree, but it also works the other way around, how many healthy people have to be harmed for the others to survive? We can argue about this ad infinitum, but this is about numbers and I don't see the whole picture.
        kmos17 5y ago
        See I think right there is where the problem starts, if you can't interpret it then you have to trust the experts to do it, or get a degree in immunology or whatever scientific field is required to properly be able to interpret this data. Why should you a non-expert want to interpret it on your own, or expect to be able to without properly studying this. This is a tech site, and any of us would laugh off a non-programmer taking a peak at code and drawing a conclusion from it. And the science we are talking about here is far more advanced than just programming. So removing this completely useless speculation based on ignorance, you have to look at the big picture and the hard facts. 600k deaths vs. no measurable negative impact of vaccines, and virtually complete protection against hospitalization and death, using a very established science (vaccines are safe and effective, and have a very long proven track record, and even mRNA is not that new.) The numbers are very clear and available, if you don't see the whole picture it's because you don't want to.