4 ms·

Often people use the argument that this vaccine was really rushed and there could potentially be side effects to such a rushed vaccine. There is one example of

Often people use the argument that this vaccine was really rushed and there could potentially be side effects to such a rushed vaccine. There is one example of this actually happening. Have a look at what happened with the pandermix vaccine: narcolepsy.org.uk/blog/important-ruling-pandemrix-case https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/20/swine-flu-vaccine-case-settled-but-hopes-for-legal-precedent-dashed https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/20/swine-flu-vacc...

mr_mitm 5y ago
It is my understanding that simply waiting for a longer time would not have helped. This side effect did not come much later after the vaccination, but only in very rare cases, which is why it took some time to notice it. Considering how many people we vaccinated with the Covid vaccines, we should have seen (and have seen, with myocarditis, trombosis) such rare side effects. Plus, it is likely that the disease itself would have a similar effect on patients, because it is an interaction of the immune system with the nervous system. The vaccine itself is cleared from the body within weeks, after all, so it's not like medicine that is taken over a long period of time and can build up. So what you need is not longer trials, but trials with more people. Which is what is done in so called phase 4 trials after approval.
- cies 5y ago
  Side-effects may develop only after a while: a good reason for longer trials.
  - learc83 5y ago
    There has never been a vaccine that was recalled because of side effects that didn't show up until over a year later.
    - hall0ween 5y ago
      Citation? It's a bold claim, without any evidence to back it up. HN is different than the comments section of a news site.
      - learc83 5y ago
        Look through a list of vaccine safety recalls. Here's a highlight of the big ones--this is the list that most vaccine hesitant people talk about when they discuss their issues with vaccine safety. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/concerns-history.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/concerns-history.... None of the side effects in that list took more than a few weeks to occur, and the majority them happened within a few days. >HN is different than the comments section of a news site. Tell me again how hacker news isn't reddit O user of 3 months.
        hall0ween 5y ago
        Content for one, do you see many memes here? tik tok videos? pictures of dogs and cats? Typically the dialogue is more...dialogue than just cynicism. What's your reasoning it is Reddit?
        hall0ween 5y ago
        Thanks for the list too. Looking at the examples from the 90s on - aside from the rotavirus vaccine - this looks like a list of examples for why there should not be concern. Concerns were raised for vaccines and subsequently found to be uncorrelated. Regardless of interpretation too, this doesn't support the claim the commenter made - there has never been a vaccine recalled within a year.
    - cies 5y ago
      There was never a major mRNA vaccine roll out ever. mRNA possibly does not compare to traditional vaccines, there's evidence it is a different beast entirely. Enough reason to be cautious, wait out the hidden/late-onset side effect, and not give it to those not too vulnerable to covid. But authorities claim it's totally safe for all ages, while they have no data to back this up (that'd need a long trial, and those taking it ARE the long trial).
      - learc83 5y ago
        Multiple mRNA vaccines have been tested on humans since 2008 and on animals before that. None of them produced any “late-onset” side effects. And there is no sound theoretical mechanism for late-onset mRNA side effects. No drug approval process works like what you are proposing. Hundreds of millions of people have had nearly a year to develop side effects—-the safety profile is very well known at this point.
cies 5y ago
It's stories like this --gov't makes out of court settlements and vaccine retracted-- that give a lot of credibility to those against/ hesitant towards vaccination. I'm in a low-risk group and see no use in getting vaccinated, especially since herd immunity is off the table and nearby ICUs are not overflowing. The media/pharma/politicians/bigtech are all passing out the same message: get the vaccine. Non of them highlight that there are good reasons not to. So much for informed consent? Why all the hate against people being cautious?
- learc83 5y ago
  You might want to reevaluate your definition of low risk thanks to the delta variant. My wife is a pediatric ER doctor (but because the adult ER is so swamped with COVID patients they're now seeing all patients up to 25), during the first few waves of COVID, she saw almost no severe cases in children and young adults. There were plenty of kids who came in with COVID, but she didn't admit a single otherwise healthy kid or young adult because of COVID. In the last week, she's admitted 3 17 year olds to the PICU, and they've admitted many more than that to the floor for treatment. >It's stories like this --gov't makes out of court settlements and vaccine retracted-- that give a lot of credibility to those against/ hesitant towards vaccination. We have now administered billions of doses of MRNA vaccines. The safety profiles are more well known than a large percentage of drugs on the market that most people would take without a moment's hesitation. Historically vaccines have been taken off the market b/c of issues that were too uncommon to show up in trials, which consist of only a few thousand or tens of thousands of people. The side effects were so rare that they only showed up once millions of people started taking them. There has never been a vaccine that was pulled off the market for a side effect that took a year to show up.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- seoaeu 5y ago
  Because in places where lots of people think like you, the ICUs are overflowing? I also think you underestimate how ANGRY people are that they spent 18 months in lockdown, only to have some anti-vaxers mess things up at the end. By this point, we shouldn't be talking about which areas do/don't have overflowing ICUs, we should be talking about which areas have hit milestones for number of days without a positive case!

mr_mitm 5y ago

It is my understanding that simply waiting for a longer time would not have helped. This side effect did not come much later after the vaccination, but only in very rare cases, which is why it took some time to notice it. Considering how many people we vaccinated with the Covid vaccines, we should have seen (and have seen, with myocarditis, trombosis) such rare side effects. Plus, it is likely that the disease itself would have a similar effect on patients, because it is an interaction of the immune system with the nervous system. The vaccine itself is cleared from the body within weeks, after all, so it's not like medicine that is taken over a long period of time and can build up. So what you need is not longer trials, but trials with more people. Which is what is done in so called phase 4 trials after approval.

cies 5y ago
Side-effects may develop only after a while: a good reason for longer trials.
- learc83 5y ago
  There has never been a vaccine that was recalled because of side effects that didn't show up until over a year later.
  - hall0ween 5y ago
    Citation? It's a bold claim, without any evidence to back it up. HN is different than the comments section of a news site.
    - learc83 5y ago
      Look through a list of vaccine safety recalls. Here's a highlight of the big ones--this is the list that most vaccine hesitant people talk about when they discuss their issues with vaccine safety. https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/concerns-history.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/concerns-history.... None of the side effects in that list took more than a few weeks to occur, and the majority them happened within a few days. >HN is different than the comments section of a news site. Tell me again how hacker news isn't reddit O user of 3 months.
      - hall0ween 5y ago
        Content for one, do you see many memes here? tik tok videos? pictures of dogs and cats? Typically the dialogue is more...dialogue than just cynicism. What's your reasoning it is Reddit?
      - hall0ween 5y ago
        Thanks for the list too. Looking at the examples from the 90s on - aside from the rotavirus vaccine - this looks like a list of examples for why there should not be concern. Concerns were raised for vaccines and subsequently found to be uncorrelated. Regardless of interpretation too, this doesn't support the claim the commenter made - there has never been a vaccine recalled within a year.
  - cies 5y ago
    There was never a major mRNA vaccine roll out ever. mRNA possibly does not compare to traditional vaccines, there's evidence it is a different beast entirely. Enough reason to be cautious, wait out the hidden/late-onset side effect, and not give it to those not too vulnerable to covid. But authorities claim it's totally safe for all ages, while they have no data to back this up (that'd need a long trial, and those taking it ARE the long trial).
    - learc83 5y ago
      Multiple mRNA vaccines have been tested on humans since 2008 and on animals before that. None of them produced any “late-onset” side effects. And there is no sound theoretical mechanism for late-onset mRNA side effects. No drug approval process works like what you are proposing. Hundreds of millions of people have had nearly a year to develop side effects—-the safety profile is very well known at this point.

cies 5y ago

It's stories like this --gov't makes out of court settlements and vaccine retracted-- that give a lot of credibility to those against/ hesitant towards vaccination. I'm in a low-risk group and see no use in getting vaccinated, especially since herd immunity is off the table and nearby ICUs are not overflowing. The media/pharma/politicians/bigtech are all passing out the same message: get the vaccine. Non of them highlight that there are good reasons not to. So much for informed consent? Why all the hate against people being cautious?

learc83 5y ago
You might want to reevaluate your definition of low risk thanks to the delta variant. My wife is a pediatric ER doctor (but because the adult ER is so swamped with COVID patients they're now seeing all patients up to 25), during the first few waves of COVID, she saw almost no severe cases in children and young adults. There were plenty of kids who came in with COVID, but she didn't admit a single otherwise healthy kid or young adult because of COVID. In the last week, she's admitted 3 17 year olds to the PICU, and they've admitted many more than that to the floor for treatment. >It's stories like this --gov't makes out of court settlements and vaccine retracted-- that give a lot of credibility to those against/ hesitant towards vaccination. We have now administered billions of doses of MRNA vaccines. The safety profiles are more well known than a large percentage of drugs on the market that most people would take without a moment's hesitation. Historically vaccines have been taken off the market b/c of issues that were too uncommon to show up in trials, which consist of only a few thousand or tens of thousands of people. The side effects were so rare that they only showed up once millions of people started taking them. There has never been a vaccine that was pulled off the market for a side effect that took a year to show up.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
seoaeu 5y ago
Because in places where lots of people think like you, the ICUs are overflowing? I also think you underestimate how ANGRY people are that they spent 18 months in lockdown, only to have some anti-vaxers mess things up at the end. By this point, we shouldn't be talking about which areas do/don't have overflowing ICUs, we should be talking about which areas have hit milestones for number of days without a positive case!