2 ms·

I misunderstood. I thought the award was for the vaccination, rather than the underlying technology. The technology is definitely worth an award. I think that

I misunderstood. I thought the award was for the vaccination, rather than the underlying technology. The technology is definitely worth an award. I think that there is enough "noise" over COVID vaccine side-effects that we don't yet know whether long term it is safe. I also think that given the politicisation of COVID (for instance even discussion of the lab leak theory was gas-lit), I don't think politicians would admit to an issue even if there was one.

funcDropShadow 3y ago
My understanding is that almost all side-effects of mRNA covid vaccines originate in the fact that the body produces a part of the virus. If that part of the virus can damage the body, so can the vaccine. This is the mechanism for the myocarditis after vaccination. But it also means that the probability to get myocarditis from an actual infection is much higher because of the exponential growth of the real virus. If that understanding holds up against scrutiny in the future, mRNA vaccines are an extremely safe and capable platform to deliver vaccines.
- gadders 3y ago
  If that is what happens, then I agree with you.
- the-rc 3y ago
  To think of it in programming terms: the original vaccines had code with a length of 4000-4300 nucleotides. Yes, that protein might trigger reactions after injection. But, then, what would you expect from the virus, which has almost 30,000 nucleotides, encoding an additional 28 proteins, including those involved in replication and camouflaging? The only scenario in which you have better chances not taking the vaccine is by making sure you never get exposed to the virus, for years.