8 ms·

i think i'm done with current level vaccines. I've had 3 mrna. The second and third each took me out for 2 days. I don't see any reason for more unless a better

i think i'm done with current level vaccines. I've had 3 mrna. The second and third each took me out for 2 days. I don't see any reason for more unless a better one comes out. I do think 3 are important though.

cblconfederate 5y ago
Why do you think 3 is enough but not 4. That's not rational, its just psychologically comforting
- denimnerd42 5y ago
  the reasoning is 3 provides robust long term immunity due to the several month gap between 2 and 3. While 4 won't add much benefit except to boost antibody count for a short while.
  - cblconfederate 5y ago
    so just like 3
VeninVidiaVicii 5y ago
For all vaccines, neutralizing antibody titers decrease over time. This is why boosters exist in the first place.
- denimnerd42 5y ago
  From what I've seen so far the antibodies don't really last long enough. I'll rely on long term t-cell protection. At least that's what I think so far.
- jaywalk 5y ago
  No vaccine has ever had an efficacy dropoff as steep and rapid as the current crop of Covid vaccines.
  - stefan_ 5y ago
    "The current crop of Covid vaccines" all of which are engineered based on the original variant. Ignorance like this has contributed to the virus mutating, and obviously the newer variants have increased fitness against whatever immune response the original one provokes - otherwise it wouldn't exist.
    - djrogers 5y ago
      If you look at the history of vaccinations against other diseases like measles, mumps, rubella, polio, smallpox, etc. you won't see untying like what we're seeing now - those were all able to be largely or completely eradicated. What we appear to have with COVID-19 is akin to influenza - endemic, will never be eradicated, and thus it will mutate regularly and require new vaccines/boosters. Given that, people understandably want to treat it like the flu and get back to normal life. > Ignorance like this has contributed to the virus mutating Ignorance contributes nothing to the virus - it doesn't care if you have knowledge or not. This virus was going to mutate faster than we could produce vaccine no matter what we did.
  - Ichthypresbyter 5y ago
    No vaccine has ever had its efficacy measured in terms of infection detectable by PCR test.
- Mikeb85 5y ago
  It's always been understood that antibodies wane over time. That's why other cells in our bodies 'remember' viral infections and essentially are primed to create antibodies again when infected (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z)
samspenc 5y ago
Yeah, after contracting COVID in January 2021, and now 3 shots (including a booster), I'm just tired of the whole thing. If I'm not immune "enough" after all that, so be it.
collias 5y ago
Apparently, booster efficacy wanes after about 10 weeks[1]. If you think the 3rd shot is important, why not the 4th, 5th, ad infinitum? Genuinely curious, not trying to be difficult. [1]: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043807/technical-briefing-33.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...
- denimnerd42 5y ago
  Being sick for 2 days. I'm not signing up to be sick 2 days every 2.5 months. Pounding headache, fatigue, nausea, heart pain.
  - collias 5y ago
    I agree with you that the risk/reward matrix varies greatly per individual; there are many like you who have had similar reactions. I was just wondering what data your "3 is important" statement was based on. Why the first booster but not the rest, or why the first booster at all?
    - groggo 5y ago
      I'm the exact same as parent comment. For me, I was a bit pressured into getting the booster. I also thought it was 3 and done, it wasn't clear that it could potentially be recurring. I also thought maybe the reaction wouldn't be as bad as after the 2nd shot, but it was. Also, I've read more about myocarditis and don't really want to keep exposing myself to that risk. Is having your heart hurt a normal side effect? A lot of anecdotes mention it as a symptom. How many of them actually go to get diagnosed?
    - denimnerd42 5y ago
      I think the length between 1 and 2 was too short. I think 3 gives more overall robust immunity. I'll keep an eye on the research coming out though.
    - xeromal 5y ago
      3 is probably just the amount of downtime OP was willing to put up with before throwing in the towel.
ashtonkem 5y ago
I’ve gotten my flu shot yearly for my entire living memory. I don’t really understand why a booster vaccine for a pandemic that’s killed an order of magnitude more people than the flu does per year is some serious burden.
- denimnerd42 5y ago
  The covid vaccines make me seriously sick for at least a day or two.
  - mgkimsal 5y ago
    If you didn't get sick from it (current formulation or perhaps new ones in future), would you just take it and move on? Known downtime of a day or two (and not feeling well) is, to me, still a tradeoff to make compared to the potential of being intubated in an ICU. Each Pfizer shot I've had I've had somewhere of 8-18 hours of being really knocked out, usually starting around 24 hours after injection. I usually have milder (but some) reaction to flu vaccine each year (usually up to 8 hours of fatigue/headache/etc) within a day or so. Risks/reward still moves to me take the shots.
    - denimnerd42 5y ago
      if I didn't get sick or there was a new one that's better of course I would take it. I think t-cells are still robust long term so I'm safe from severe disease. That's what I've read so far in the news but I'll keep monitoring.
    - School-Cotton 5y ago
      > compared to the potential of being intubated in an ICU. Comments like this are only intelligible if one considers the probability of each outcome. Deterministically (probability 1) getting unpleasant vaccine side effects vs. deterministically ending up intubated in an ICU? Sure, give me a booster every month. But that's not actually the relevant calculus -- your probability of ending up in an ICU is already extremely low after two shots.
- 5y ago

cblconfederate 5y ago

Why do you think 3 is enough but not 4. That's not rational, its just psychologically comforting

denimnerd42 5y ago
the reasoning is 3 provides robust long term immunity due to the several month gap between 2 and 3. While 4 won't add much benefit except to boost antibody count for a short while.
- cblconfederate 5y ago
  so just like 3

VeninVidiaVicii 5y ago

For all vaccines, neutralizing antibody titers decrease over time. This is why boosters exist in the first place.

denimnerd42 5y ago
From what I've seen so far the antibodies don't really last long enough. I'll rely on long term t-cell protection. At least that's what I think so far.
jaywalk 5y ago
No vaccine has ever had an efficacy dropoff as steep and rapid as the current crop of Covid vaccines.
- stefan_ 5y ago
  "The current crop of Covid vaccines" all of which are engineered based on the original variant. Ignorance like this has contributed to the virus mutating, and obviously the newer variants have increased fitness against whatever immune response the original one provokes - otherwise it wouldn't exist.
  - djrogers 5y ago
    If you look at the history of vaccinations against other diseases like measles, mumps, rubella, polio, smallpox, etc. you won't see untying like what we're seeing now - those were all able to be largely or completely eradicated. What we appear to have with COVID-19 is akin to influenza - endemic, will never be eradicated, and thus it will mutate regularly and require new vaccines/boosters. Given that, people understandably want to treat it like the flu and get back to normal life. > Ignorance like this has contributed to the virus mutating Ignorance contributes nothing to the virus - it doesn't care if you have knowledge or not. This virus was going to mutate faster than we could produce vaccine no matter what we did.
- Ichthypresbyter 5y ago
  No vaccine has ever had its efficacy measured in terms of infection detectable by PCR test.
Mikeb85 5y ago
It's always been understood that antibodies wane over time. That's why other cells in our bodies 'remember' viral infections and essentially are primed to create antibodies again when infected (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z)

samspenc 5y ago

Yeah, after contracting COVID in January 2021, and now 3 shots (including a booster), I'm just tired of the whole thing. If I'm not immune "enough" after all that, so be it.

collias 5y ago

Apparently, booster efficacy wanes after about 10 weeks[1]. If you think the 3rd shot is important, why not the 4th, 5th, ad infinitum? Genuinely curious, not trying to be difficult. [1]: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1043807/technical-briefing-33.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

denimnerd42 5y ago
Being sick for 2 days. I'm not signing up to be sick 2 days every 2.5 months. Pounding headache, fatigue, nausea, heart pain.
- collias 5y ago
  I agree with you that the risk/reward matrix varies greatly per individual; there are many like you who have had similar reactions. I was just wondering what data your "3 is important" statement was based on. Why the first booster but not the rest, or why the first booster at all?
  - groggo 5y ago
    I'm the exact same as parent comment. For me, I was a bit pressured into getting the booster. I also thought it was 3 and done, it wasn't clear that it could potentially be recurring. I also thought maybe the reaction wouldn't be as bad as after the 2nd shot, but it was. Also, I've read more about myocarditis and don't really want to keep exposing myself to that risk. Is having your heart hurt a normal side effect? A lot of anecdotes mention it as a symptom. How many of them actually go to get diagnosed?
  - denimnerd42 5y ago
    I think the length between 1 and 2 was too short. I think 3 gives more overall robust immunity. I'll keep an eye on the research coming out though.
  - xeromal 5y ago
    3 is probably just the amount of downtime OP was willing to put up with before throwing in the towel.

ashtonkem 5y ago

I’ve gotten my flu shot yearly for my entire living memory. I don’t really understand why a booster vaccine for a pandemic that’s killed an order of magnitude more people than the flu does per year is some serious burden.

denimnerd42 5y ago
The covid vaccines make me seriously sick for at least a day or two.
- mgkimsal 5y ago
  If you didn't get sick from it (current formulation or perhaps new ones in future), would you just take it and move on? Known downtime of a day or two (and not feeling well) is, to me, still a tradeoff to make compared to the potential of being intubated in an ICU. Each Pfizer shot I've had I've had somewhere of 8-18 hours of being really knocked out, usually starting around 24 hours after injection. I usually have milder (but some) reaction to flu vaccine each year (usually up to 8 hours of fatigue/headache/etc) within a day or so. Risks/reward still moves to me take the shots.
  - denimnerd42 5y ago
    if I didn't get sick or there was a new one that's better of course I would take it. I think t-cells are still robust long term so I'm safe from severe disease. That's what I've read so far in the news but I'll keep monitoring.
  - School-Cotton 5y ago
    > compared to the potential of being intubated in an ICU. Comments like this are only intelligible if one considers the probability of each outcome. Deterministically (probability 1) getting unpleasant vaccine side effects vs. deterministically ending up intubated in an ICU? Sure, give me a booster every month. But that's not actually the relevant calculus -- your probability of ending up in an ICU is already extremely low after two shots.
5y ago