Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.
Novavax and the lack of Vaccine Choice
Comments
-
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 59000
This has been my consistent personal opinion on this and have emphasised the personal opinion aspect throughout and repeated it often: Do I think the mRNA class of vaccines will cause lots of longer term side effects in many people? I doubt it, but the data is not in yet and because of that and the tangled history of this medical technology I personally chose a non mRNA based vaccine. Indeed I've even said that if I were under 30 I'd probably not go for the same J&J vaccine because of the risk of blood clots, small though that risk was/is. No mention of imaginary long term effects either. I have simply stated that the mRNA technology is in its infancy in human models, that the only such therapies that have made it to commercial products are the covid vaccines and that other mRNA therapies have been very slow in coming and quite the number were halted because going forward with human trials was considered too risky and the move into vaccines was seen as the safer bet because of the lower doses involved. These are facts. Not conjecture. And I've linked to mainstream non facebook fcukwit sources to back all of them up. And because of those facts I personally decided to adapt a wait and see approach while getting vaccinated using a different vaccine technology that was available to me. If the only choice had been mRNA would I have gotten vaccinated? YES. But it wasn't. If you think that's "eloquent shitposting" then work away.
I have also since the get go been pro vaccination, even convinced the one antivaxxer/it's the great reset person in my life to get vaccinated. Pro mask from the start too. And pro the initial lockdowns and curbs on movement, social distancing etc. I've had a fair number of vaccinations in my life and was happy to get them. I had all the childhood diseases as was the fashion of the time, but if I hadn't or found out that I was no longer protected I'd line up for them too. Shít, by a happy quirk of genetics I'm immune to symptomatic influenza, yet guess who gets a flu vaccine to protect others? I even get a tetanus boost every ten years or so, to be sure. I consider vaccines to be one of the single greatest inventions in history, not just within medicine either. It's right up there with writing, the wheel, the printing press and sewers. If you think that makes me somehow promoting an anti vaccine agenda then work away. Again.
Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
1 -
If you think that makes me somehow promoting an anti vaccine agenda then work away. Again.
No, I don't think you're deliberately promoting an anti vaccine agenda.
3 -
But there is no practical difference. In Ireland at this stage our primary vaccines are Pfizer and Moderna. If a person says they are unsafe they are anti vaccination at least when it comes to Covid and at least in Ireland. After hundreds of millions of doses worldwide we have no evidence of long-term side effects. Any one who says otherwise is engaging in spreading a conspiracy theory based on the current evidence available. And remember absence of evidence is not evidence. A person's motives are impossible to determine on an anonymous Internet forum and are irrelevant.
It is probable that we will at some point we will use newer vaccines. I know from people who have to handle the Pfizer vaccine is that it requires careful handling and relatively time consuming to administer( the process of getting it out of storage and into a person's arm). Improvements in areas like this would obviously help speed up the current worldwide rollout and booster roll outs in the future.
0 -
My view is more like "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence".
And the extraordinary claim is a composite of (a) the risk/benefit profile of mRNA vaccines is inferior, (b) the collective scientific and medical expertise of every public authority is wrong in ordering mRNA vaccines over the available alternatives.
4 -
It's the danger of a little bit, but not a load of knowledge (and I'm sure some on here would accuse myself of the same 😁), but there's 2 outcomes, mRNA is completely fine and the 2 billion+ people who have had it continue living without issue, or Wibbs is correct and as one of the very few elders remaining after the vaccine apocalypse, he takes on the role of Wibbs the wise to lead the remains of Irish society through turbulent times and he goes to sleep every night with the thought that a stranger called astrofool predicted this and that Wibbs should have done more to help.
In all seriousness, these are complex things, antibodies, t/b-cells, length of immunity (I suspect the SARS immunity is from B and T-Cells rather than antibodies, so latency to the reaction, but still faster than no exposure), the impact of one over the other, the huge variable that is the human immune system, the place to look at are the experts who worked on the vaccines, do the J&J virologists have complete confidence in mRNA? Probably yes, as they are now pivoting that way, are any of the companies (apart from Russia with their triple distilled Sputnik designed to trick the same people who fall for badly written spam email) talking down each others vaccines? No. The experts behind all the studies support the vaccines, give it to themselves and their own families, are they expecting a bomb to go off at 10 minutes? No, the bomb is gone, no traces left in the body (that we can find at least, but that also applies to adenovector), hence the lack of worry. The bomb might go off after 10 minutes, but it's already way down the sewer system and out in the ocean.
Does that mean we shouldn't be cautious? Of course not, pharma companies have bad track records (see Purdue recently), is there an issue here given the oversight and visibility of the current set of vaccines? Probably not, the chances of something long term being found are infinitesimal and certainly lower than the low risk of SARS-COV2 to the vast majority of the population. Am I personally worried about vaccine side effects? No.
The other aspect is "are these really 3 dose vaccines" does the waning slow after 3, or is it perpetual, in which case, we need a mutation like Omicron for the virus to wipe itself out (safely hopefully due to vaccines) or have better treatments for those where the vaccine protection isn't enough. Would an Omicron specific vaccine offer any more protection anyway, or wane the same way.
I would also add that one of the reasons the mRNA vaccines work so well is that they generate high numbers of antibodies (like 3x higher than Adenovector) which means that even if the antibodies aren't an exact match to the spike, they can still overwhelm the virus by sheer numbers, I don't think we'll find a way to keep that number high though apart from boosters.
1 -
Advertisement
-
Early January so will have to wait till after the festive season to find out what way they are gonna roll this out, I'm hoping you can avail of this at the walk in clinics
1 -
I had a read through the restart of this since the Novavac news that indicated that it would be approved in the NY.
The first thing is the ''I wanted to wait BS'', the only reason people could wait was because 90%+ of adults went away and got vaccinated. Novavac actually seemed to have slowed it regulatory approval because it was not developed fast enough so was never going to collect the first past the post that Phizer got. AZ would have got that as well but it British developers decided to play a political game with the EU.
The vaccines developed are all good vaccines. Vaccines are low risk medicines in that if they do not work they seldom cause significant harm. There are some on here and if Irish whiskey was the solution to COVID they would only take whichever whiskey was not available.
Lads BSing about South Africa are not comparing like with like. In SA at present they are in high summer we are in mid winter. Any Omicron effect here will be multiplied because of the he winter effect. As well SA and Africa in general have a much lower age profile, there average life before expectancy is much lower than in western developed countries. You also have less obesity or chronic illness as generally you do not survive long with it there.
After nearly a year of mass vaccination in the western and developed Asian countries we are not seeing any significant short-term issues with ANY of the vaccines.
On there prolifically, it looks like mRNA vaccines work better than traditional type vaccines. If we had waited for real traditional vaccines based on using eggs we still be in full lockdown.
We are slowly grinding our way out of this crisis. Pandemic's take 5+ years to run there course. The world managed to slow this one down and vaccines will get us out of it in the next 6-12 months.
At the start of this crisis there was always a chance it would become endemic which it will become just like the flu that first arrived at the end of WW1. In 1918 the population of the world was 1.8 billion approx and it is estimated that about only 30% contacted it but 2.7% of the world population(50 million people) died from it.
So here we are with a similar pandemic with a much older population, 8.8 billion people world wide. Estimated deaths is 5.5 million and only about 4-5% of the world population have contacted it.
The death for old HN1N was 2.7%. with out intervention the death rate for COVID was calculated at 2%. Or some where around 170 million
The original death rate for H1N1 may have been underestimated as older adults may have been considered as normal deaths where upon they considered the deaths of younger adults as not normal
Slava Ukrainii
1 -
Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,643 Mod ✭✭✭✭
Join Date:Posts: 64626
There's nothing to suggest that it'll be offered here at all. If it is, you are not going to have an easy method to decide which to take.
1 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59000
But there is no practical difference. In Ireland at this stage our primary vaccines are Pfizer and Moderna. If a person says they are unsafe they are anti vaccination at least when it comes to Covid and at least in Ireland. After hundreds of millions of doses worldwide we have no evidence of long-term side effects. Any one who says otherwise is engaging in spreading a conspiracy theory based on the current evidence available.
You seem to have difficulty with reading my posts and even your own. No matter what one's position is hundreds of milllions of doses in the short term is not the long term. That's the current evidence available. I also never said they were unsafe. I have said this is a very new application of a technology that wasn't mature before covid 19 hit and was developed, tested and rushed to market because of understandable necessity and because of that my personal preference was not to take those vaccines where alternatives were available. I might very well take one in a years time, but I chose not to in 2020.
I've not made an extraordinary claim. That's your first misrepresentation. I set my stall as my personal opinion and the whys of which in my last post and it's been my consistent position and not one part of the background to mRNA therapies I posted is untrue, nor are they extraordinary claims. On the other hand in this thread and others we have quite the number of posters including PeadarCo confidently claiming positions like: MRNA vaccines and technology behind it has been researched for 50 odd years so It's not new or unheard of, which is only half truth. Actually it's barely that and I don't see you suggesting they're making "extraordinary claims"(never mind conflating mRNA and RNA viruses for some odd reason). The facts are that mRNA therapies were seen as a possible magic bullet for all sorts of health applications and the research and investment rolled in and companies were formed(Moderna being one) on the back of that, but the promise didn't reflect the reality and in some cases was too risky to go beyond animal trials, in others the trials were stopped because of lack of efficacy. Pre Covid 19 the first and only human trial of an mRNA vaccine(against rabies) was less than ten years ago(between 2013/16) and never went beyond a phase 1 clinical trial of a 100 subjects and wasn't followed up and there has never been a human licenced mRNA therapy before covid 19 and the vaccines that use it. But the 40/50/whatever you're having yourself years of research is apparently fine and not an extraordinary claim?
Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
4 -
@Wibbs wrote
I've not made an extraordinary claim. That's your first misrepresentation. I set my stall as my personal opinion and the whys of which in my last post and it's been my consistent position and not one part of the background to mRNA therapies I posted is untrue, nor are they extraordinary claims.
Do you disagree with the statement that you believe the risk/benefits of mRNA vaccines are inferior to other vaccines?
Your posting style is persuasive and reasonable, and that's not my opinion, I could find posts lauding it. That bothers me, because in my opinion there will be people reading your posts who think "Wibbs has done their research and isn't preaching from a soapbox, I guess I'll hold off on these mRNA vaccines". And that, whether it's your intention or not, is bad. Is it any worse than more obvious bunkum? In my opinion yes, because it's persuasive.
2 -
Advertisement
-
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59000
Pandemic's take 5+ years to run there course.
Nope. More like two when it's a virus. The influenza pandemics were all two years. Some like smallpox(and the plague) never fully go away only to come back in waves, often when previous immunity has waned in the population. Others like the plague have animal reservoirs so sit out there waiting until some poor bastard gets close and brings it back to the town. Though we've no clue why the Black Death just stopped pretty much. Yes there have been a couple of bursts of it since the worst days, but nothing like back then.
Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59000
Do you disagree with the statement that you believe the risk/benefits of mRNA vaccines are inferior to other vaccines?
I believe, or rather believed more when the vaccines were rolled out, that mRNA vaccines were an unknown and higher risk than other vaccines because of their novel very first widespread use in human subjects and made my personal choice based on that, because we had that choice, but that any vaccine was of much less risk than catching covid 19 without one.
Would I have taken an mRNA vaccine if there had been no choice? Yes, but I'd have waited a few months. If I were under forty? Probably not tbh. Would I take an mRNA based vaccine down the line? Yes, if the efficacy was worth it and there weren't better alternatives and there weren't any safety issues cropping up in the meantime.
because in my opinion there will be people reading your posts who think "Wibbs has done their research and isn't preaching from a soapbox, I guess I'll hold off on these mRNA vaccines". And that, whether it's your intention or not, is bad. Is it any worse than more obvious bunkum? In my opinion yes, because it's persuasive.
In future I'll include quantum tracking and the great reset to balance things out... 😁 In any event clearly my "persuasive" posts have little effect around here. The vast majority are vaccinated, a shedload are getting boosters and that's great. Indeed there are more holier than thou types attention whoring their vaccination peity for the greater good than there are anti vaxxer loons convinced Bill Gates is going to steal all their bitcoin. This is also reflected in wider Ireland. The non vaccinated are around 7%. It seems many of them aren't originally Irish either and are more likely to be folks from the former Soviet Bloc who are understandably dubious about government missives. Others may not be able to get the vaccines because of some medical issue(though I suspect they're a small number?). I'd reckon of the local Irish, Bill Gates is fiddling with my nipples through 5G types it's more like 3-5%.
Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
0 -
What's your evidence that says the technology isn't mature? What's your evidence that extra testing is needed? Why do you think it is inappropriate to approve the vaccines? Because if you think the vaccines require more testing /long term information, you are saying that the vaccines should not have been approved.
You write a lot and are a far more eloquent writer compared to myself but there's no evidence to back up anything you say when it comes to the dangers associated with the Pfzer and Moderna vaccines. Personal feelings doesn't constitute scientific evidence. And absence of evidence is not evidence.
I appreciate its a personal decision not to take a Pfizer or Moderna vaccine. That's fair enough provided you are prepared to accept the consequences assuming the government doesn't choose alternatives in the short-term. The EU has limited the vaccination travel cert to 9 months without a booster. Also while you have a personal opinion if you post it online particularly with no evidence to back it up be prepared to be challenged on it.
1 -
Why would it not be available here?
0 -
In short you want Wibbs censored?
What bothers me is some folk are intent on using censorship in some shape or form to whitewash away concerns.
I'll tell you what, IF (and hopefully it's an extremely low chance if) in years to come there is some linked upsurge in an illness/condition that can be traced back to these mRNA vaccines then the usual line trotted out...
we were only working with the best information we had at the time
...will not cut it. Let that be on folk like that.
2 -
Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,643 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 64626
Because we have no need for it. We have sufficient supplies of Pfizer and Moderna.
J&J and Astrazeneca are no longer available here for that reason.
0 -
No more like 4-5. The Spainish Flu was first detected in spring 1918, however it was more than likly around since late 1917. This 1st wave in spring 1918 was relativly mild. The intervention of summer probably inhibited it spread. In winter 1918/19 and 1919/20 a second and third waves had large death tolls there was a forth wave in 1920/21 not as noticable because of the serious death toll in the previous two winters Its is quite likly that immunity made any subsquent waves less noticeable.
We knew about this virus within months of it coming into existance. The Spanish flu (H1N1) may have been around for a period before that but it was probably the mass movement of troops that spread it as well as the cramped conditions soldiers were living in on the Western Front. We have supressed COVID to a large extent but pandemicsare 5 years affairs. With the existing vaccines and the new anti viral drugs coming online in January we will supress this by next summer.
That is not to mean that everything will be back to normal. We will have to contend on a new normal. H1N1 has never gone away it has become endemic meaning it has become a regular disease in the population. Measles and chicken pox had devasting effects on indegenous peoples when they encountered western civilisation. Buth these are not endemic from the point that when you catch them once that is it. They do not mutate. The Black Death was a bubonic plague (BP), Normally you only catch BP from fleas from animals ( the black rat in particular) but this version either spread from human to human or was caused by a pandemic in the black rat population at the time as well. I think BP has a 90% death rate if you contact it and it goes untreated. It may well be that the brown rat superceeding the black rat may have stopped the severity of BP infections.
Slava Ukrainii
1 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59000
Meh, her entire posting history is pretty much a constant Karenism stream about how boards is a failing [insert hobby horse here]ist cesspit populated by men she hates, yet can't step away from continuing to post on here.
Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
2 -
No, I don't want anyone censored.
2 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59000
That is not to mean that everything will be back to normal. We will have to contend on a new normal. HN1N has never gone away it has become endemic meaning it has become a regular disease in the population. Measles and chicken pox had devasting effects on indegenous peoples when they encountered western civilisation. Buth these are not endemic from the point that when you catch them once that is it. They do not mutate. The Black Death was a bubonic plague (BP), Normally you only catch BP from fleas from animals ( the black rat in particular) but this version either spread from human to human or was caused by a pandemic in the black rat population at the time as well. I think BP has a 90% death rate if you contact it and it goes untreated. It may well be that the brown rat superceeding the black rat may have stopped the severity of BP infections.
The Black Death going away in it's we're fecked bring out your dead form is a bit of a mystery alright. Your point about the brown rat could well be one reason alright. Though India gets the odd outbreak every so often and they have brown rats and IIRC it's found in ground squirrels in the US. Every so often a person catches it from one of them. Our increasingly clean environements with clean running water and sewage systems probably made a big difference too. There is evidence of some genetic resistance in Europeans that likely had a big effect too(and oddly he same genes seem to have a role in resisting HIV too, even though it's a virus). After all if you're European most of your ancestors were the ones who survived many decades of rolling plagues. From what I recall the bubonic type was around 50% survivable, but the pneumonic version was scarily deadly and could kill someone within hours of symptoms. I don't think there's a record of anyone surviving that. Rabies is another scary bugger we generally don't have to worry about these days. If you get bitten and get a vaccine before symptoms occur your chances of survival are pretty good. If you don't you're almost certainly a goner.
What looks to have made the 1918 virus particularly deadly was the war, or at least that's a pretty strong hypothesis. Those in the forces with the milder form were kept at the front and only the truly poleaxed by it were sent back to field hospitals, so the nasty version was positively selected for. Pretty much the reverse of what usually happens, where the very ill stay home in bed and don't mix, but the less sick go on as normal and tend to spread the less nasty form more.
The indigenous people's of the Americas being decimated by European diseases is an interesting one too. More that there wasn't a New World disease that came back on the returning ships to kill us in the Old World(possibly syphillis, but the jury's out on that). The reason for that was they had far fewer domesticated animals. That's where most of our nasties came from. They had no cattle, sheep, pigs, chickens etc all squished in together on top of humans, with some wild animals nearby for the craic. Basically we had a virus weaponising facility. They had the dog and the Llama and guinea pig and that was pretty much it. It's sobering to consider that our harmless ham sandwich has killed hundreds of millions of people(didn't do pigs any good either mind you).
Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
1 -
Advertisement
-
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59000
What's your evidence that says the technology isn't mature?
I literally pointed out my reasoning in the very post you quoted: The facts are that mRNA therapies were seen as a possible magic bullet for all sorts of health applications and the research and investment rolled in and companies were formed(Moderna being one) on the back of that, but the promise didn't reflect the reality and in some cases was too risky to go beyond animal trials, in others the trials were stopped because of lack of efficacy. Pre Covid 19 the first and only human trial of an mRNA vaccine(against rabies) was less than ten years ago(between 2013/16) and never went beyond a phase 1 clinical trial of a 100 subjects and wasn't followed up and there has never been a human licenced mRNA therapy before covid 19 and the vaccines that use it.
Do you want links from science and medical journals? I can certainly provide them. Hell, just google Moderna alone for their timeline. Here's an article on Moderna's issues with safety around this technology in 2017. Here's one from Nature the year before that on the workings of the company(and others). No matter what position you take, this is not a "mature technology". If it were the aforementioned Moderna who have been around for just over a decade would have more than one commercial product based on the tech. Nobody else had one either. If Covid 19 hadn't hit it's highly doubtful they would have now. And this could very well be a good thing, in that it has fast tracked a game changer in medicine, which is great, but mature tech it is not by any stretch of the imagination.
Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
1 -
At this stage an article in 2017 is out of date especially given the huge amount of money poured into it. And yes money does make a difference. Look at moon landing, look at aircraft development during both World wars which saw massive investment in technology and infrastructure that revolutionised aircraft.
But your argument against the mRNA vaccines boils down to personal incredulity, which isn't an argument. You realise that practically the entire medical establishment disagree with your personal feeling.
And this is why I have compared your argument mRNA to conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theories ignore experts like you have done in your argument in favour of personal feelings which you have also repeatedly mention in your argument.
This is very relevant when it comes to boosters because its likely that mRNA vaccines will be the only options readily available in the short to medium term.
1 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59000
And this is why I have compared your argument mRNA to conspiracy theories. Conspiracy theories ignore experts like you have done in your argument in favour of personal feelings which you have also repeatedly mention in your argument.
No. Incorrect. Again. At no point have my "feelings" come into it. My personal opinion yes. Quite different and based on the fact that mRNA vaccines weren't a mature technology as you seem to believe. And yep money makes a difference as does time and urgency. All were in play in trying to get a handle on this pox. We went from nada to vaccination in under a year, which is incredible, but we're still in phase 3 trials of same. I don't particularly think we're going to see any major issues with mRNA, or the other vaccines for that matter as millions have received them and only Karens on facebook seem to be dropping like flies from them, but when the vaccines were being rolled out here in Ireland in the early months of this year they hadn't and I took the personal decision, based on the novelty of these vaccines that I would wait and see(I had to wait for my age group to come around anyway) and ultimately made the decision to not take the mRNA type. Simple as that. As for boosters of same? Chances are as we speak very high that I've been exposed to covid in the last week* and am awaiting a test result. If I have it and I'll be shocked if I don't tbh, though no symptoms so far six days in, then that's my booster covered for the moment. Or I'll be pushing up daisies in short order. That'll come back to haunt me. Foreshadowing an' that. 😮😂
*As it happens I've been exposed to it a few times in the last month. Mostly because a few morons didn't inform people they had it. That's a story I've heard way too often of late. Including a friend of mine where an in law showed up to his house didn't tell them they were positive and later "explained" this away as "ah sure better to get it over with". Yeah. 100% thundering moron. How he didn't kick their heads in is beyond me. Anyway I was negative each time. That said I do observe masks and keeping my distance and basic precautions. Needless to say I isolated each time until I got my PCR results.
Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
1 -
No expert worth his/her salt will say that mRNA is proven - unless they've a secret time machine hiding somewhere. Now the CEO of a company might bend the truth a little, you know - for the shareholders, etc...
As for mRNA being the only options, that is grand for people who want to take them and for people who are recommended to take them. But limiting the booster campaign to only mRNA options will mean a small percentage of people who would take a booster will likely now not do.
1 -
No expert will say 100% agreed and you will see I've pointed that out in the thread. However what experts will do is raise questions. And when it comes to mRNA vaccines you are talking about thousands if not tens of thousands of people have been involved in the development,testing and monitoring of mRNA vaccines. The consensus is that are safe or at the very least the risk of taking them exceeds the risk of Covid. Now remember all these people work in different countries, for different organisations. They are not part of some grand conspiracy.
Wibbs has made the extraordinary statement that all these people are wrong on the basis of their gut feeling. If a person is going to spread misinformation about vaccines they should expect to be challenged. You only need to look worldwide to see the damage misinformation around vaccines causes.
A small percentage of people won't take mRNA vaccines and part of that is due to misinformation being spread about them. They will have to accept the consequences associated with that ie not being able to get up to date vaccine passes etc. The government doesn't have to give people a choice. The government's job is get approved vaccines. mRNA vaccines are safe based on the current scientific consensus. We only need to look at the MMR vaccine and the damage caused by not listening to people who know what they are talking about
1 -
Not too sure about sufficient supplies, wasn't their issues around moderna having enough stock and expiration dates etc.
So that just leaves the Pfizer shot, many would argue their is a need for another vaccine, and this vaccine could be the silver bullet in regards to fighting new variants and also getting a higher percentage of the population vaccinated due to concerns over the other brands, I would call that a win-win situation and it would be insanity for the government to refuse this product
1 -
But again you have provided literally no evidence to back up your doubts in mRNA vaccines. It's just your personal feelings. The reason I think mRNA vaccines are safe is because thousands of different and independent people who work in the area say they are safe. The fact they think they are safe also means the technology has been sufficiently developed to use and is mature. That's my evidence. Are you honestly saying the EMA, US FDA, etc and thousands of independent scientists are wrong.
Look if you can prove them wrong fire away you'll be set for life but it will take more than a person's feelings to do that.
1 -
Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,071 Mod ✭✭✭✭ Join Date:Posts: 59000
Wibbs has made the extraordinary statement that all these people are wrong on the basis of their gut feeling.
You keep accusing me of this and you're very wrong and being incredibly nay deliberately misrepresentative. I have never said anything like "these people are wrong" and I have repeatedly pointed out even with citations and links why I held the position I have.
If a person is going to spread misinformation about vaccines they should expect to be challenged. You only need to look worldwide to see the damage misinformation around vaccines causes.
Please point to a single thing I have said that is misinformation. Should be easy peasy.
But again you have provided literally no evidence to back up your doubts in mRNA vaccines. It's just your personal feelings.
And there you go again, like clockwork. I have stated that mRNA vaccines are not the "mature technology" you claim they are. I have provided links which you have either ignored or dismissed because ironically they're four years old. Which kinda throws water on your mature technology claim, but anyway.
Are you honestly saying the EMA, US FDA, etc and thousands of independent scientists are wrong.
I am saying that when mRNA vaccines were rolled out, it was the first time this technology was applied in anything like a widespread fashion in human subjects. This is a cast iron fact. No amount of your appeals to authority can change that. No references to the Apollo programme take away from that fact either. Trials were run and they passed those trials, trials that were only a few months old because of the emergency the world faced. By definition you can't extrapolate long, even medium term outcomes from short term results. You can guess. You can even have a pretty good guess, especially if you have similar previous examples to go by, which they didn't have with the mRNA vaccines. Even the viral vector aren't exactly long in the tooth either. What they could say after the trials was the vaccines provide a strong protection against serious illness and death which is a very good thing and saved countless numbers of people. That the vaccines seemed to be well tolerated in the majority of people, that on average the mRNA vaccines had more side effects than the viral vector, but these were temporary, that the viral vectors could have an elevated risk of clotting in a minority of people and that when the vaccine was finished doing its job it was flushed from the body, so medium to long term issues shouldn't be a problem. They had also hoped transmission would be far more reduced than in turned out to be and protection would also last longer than it turned out. But at the time with the data they had that was a good guess and their worth as prophylactics was very strong. And certainly a thousand times better than leting the virus run through a population. The vaccines worked.
My personal decision when these vaccines were rolled out was that I placed less trust in such a novel technology and one that had shown some serious problems in earlier research and because I had a choice I chose to be vaccinated with a non mRNA vaccine at the time. I would have gone for the AZ too. The point is I believe in vaccines. I am vaccinated(even though I'd already had covid, so could have used that as an excuse if I were of that type) and if there hadn't been a choice I would have taken an mRNA vaccine, but I would also have waited longer to do so until more data came in.
I believe vaccine choice is a good thing. Give more confidence in the general public. And one I would happily pay for. If such a choice increased vaccine uptake in the population by a couple of percent it would be worth it.
Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.
1 -
Wibbs beat me to it…but I’ll say it anyway.
how is offering choice to people, and therefore potentially getting more people both vaccinated and boosted, a negative thing ?
5 -
Advertisement
-
Maybe nothing, but this thread is over four months old and the EMA only approved a second dose of Janssen 6 days ago, and Novavax yesterday.
AFAIK neither is approved/recommended by NIAC yet.
2
