7 ms·

We've only had mRNA vaccines for two years. Also there are starting to be plenty of companies requiring boosters. Do you want to get a new experimental vaccine

We've only had mRNA vaccines for two years. Also there are starting to be plenty of companies requiring boosters. Do you want to get a new experimental vaccine whose long term effects are poorly known every few months?

arcticbull 5y ago
> We've only had mRNA vaccines for two years. First off, mRNA was discovered in the 1960s, first used for drug delivery in the 1970s, and vaccines in 1975. [1] The work to create these vaccines has been under way for almost 60 years. It also builds off the work of other coronavirus vaccines that have been in development since SARS and MERS about 20 years ago. If that's for some reason not sufficient, J&J, Covishield and AstraZeneca vaccines are not mRNA but instead adenoviral vector vaccines that have similar histories. [edit] Most vaccines take a long time to test due to the low prevalence of the disease in the population but given half of America is currently infected, it takes very little time to determine the safety and efficacy. Most drugs and vaccines were released publicly after a few thousand participants tried it. You're looking at billions of doses administered. You are not early. [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02483-w https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02483-w
- salawat 5y ago
  >given half of America is currently infected Point of order: the ideal test of a vaccine is: Given uninfected || infected but early When disease runs course Then Side effects minimized/non-existent Symptoms and severity of disease minimized. The worst time to test a vaccine is when everyone is in the "Oh snap, infected" situation, as it allows for teasing out of long cycle problems (like say unintentional sterilization or birth defects inducement) before introducing it to the majority of the population. Life hardly ever is that accommodating however.
joshuamorton 5y ago
The booster is the same as the original vaccine but in a lower dosage. This may change with future boosters, but I also get a flu vaccine every year (and have for a decade). Those are "new" each year but aren't generally considered dangerous and experimental. > Do you want to get a new experimental vaccine whose long term effects are poorly known every few months? Can you give a coherent biological mechanism by which the vaccine would have health impacts that aren't detectable over the course of say 3 months? As I understand it, the entire vaccine will have left your body will before that point, leaving only your body's reaction to the spike protein. In other words, the only vaccine side effects possible after a month or so are a strict subset of covid side effects.
- merlincorey 5y ago
  > In other words, the only vaccine side effects possible after a month or so are a strict subset of covid side effects. I'm curious how you reconcile that statement with the various reports of women having way too much menstruation or way too little for several months after their shots. In a recent article about a study from Boston University[0], the researcher believes that under six months after vaccination would amount to short term side effects: > We don’t know yet whether vaccination does have an effect on menstruation. So, I think we need to wait and see what the results of these studies come out with. And let’s just say there is an effect, we don’t know if it’s just a short-term effect or a longer-term effect. And so even if we see evidence of short-term effects, it may be that these effects go away and are no longer clinically meaningful or wreaking havoc on women’s lives over the long term, meaning like six months after vaccination. We also need to keep in mind what are the other types of reproductive outcomes of interest like fertility. That being said, I can tell you that I was surprised to see how low the percent vaccinated in our cohort was. [0] - https://www.bu.edu/articles/2022/do-covid-vaccines-affect-menstrual-cycle/ https://www.bu.edu/articles/2022/do-covid-vaccines-affect-me...
  - arcticbull 5y ago
    The study author on that page says: > ... there’s no evidence that the vaccine has any impact on menstruation, fertility, any of these reproductive outcomes. This is an interesting read, and the folks interviewed run the PRESTO NIH-funded study which tracks all aspects of pregnancy and menstruation. They say they heard a bunch of anecdotes, have some theories on what could cause this (if it in fact exists) - but that there is insufficient data to claim any adverse outcomes at all. The reality is, to the best of my knowledge (I am a man, so keep that in mind) menstrual cycles are highly variable and do not follow a fixed predictable 28 day cycle. If I had to guess, these menstrual changes were completely uncorrelated but that the women nervous about vaccination self-selected to make these reports. The PRESTO folks will collect and analyze data via PRESTO and share the results in due time.
    - merlincorey 5y ago

arcticbull 5y ago

> We've only had mRNA vaccines for two years. First off, mRNA was discovered in the 1960s, first used for drug delivery in the 1970s, and vaccines in 1975. [1] The work to create these vaccines has been under way for almost 60 years. It also builds off the work of other coronavirus vaccines that have been in development since SARS and MERS about 20 years ago. If that's for some reason not sufficient, J&J, Covishield and AstraZeneca vaccines are not mRNA but instead adenoviral vector vaccines that have similar histories. [edit] Most vaccines take a long time to test due to the low prevalence of the disease in the population but given half of America is currently infected, it takes very little time to determine the safety and efficacy. Most drugs and vaccines were released publicly after a few thousand participants tried it. You're looking at billions of doses administered. You are not early. [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02483-w https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02483-w

salawat 5y ago
>given half of America is currently infected Point of order: the ideal test of a vaccine is: Given uninfected || infected but early When disease runs course Then Side effects minimized/non-existent Symptoms and severity of disease minimized. The worst time to test a vaccine is when everyone is in the "Oh snap, infected" situation, as it allows for teasing out of long cycle problems (like say unintentional sterilization or birth defects inducement) before introducing it to the majority of the population. Life hardly ever is that accommodating however.

joshuamorton 5y ago

The booster is the same as the original vaccine but in a lower dosage. This may change with future boosters, but I also get a flu vaccine every year (and have for a decade). Those are "new" each year but aren't generally considered dangerous and experimental. > Do you want to get a new experimental vaccine whose long term effects are poorly known every few months? Can you give a coherent biological mechanism by which the vaccine would have health impacts that aren't detectable over the course of say 3 months? As I understand it, the entire vaccine will have left your body will before that point, leaving only your body's reaction to the spike protein. In other words, the only vaccine side effects possible after a month or so are a strict subset of covid side effects.

merlincorey 5y ago
> In other words, the only vaccine side effects possible after a month or so are a strict subset of covid side effects. I'm curious how you reconcile that statement with the various reports of women having way too much menstruation or way too little for several months after their shots. In a recent article about a study from Boston University[0], the researcher believes that under six months after vaccination would amount to short term side effects: > We don’t know yet whether vaccination does have an effect on menstruation. So, I think we need to wait and see what the results of these studies come out with. And let’s just say there is an effect, we don’t know if it’s just a short-term effect or a longer-term effect. And so even if we see evidence of short-term effects, it may be that these effects go away and are no longer clinically meaningful or wreaking havoc on women’s lives over the long term, meaning like six months after vaccination. We also need to keep in mind what are the other types of reproductive outcomes of interest like fertility. That being said, I can tell you that I was surprised to see how low the percent vaccinated in our cohort was. [0] - https://www.bu.edu/articles/2022/do-covid-vaccines-affect-menstrual-cycle/ https://www.bu.edu/articles/2022/do-covid-vaccines-affect-me...
- arcticbull 5y ago
  The study author on that page says: > ... there’s no evidence that the vaccine has any impact on menstruation, fertility, any of these reproductive outcomes. This is an interesting read, and the folks interviewed run the PRESTO NIH-funded study which tracks all aspects of pregnancy and menstruation. They say they heard a bunch of anecdotes, have some theories on what could cause this (if it in fact exists) - but that there is insufficient data to claim any adverse outcomes at all. The reality is, to the best of my knowledge (I am a man, so keep that in mind) menstrual cycles are highly variable and do not follow a fixed predictable 28 day cycle. If I had to guess, these menstrual changes were completely uncorrelated but that the women nervous about vaccination self-selected to make these reports. The PRESTO folks will collect and analyze data via PRESTO and share the results in due time.
  - merlincorey 5y ago