6 ms·

> the Pfizer vaccine works and is safe Yes the vaccine has been proven to be safe for most adults in the short-term. But blanket statements like this over-simp

> the Pfizer vaccine works and is safe Yes the vaccine has been proven to be safe for most adults in the short-term. But blanket statements like this over-simplify the reality of the situation. People need to be aware that for certain sub-populations (eg pediatrics & pregnant women), there is insufficient scientific evidence - in terms of clinical trials and longitudinal studies - to conclude that the benefits of vaccination always and universally outweigh the risks. Until consensus has been established in the scientific literature - and even after that - everyone should be making their own decisions based on personal risk evaluation with the consultation of doctors and other medical professionals.

XorNot 5y ago
For pregnant women the conclusion has been in for a while that COVID-19 leads to a higher incidence of hospitalizations and complications and it has been advice from OBGYN's to get vaccinated with Pfizer ASAP: source - my wife is currently pregnant and we were told this by our OBGYN, who also suggested Astrazeneca would be unlikely to be harmful but couldn't professionally recommend it as their were no formal studies (but a large number of pregnant women have been vaccinated with it not knowing they were pregnant). For pregnant women the current data is that vaccination is conclusively necessary because they cannot possibly hope to avoid COVID-19 infection when giving birth and while pregnant are much more likely to be severely impacted by COVID-19.[1] [1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/special-populations/pregnancy-data-on-covid-19/what-cdc-is-doing.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/spec...
- criticaltinker 5y ago
  > The conclusion has been in for a while that COVID-19 leads to a higher incidence of hospitalizations and complications Yes just about any symptomatic illness is going to lead to hospitalization and complications during pregnancy. I understand how the language on the CDC page you cited may lead you to believe that vaccines are conclusively recommended, but take a look at this page from the CDC [1] (updated August 11th) for a more balance appraisal. They say that evidence about the safety is "limited" but "early data" is reassuring. Almost all of the links on the page you cited are to ongoing trials. It's a misrepresentation of science to say that the recommendation to vaccinate pregnant women is conclusive. And if we're trading anecdotes, my wife's OBGYN advised her not to get vaccinated yet, because it's unclear what the long-term risks are for mother and baby, and because it's unclear if vaccination provides any additional benefits for mothers who have acquired immunity through natural infection. If you can provide any citations to primary sources supporting your claim that vaccination is conclusively recommended I would appreciate it - I'm keeping an open mind here. [1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommendations/pregnancy.html#anchor_1628692520287 https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommend...
  - XorNot 5y ago
    If your wife has had COVID before she got pregnant, or during and recovered just fine, then that's a very different proposition to my wife who has not had COVID. You're burying the lead hard and frankly if you want to argue against the CDC and ATAGI[1] (the Australia advisory board) then the onus is on you to provide the extraordinary evidence that they shouldn't be believed. Your proposition is "a virus many times deadlier then the flu in a target group who have more serious outcomes from anything, what could go wrong?" And your evidence is: "well for someone who currently has effective natural immunity.." [1] https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2021/08/covid-19-vaccination-shared-decision-making-guide-for-women-who-are-pregnant-breastfeeding-or-planning-pregnancy-covid-19-vaccination-shared-decision-making-guide-for-women-who-are-pregnant-breastfeeding-or-planning-pregna_0.pdf https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2021...
    - AuryGlenz 5y ago
      I think he’s arguing against absolutism. If you’re pregnant and have had COVID or can keep your chances of catching it low by staying/working from home the potential risks probably outweigh the benefit of the vaccine. But that’s not what’s being communicated.
mike00632 5y ago
1. If "long term" is a matter of years, then yes, the vaccines have been shown to be safe long term. 2. New data shows that the vaccine is indeed safe for pregnant women and it's not recommended that everyone 12 and older get a vaccine. https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0811-vaccine-safe-pregnant.html https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0811-vaccine-safe-p...
handoflixue 5y ago
Just to be clear, by the standard you're proposing there's also no scientific evidence that posting on Hacker News is safe. There is no scientific evidence that the internet is safe. There is no scientific evidence that wearing a mask is safe. There is, of course, an INCREDIBLE amount of EVIDENCE for all of these things being safe (including the vaccine). There has simply never been a 100% complete full evaluation of safety to the rigorous standards of an academic paper. But it's really important to understand that we know TONS of things without having that rigor, and we don't hold the vast majority of our life to that standard. Heck, we outright know that driving IS dangerous, ridiculously so compared to taking a vaccine, but we still allow that.
- dhanvanthri 5y ago
  Parachutes have not been subjected to rigorous evaluation by using randomized controlled trials. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC300808/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC300808/ :D
  - criticaltinker 5y ago
    Had to up-vote because this is hilarious, thanks for sharing. As a critique of evidence based medicine they've clearly demonstrated their point, but it's obviously philosophical and the tradeoffs of practical medical interventions are no where near as clear cut as the case of falling from the sky without a parachute.
    - handoflixue 5y ago
      We have a known-safe vaccine that has been tested on millions of people. We have a known-deadly pandemic that has killed almost 4.5 million people. While we are not QUITE as clearcut as parachutes, this is still an area where we can reasonably conclude that the vaccine is vastly safer than being unvaccinated.
- criticaltinker 5y ago
  Just to be clear, you're arguing against evidence based medicine and instead advocating for hasty generalization and jumping to conclusions based on the absence of evidence. Somewhere between our two points is an optimal middle ground. The holy grail of exclusively evidence based interventions is lofty no doubt, and we'll have to do the best with what we know right now, but to aim for anything less is quite difficult to defend.
taurath 5y ago
There are no doctors that will tell you not to get the vaccine unless you go looking for one who will tell you not to. Covid sucks and is filling up the hospitals, and it’s crazy to me that someone decides for themselves that a potential unknown about a vaccine is worse to them than the real virus taking out people left and right. You’re basically saying that the medical establishment is incompetent in the extreme, yet the evidence for that is extremely low.

XorNot 5y ago

For pregnant women the conclusion has been in for a while that COVID-19 leads to a higher incidence of hospitalizations and complications and it has been advice from OBGYN's to get vaccinated with Pfizer ASAP: source - my wife is currently pregnant and we were told this by our OBGYN, who also suggested Astrazeneca would be unlikely to be harmful but couldn't professionally recommend it as their were no formal studies (but a large number of pregnant women have been vaccinated with it not knowing they were pregnant). For pregnant women the current data is that vaccination is conclusively necessary because they cannot possibly hope to avoid COVID-19 infection when giving birth and while pregnant are much more likely to be severely impacted by COVID-19.[1] [1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/special-populations/pregnancy-data-on-covid-19/what-cdc-is-doing.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/spec...

criticaltinker 5y ago
> The conclusion has been in for a while that COVID-19 leads to a higher incidence of hospitalizations and complications Yes just about any symptomatic illness is going to lead to hospitalization and complications during pregnancy. I understand how the language on the CDC page you cited may lead you to believe that vaccines are conclusively recommended, but take a look at this page from the CDC [1] (updated August 11th) for a more balance appraisal. They say that evidence about the safety is "limited" but "early data" is reassuring. Almost all of the links on the page you cited are to ongoing trials. It's a misrepresentation of science to say that the recommendation to vaccinate pregnant women is conclusive. And if we're trading anecdotes, my wife's OBGYN advised her not to get vaccinated yet, because it's unclear what the long-term risks are for mother and baby, and because it's unclear if vaccination provides any additional benefits for mothers who have acquired immunity through natural infection. If you can provide any citations to primary sources supporting your claim that vaccination is conclusively recommended I would appreciate it - I'm keeping an open mind here. [1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommendations/pregnancy.html#anchor_1628692520287 https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommend...
- XorNot 5y ago
  If your wife has had COVID before she got pregnant, or during and recovered just fine, then that's a very different proposition to my wife who has not had COVID. You're burying the lead hard and frankly if you want to argue against the CDC and ATAGI[1] (the Australia advisory board) then the onus is on you to provide the extraordinary evidence that they shouldn't be believed. Your proposition is "a virus many times deadlier then the flu in a target group who have more serious outcomes from anything, what could go wrong?" And your evidence is: "well for someone who currently has effective natural immunity.." [1] https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2021/08/covid-19-vaccination-shared-decision-making-guide-for-women-who-are-pregnant-breastfeeding-or-planning-pregnancy-covid-19-vaccination-shared-decision-making-guide-for-women-who-are-pregnant-breastfeeding-or-planning-pregna_0.pdf https://www.health.gov.au/sites/default/files/documents/2021...
  - AuryGlenz 5y ago
    I think he’s arguing against absolutism. If you’re pregnant and have had COVID or can keep your chances of catching it low by staying/working from home the potential risks probably outweigh the benefit of the vaccine. But that’s not what’s being communicated.

mike00632 5y ago

1. If "long term" is a matter of years, then yes, the vaccines have been shown to be safe long term. 2. New data shows that the vaccine is indeed safe for pregnant women and it's not recommended that everyone 12 and older get a vaccine. https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0811-vaccine-safe-pregnant.html https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0811-vaccine-safe-p...

handoflixue 5y ago

Just to be clear, by the standard you're proposing there's also no scientific evidence that posting on Hacker News is safe. There is no scientific evidence that the internet is safe. There is no scientific evidence that wearing a mask is safe. There is, of course, an INCREDIBLE amount of EVIDENCE for all of these things being safe (including the vaccine). There has simply never been a 100% complete full evaluation of safety to the rigorous standards of an academic paper. But it's really important to understand that we know TONS of things without having that rigor, and we don't hold the vast majority of our life to that standard. Heck, we outright know that driving IS dangerous, ridiculously so compared to taking a vaccine, but we still allow that.

dhanvanthri 5y ago
Parachutes have not been subjected to rigorous evaluation by using randomized controlled trials. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC300808/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC300808/ :D
- criticaltinker 5y ago
  Had to up-vote because this is hilarious, thanks for sharing. As a critique of evidence based medicine they've clearly demonstrated their point, but it's obviously philosophical and the tradeoffs of practical medical interventions are no where near as clear cut as the case of falling from the sky without a parachute.
  - handoflixue 5y ago
    We have a known-safe vaccine that has been tested on millions of people. We have a known-deadly pandemic that has killed almost 4.5 million people. While we are not QUITE as clearcut as parachutes, this is still an area where we can reasonably conclude that the vaccine is vastly safer than being unvaccinated.
criticaltinker 5y ago
Just to be clear, you're arguing against evidence based medicine and instead advocating for hasty generalization and jumping to conclusions based on the absence of evidence. Somewhere between our two points is an optimal middle ground. The holy grail of exclusively evidence based interventions is lofty no doubt, and we'll have to do the best with what we know right now, but to aim for anything less is quite difficult to defend.

taurath 5y ago

There are no doctors that will tell you not to get the vaccine unless you go looking for one who will tell you not to. Covid sucks and is filling up the hospitals, and it’s crazy to me that someone decides for themselves that a potential unknown about a vaccine is worse to them than the real virus taking out people left and right. You’re basically saying that the medical establishment is incompetent in the extreme, yet the evidence for that is extremely low.