5 ms·

So we can know the long term effects of a novel vaccine but we can’t know the long term effects of COVID? How does that make any sense? Don’t you think it’s mo

So we can know the long term effects of a novel vaccine but we can’t know the long term effects of COVID? How does that make any sense? Don’t you think it’s more reasonable to assume we don’t know either?

slenk 5y ago
Maybe? We have been studying vaccines and how they work since the 1800s...we have a lot more history with vaccines and how they work compared to a Coronavirus. And two of the available vaccines don't even give you a dead infection like most vaccines - you can't get COVID from the COVID shot (Moderna or Pfizer)
- disneygibson 5y ago
  If it’s a new vaccine unlike most others, doesn’t that imply that historical information is not as relevant as it would be otherwise?
  - slenk 5y ago
    What about some of the people that have been vaccinated almost a year and a half with no side effects? Does that evidence count?
    - disneygibson 5y ago
      That would count if our question was “What are the likely side effects after one year?” But it’s not. The question is long term side effects. Unless you have a time machine, I’m gonna say we can’t know those for quite a bit - unlike other vaccines which have decades of testing data.
      - ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
        I haven't seen any reason to believe that longER-term side effects will differ significantly from the small amount of side effects we've already seen in the long period of time since the first vaccinations obviously we can't just wait forever with the worry that in year forever+1 some random side effect completely different from what the evidence currently indicates will manifest itself
        disneygibson 5y ago
        So you think that all side effects of substances are either noticeable in the first year or not at all? Have you heard of DDT?
        ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
        I must have missed the study that showed the long-term side effects of the vaccine were determined by the long-term side effects of DDT if you would be so kind as to link it here...
        disneygibson 5y ago
        This really isn’t hard to understand. In the past, some substances were thought to be safe, but turned out not to be. The “it’s safe” period of time was longer than a year. Ergo it is reasonable to assume that we can’t know all of the side effects of current novel vaccines. It doesn’t mean there will be any, but it doesn’t mean there won’t be either. That’s how science works.
        ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
        actually, science and logic do not work in the manner of "in the past, X did Z, therefore Y will also do Z, QED" see, in that example, you made up a rule that anything you want will cause Z, but there's no actual scientific basis for the rule you have to actually prove Y will do Z, you can't just claim something else did Z, therefore anything can do Z
        disneygibson 5y ago
        I’m not proving anything. Simply saying that we lack data and if we go by past examples, we have a reason to be cautious. Again, you lack a basic understanding of the scientific method.
        5y ago
      - slenk 5y ago
        Why is this vaccine likely to have long term side effects after a year+ when others don't? How long is long enough?
        disneygibson 5y ago
        There have been many negative side effects of other vaccines which were discovered after years of study. This is basic medical knowledge. Not a conspiracy.
        ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
        "many negative side effects of other vaccines" is a profoundly unscientific statement, particularly when you're trying to prove the likelihood of a completely different vaccine having side effects for other reasons if I could just offer a piece of friendly advice, for anyone trying to convince the majority that the COVID-19 vaccines show a strong likelihood of negative side effects long-term: try to show the actual frequency of each long-term side effect you mention, as a proportion of # of those vaccines administered, and explain the physical mechanism by which each of those side effects will manifest in recipients of the COVID-19 vaccines
        disneygibson 5y ago
        No, it’s basic medical knowledge. You seem to have very little understanding of how medicine works.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
        ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
        could you post those frequencies, please? if you're trying to convince the vast majority of Americans who aren't opposed to vaccine mandates, that they should change their mind, you should probably be able to show that significant side effects occur a significant % of the time in another vaccine, then explain how that side effect modality would transfer to this vaccine (IE what they have in common which indicates the COVID vaccine will probably have the same long-term side effects) oh, also, you never answered OP's question: how long do you think is enough?
kbos87 5y ago
Yes, it’s called looking at past evidence. No past vaccines have presented unknown side effects more than 8-10 weeks out. Viruses regularly do damage we don’t see or understand until many years later.

slenk 5y ago

Maybe? We have been studying vaccines and how they work since the 1800s...we have a lot more history with vaccines and how they work compared to a Coronavirus. And two of the available vaccines don't even give you a dead infection like most vaccines - you can't get COVID from the COVID shot (Moderna or Pfizer)

disneygibson 5y ago
If it’s a new vaccine unlike most others, doesn’t that imply that historical information is not as relevant as it would be otherwise?
- slenk 5y ago
  What about some of the people that have been vaccinated almost a year and a half with no side effects? Does that evidence count?
  - disneygibson 5y ago
    That would count if our question was “What are the likely side effects after one year?” But it’s not. The question is long term side effects. Unless you have a time machine, I’m gonna say we can’t know those for quite a bit - unlike other vaccines which have decades of testing data.
    - ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
      I haven't seen any reason to believe that longER-term side effects will differ significantly from the small amount of side effects we've already seen in the long period of time since the first vaccinations obviously we can't just wait forever with the worry that in year forever+1 some random side effect completely different from what the evidence currently indicates will manifest itself
      - disneygibson 5y ago
        So you think that all side effects of substances are either noticeable in the first year or not at all? Have you heard of DDT?
        ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
        I must have missed the study that showed the long-term side effects of the vaccine were determined by the long-term side effects of DDT if you would be so kind as to link it here...
        disneygibson 5y ago
        This really isn’t hard to understand. In the past, some substances were thought to be safe, but turned out not to be. The “it’s safe” period of time was longer than a year. Ergo it is reasonable to assume that we can’t know all of the side effects of current novel vaccines. It doesn’t mean there will be any, but it doesn’t mean there won’t be either. That’s how science works.
        ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
        actually, science and logic do not work in the manner of "in the past, X did Z, therefore Y will also do Z, QED" see, in that example, you made up a rule that anything you want will cause Z, but there's no actual scientific basis for the rule you have to actually prove Y will do Z, you can't just claim something else did Z, therefore anything can do Z
        disneygibson 5y ago
        I’m not proving anything. Simply saying that we lack data and if we go by past examples, we have a reason to be cautious. Again, you lack a basic understanding of the scientific method.
        5y ago
    - slenk 5y ago
      Why is this vaccine likely to have long term side effects after a year+ when others don't? How long is long enough?
      - disneygibson 5y ago
        There have been many negative side effects of other vaccines which were discovered after years of study. This is basic medical knowledge. Not a conspiracy.
        ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
        "many negative side effects of other vaccines" is a profoundly unscientific statement, particularly when you're trying to prove the likelihood of a completely different vaccine having side effects for other reasons if I could just offer a piece of friendly advice, for anyone trying to convince the majority that the COVID-19 vaccines show a strong likelihood of negative side effects long-term: try to show the actual frequency of each long-term side effect you mention, as a proportion of # of those vaccines administered, and explain the physical mechanism by which each of those side effects will manifest in recipients of the COVID-19 vaccines
        disneygibson 5y ago
        No, it’s basic medical knowledge. You seem to have very little understanding of how medicine works.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
        ImPostingOnHN 5y ago
        could you post those frequencies, please? if you're trying to convince the vast majority of Americans who aren't opposed to vaccine mandates, that they should change their mind, you should probably be able to show that significant side effects occur a significant % of the time in another vaccine, then explain how that side effect modality would transfer to this vaccine (IE what they have in common which indicates the COVID vaccine will probably have the same long-term side effects) oh, also, you never answered OP's question: how long do you think is enough?

kbos87 5y ago

Yes, it’s called looking at past evidence. No past vaccines have presented unknown side effects more than 8-10 weeks out. Viruses regularly do damage we don’t see or understand until many years later.