Documenting potential side-effects: Covid vs Vaccine

[null]

You aren't waiting for objective/scientific evidence. You are waiting for someone (ie your employer or government) to force your hand before you get the vaccine even if there is no new information present.

Coli crystal ball powers engage !!!

Emotionally driven drift from science ahoy !!

Ok, so hypothetically what is the # of black people you'd like to see be your guinea pig before you decide that it's OK for you to get vaccinated?

You didn't understand what I said. Google multivariate. Understand what this means for individual risk.

This isn't directed at you specifically but it is frustrating as an African Americans seeing the circular logic leading to death

1. Black people didn't enroll in the trials because we don't trust the healthcare system.
2. Now that the vaccine is live, we don't trust it because they didn't test it on enough black people.

On a similar note:

1. One contributing factor towards poorer health outcomes for African Americans is a complete indifference towards us as a population by institutions
2. Now that we are dying at a disproportionately higher rate, the healthcare system is targeting us to get vaccinated and we are saying that we'd rather wait and see what happens and chance it.

Not to go all Adam Smith in here, but at what point do we realize that each of our individual actions make up the collective and embody the reasons why African Americans are being vaccinated at a lower rate than most races and have more severe outcomes than other races?

At what point do we realize that the "wait and see" attitude doesn't just stop at individuals who are WFH and social distancing. It applies to the nurses at the hospital. It applies to to the workers at the retirement home. It applies to the bus driver. It applies to the case worker. It applies to everyone in our community as a whole and the longer that we "Aww shucks let everyone get it and then come back to me" the situation, the worse off our communities become on a daily basis.

Post trials, this narrative that "I deserve to be more informed than the rest of the population and so I am going to indefinitely postpone my vaccination" is some true-blue American narcissism. How do people not feel ashamed when they follow these (in)actions to their logical conclusion with (even more) preventable deaths within our community?

Too many variables there. There is plenty that is not being done in addition to "lower vaccine takeup". Vitamin D for example. Following the distancing rules for example. These things, and more, could have been addressed from day 1 (unlike vaccines) and even now more could be done, but I digress.

I was referring to the infectious disease community when I said science. As for using modeling to predict outcomes/reactions to vaccines, here is an example of a paper reinforcing my original point:
Methods for predicting vaccine immunogenicity and reactogenicity

Modelling is a predication and is therefore not set in stone. The past is reality. Test results are based on the past. More valid past => better predictions, generally speaking (ceteris-paribus).

Taken out of context and completely (purposefully?) missing the point. Here is it more concisely: Waiting an additional 6-12 months for data will not provide any meaningful data on any possible long-term effects of the vaccine if you are already rejecting the existing modeling that suggests that the vaccine is safe.

Crystal ball again? Who said anything about 6 - 12 months?

Emotionally driven drift from science ahoy !!

No I am nor missing the point. That is the logical consequence of what you posted.

The raison-de-etre of testing itself rejects your reasoning and conclusions. The marginal benefit reduces with time but that time is a function of individual multivariate risk analysis. Hopefully I do not have to spell out what that means but I fear that I do.

Again. Purposefully taken out of context. We have talked about trials in this conversations yet somehow you are making the argument that I am insinuating that nothing should be tested. Covid vaccinations have already been thoroughly tested. There is always room for improvement and they will continually be tested. But it has been tested to the degree that infectious disease experts widely view it as safe.

No they haven't. See the FDA covid release and guidance PDFs. For all your waffling, have you even read them?

Can you see the flaw in your own reasoning here? "Widely viewed as safe" (as you claim) has not prevented previous virus issue, recalls and guidance revisions - see the FDA website, In other words "widely viewed as safe" is no guarantee.

You are reinforcing my point. You bolded an independent commission's recommendation around phones as your entire argument is contrary to the independent commission that approved the vaccine:

The link, commentary and advice is directly from the UK government.

Herd immunity is the goal. You will likely have a severely impaired role in society if you haven't been vaccinated by the time we have longitudinal data on the vaccine.

Coli crystal ball powers engage !!!

Emotionally driven drift from science ahoy !!

-

question - probability: two independent events; P(E1) = 0.9 and P(E2) = 0.91 what is the probability of E1 and then sometime later E2 happening?

 

[Fctftl]

I've heard mild side effects from people who have taken it (like chills and fatigue) but I would take that shyt any day over even a moderate case of Covid.

I got the first dose of the Moderna vaccine. so far so good

 

[Agent Mulder]

It’s like I said in another thread, I’m healthy and masks work. If vaccinated, I and everyone else will still have to wear masks at work, in public and when in close contact with ppl. Don’t see why I should take this initial non-trial run of the vaccine that will surely be updated and tweeked.

 

[Macallik86]

Coli crystal ball powers engage !!!

Emotionally driven drift from science ahoy !!

Non-answer. Noted

You didn't understand what I said. Google multivariate. Understand what this means for individual risk.

Trials are over. You are waiting for other black people who are just like you in multiple ways but are NOT you, expose themselves to risk and that risk is tested and reviewed before you decide it is worth it to get vaccinated. Got it.

Crystal ball again? Who said anything about 6 - 12 months?

Emotionally driven drift from science ahoy !!

Deflecting from my argument again. Noted.

No they haven't. See the FDA covid release and guidance PDFs. For all your waffling, have you even read them?

Can you see the flaw in your own reasoning here? "Widely viewed as safe" (as you claim) has not prevented previous virus issue, recalls and guidance revisions - see the FDA website, In other words "widely viewed as safe" is no guarantee.

Yes Covid has been thoroughly tested. There can and will be more testing but it has been thoroughly tested to the degree that it has passed the hurdles of public approval. There is no guarantee that they won't potentially find issues down the road but that doesn't negate the risk that you either have a severe reaction or spread it to someone that has a severe reaction. Everyone likes to limit this to family members as if thousands haven't been killed by complete strangers who are none the wiser.

As for safety:

The findings have been evaluated by independent oversight groups that have found the results and safety to be valid."

Summa infectious disease expert encourages people to get COVID-19 vaccine once available

Coli crystal ball powers engage !!!

Emotionally driven drift from science ahoy !!

Random conjecture instead of addressing my point again. Noted.
-

question - probability: two independent events; P(E1) = 0.9 and P(E2) = 0.91 what is the probability of E1 and then sometime later E2 happening?

Here is a link if you need help with your math homework:
How to Calculate Cumulative Probability

The link, commentary and advice is directly from the UK government.

You clearly didn't click it.

1. The link is not from the UK Government like you state.
2. ACIP members do not work for the government, hence why it says "Independent Health Experts"

Given your low effort response to my previous points, I won't be responding moving forward.

 

[Macallik86]

It’s like I said in another thread, I’m healthy and masks work. If vaccinated, I and everyone else will still have to wear masks at work, in public and when in close contact with ppl. Don’t see why I should take this initial non-trial run of the vaccine that will surely be updated and tweeked.

For me personally, I think I'm realizing more and more that science has no gameplan when it comes to the effects of covid on healthy people and so I'm willing to take my chances with the vaccine.

There was an article that came out this week where a surgeon says that people's lungs post-covid are worst than cigarette smokers. He said that he saw the situation play out 70-80% of the time with asymptomatic patients

Spoiler

Also, there looking at the news about a bunch of covid positive college athletes (in much better shape than me) where three out of ten ended up with enlarged hearts...

There is no scientific evidence that things are gonna just bounce back moving forward. I'm under 40 and so I can only imagine living half my life with a disability and that makes me very anxious to get vaccinated.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

wearing a mask and sanitizing everything.

no side effects.

It’s like I said in another thread, I’m healthy and masks work. If vaccinated, I and everyone else will still have to wear masks at work, in public and when in close contact with ppl. Don’t see why I should take this initial non-trial run of the vaccine that will surely be updated and tweeked.

Don't say that in TLR, they'll claim masks are even worse than the virus.


On a serious note, if you're wearing a mask but others aren't then there still a decent risk of catching it from them. A mask isn't foolproof like that.

It's the fact that the vaccine has not been administered to enough people nor has it been in use long enough...so we're still referring to 'possible' side effects.

People are simply reluctant to be first in line, that's not the same as being an anti-vaxxer.

Yep. There's a reason why vaccine trials normally take 10 to 15 years.

Can you guys give an example of an american vaccine that was found to have significant common long-term effects that were not apparent in initial trials?

My impression is that most of the reason vaccine development usually takes longer is due to taking a long time to find the right molecule to use, extended testing to ensure ideal dosing and prove efficacy in all subpopulations, bureaucracy, and the time to build the manufacturing chain. I'm not aware of a vaccine that looked good in initial trials but was shown to have long-term side-effects later. Do you know of one?

 

[null]

Non-answer. Noted


Trials are over. You are waiting for other black people who are just like you in multiple ways but are NOT you, expose themselves to risk and that risk is tested and reviewed before you decide it is worth it to get vaccinated. Got it.


Deflecting from my argument again. Noted.


Yes Covid has been thoroughly tested. There can and will be more testing but it has been thoroughly tested to the degree that it has passed the hurdles of public approval. There is no guarantee that they won't potentially find issues down the road but that doesn't negate the risk that you either have a severe reaction or spread it to someone that has a severe reaction. Everyone likes to limit this to family members as if thousands haven't been killed by complete strangers who are none the wiser.

As for safety:

Summa infectious disease expert encourages people to get COVID-19 vaccine once available


Random conjecture instead of addressing my point again. Noted.
-


Here is a link if you need help with your math homework:
How to Calculate Cumulative Probability


You clearly didn't click it.

1. The link is not from the UK Government like you state.
2. ACIP members do not work for the government, hence why it says "Independent Health Experts"

Given your low effort response to my previous points, I won't be responding moving forward.

The definition of a smart-dumb breh (who just happens to be on the dumb-dumb end of that scale).

Congrats

I hope for your sake that life hasn't noticed yet

 

[null]

Can you guys give an example of an american vaccine that was found to have significant common long-term effects that were not apparent in initial trials?

My impression is that most of the reason vaccine development usually takes longer is due to taking a long time to find the right molecule to use, extended testing to ensure ideal dosing and prove efficacy in all subpopulations, bureaucracy, and the time to build the manufacturing chain. I'm not aware of a vaccine that looked good in initial trials but was shown to have long-term side-effects later. Do you know of one?

It's only on thecoli that you get people arguing the opposite before bothering to check whether what they are arguing against is the case or not .

by "american" is that american invented, manufactured, approved?

anyway from the CDC

as background:

”While clinical trials provide important information on vaccine safety, the data are somewhat limited because of the relatively small number (hundreds to thousands) of study participants. Rare side effects and delayed reactions might not be evident until the vaccine is administered to millions of people. Therefore, the federal government established the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a surveillance system to monitor adverse events following vaccination. In addition, large-linked databases containing information on millions of individuals, such as the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), have been created to study rare vaccine adverse events. [1, 3]”

U.S. Vaccine Safety - Overview, History, and How It Works | CDC

to answer your question.

see

from

Historical Safety Concerns | Vaccine Safety | CDC

@Skooby
@Hood Critic

and that f00 from this morning for good measure @Macallik86

 

[Hood Critic]

Everyone is doing this song and dance that a lack of science and data is proof positive of potential outcomes.

• Do I have an example of a vaccine that had "substantial" long-term effects, no I do not, especially since this is the first widely distributed mRNA vaccine in our history - so there is nothing but mRNA trials in humans to go on. They have been shown to work for zika, influenza, and rabies but infection, re-infection and long term immunity as well as any other effects are not fully known. (source: mRNA vaccines — a new era in vaccinology | Nature Reviews Drug Discovery )
• No matter how rare, we know there can be long term effects from vaccine whether they are vaccine related or triggered by pre-existing/hereditary conditions. The Health Resources and Service Administration (HRSA) has an entire compensation program setup to compensate those who have a substantial claim to an adverse effect of a vaccination - so whether its rare or common, it is relevant. (source: Vaccine Injury Compensation Data )
• I have never disagreed that my own or other people's reservations are more anecdotal than they are scientific but the logic behind those feelings is not wholly flawed nor completely dismissed through existing science. Since anyone who did even casual reading or self-education could identify not only a much faster vaccination development process but a potentially new and ground breaking delivery system in mRNA:

While the flu and rabies vaccines appeared to be "safe and reasonably well tolerated," Weissman and colleagues wrote, trials did show "moderate and in rare cases severe injection site or systemic reactions."

Their chief safety concerns, which they said should be closely watched in future trials, were about local and systemic inflammation, as well as keeping tabs on the "expressed immunogen" and on any auto-reactive antibodies.

"A possible concern could be that some mRNA-based vaccine platforms induce potent type I interferon responses, which have been associated not only with inflammation but also potentially with autoimmunity," they wrote. "Thus, identification of individuals at an increased risk of autoimmune reactions before mRNA vaccination may allow reasonable precautions to be taken."

The authors also noted that extracellular RNA could contribute to edema, and cited a study that showed it "promoted blood coagulation and pathological thrombus formation."

"Safety will therefore need continued evaluation as different mRNA modalities and delivery systems are utilized for the first time in humans and are tested in larger patient populations," they wrote in the paper, which was published in 2018.

source: https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/89998

Sounds like an incredible discovery and use case but only so much is known.

• Then there are stories like this, that don't apply to anyone reading or participating in this conversation but underscore how much we don't really know Norway warns of fatal side effects of Covid-19 vaccine after elderly deaths

So now we're back at square one, weighing the known deadliness and long term effects of the virus versus a vaccine that will prevent infection or at worst, prevent a severe case of infection with no other known information. To some, that seems like a no brainer but I go back to my point about the preventative measures that we've been using for a year being an option. No @Macallik86 , I am not ignoring the half a million or so health care workers who were infected, I'm considering how the remaining uninfected may be feeling.

As long as people feel like they have another option, they won't be rushing to be first in line.

 

[mykey]

Black people are tired of being guinea pigs.. Tuskegee experiments spring to mind. Here's a thought; why don't you get your vaccine, if you want to, while the rest of us wait it out and observe.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

It's only on thecoli that you get people arguing the opposite before bothering to check whether what they are arguing against is the case or not .

by "american" is that american invented, manufactured, approved?

anyway from the CDC

as background:

”While clinical trials provide important information on vaccine safety, the data are somewhat limited because of the relatively small number (hundreds to thousands) of study participants. Rare side effects and delayed reactions might not be evident until the vaccine is administered to millions of people. Therefore, the federal government established the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a surveillance system to monitor adverse events following vaccination. In addition, large-linked databases containing information on millions of individuals, such as the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD), have been created to study rare vaccine adverse events. [1, 3]”

U.S. Vaccine Safety - Overview, History, and How It Works | CDC

to answer your question.

see

from

Historical Safety Concerns | Vaccine Safety | CDC

@Skooby
@Hood Critic

and that f00 from this morning for good measure @Macallik86

How lazy was this? You just did a copy/paste of a bunch of stuff that didn't even look to specifically answer my question. You're conflating numerous completely different issues - "rare" side effects that aren't seen because they only show up in 1 in 10,000 or 1 in a million cases, poor oversight of manufacturing, and long-term issues. I'm specifically asking about that last one.

1. Cutter incident was because the manufacturer had poor quality-assurance standards so the actual live virus was given to people - it had nothing to do with the long-term effects of the vaccine.

2. Simian 40 was again a poor quality-assurance issue in manufacturing that led to contamination. However, there were no side effects.

3. GBS was a rare side effect (1 in 100,000) and it showed up soon after the injection, not a year later.

4. The possible MS connection was found not to be real with further study

5. The intussusception issue was real but it was also very quick, again not a new long-term thing

6. The second potential GBS issue was found not to be real with further study.

7. The HiB issue was a potential contamination issue, but upon further study no contamination was found

8. The potential narcolepsy issue was found not to be real with further study

9. PCV contamination was once again a quality control issue, but there were no side-effects found.

10. HPV recall was yet again a manufacturing quality control issue of glass contamination. No side-effects were found.




So literally NONE of the shyt you linked answered my question. Only 3 of your 10 examples were actually shown to be real issues, one of those three was a quality control problem from poor 1950s era manufacturing and the other 2 were immediate side effects that were just too rare to be noticed in lower numbers testing.

So are the only issues at stake here is the low possibility of rare side effects, 1 in 100,000 or 1 in 1,000,000 type shyt that wouldn't necessarily have appeared in the trials because it's so rare? Do you actually have an example of a side-effect that didn't appear until long after the vaccine was taken?

 

[null]

How lazy was this? You just did a copy/paste of a bunch of stuff that didn't even look to specifically answer my question. You're conflating numerous completely different issues - "rare" side effects that aren't seen because they only show up in 1 in 10,000 or 1 in a million cases, poor oversight of manufacturing, and long-term issues. I'm specifically asking about that last one.

Less lazy than you not looking it up in the first place. I'm travelling. The link was enough for you to read it.

1. Cutter incident was because the manufacturer had poor quality-assurance standards so the actual live virus was given to people - it had nothing to do with the long-term effects of the vaccine.

2. Simian 40 was again a poor quality-assurance issue in manufacturing that led to contamination. However, there were no side effects.

3. GBS was a rare side effect (1 in 100,000) and it showed up soon after the injection, not a year later.

4. The possible MS connection was found not to be real with further study

5. The intussusception issue was real but it was also very quick, again not a new long-term thing

6. The second potential GBS issue was found not to be real with further study.

7. The HiB issue was a potential contamination issue, but upon further study no contamination was found

8. The potential narcolepsy issue was found not to be real with further study

9. PCV contamination was once again a quality control issue, but there were no side-effects found.

10. HPV recall was yet again a manufacturing quality control issue of glass contamination. No side-effects were found.

So literally NONE of the shyt you linked answered my question. Only 3 of your 10 examples were actually shown to be real issues, one of those three was a quality control problem from poor 1950s era manufacturing and the other 2 were immediate side effects that were just too rare to be noticed in lower numbers testing.

No one said all 10 apply. The screenshot was for you to do the reading. I already confirmed that at least one was a valid issue. I was in my car and still am. I am on my way to the UK and am at the Channel Tunnel port in Calais right now. From 04:00 more stringent Covid border rules come into play. And I am kind of tired on having to break everything down. So when rushed these days I just dump the links. Or sometimes these days I don't even do that. Bad practice I know but hey ...

So are the only issues at stake here is the low possibility of rare side effects, 1 in 100,000 or 1 in 1,000,000 type shyt that wouldn't necessarily have appeared in the trials because it's so rare? Do you actually have an example of a side-effect that didn't appear until long after the vaccine was taken?

You didn't look deep enough ... I am sitting by the dock of the bay waiting for my Eurotunnel Train so hey.. I'll do it for you ...

Read this section about the H1N1 vaccine and narcolepsy (the 3rd from the last). It is large and so I am not going to post it all here. The CDC conclusion is based on the Stanford study. However see below ...

Abridged extracts:

"Pandemrix was found to be associated with narcolepsy from observational studies, increasing the risk of narcolepsy by 5-14 times in children and 2-7 times in adults. The increased risk of narcolepsy due to vaccination in children and adolescents was around 1 incident per 18,400 doses.[5]"

"In February 2011, THL concluded that there is a clear connection between the Pandemrix vaccination campaign of 2009 and 2010 and the narcolepsy epidemic in Finland. The probability of developing narcolepsy was determined to be nine times higher in those who received the Pandemrix vaccination than those who didn't. A total of 152 cases of narcolepsy have been found in Finland during 2009–2010, and ninety percent of them had received the Pandemrix vaccination. Authorities believe that the number of cases may still increase.[29][30][31]"

"At the end of March 2011, an MPA press release stated: "Results from a Swedish registry based cohort study indicate a 4-fold increased risk of narcolepsy in children and adolescents below the age of 20 vaccinated with Pandemrix, compared to children of the same age that were not vaccinated."[32] The same study found no increased risk in adults who were vaccinated with Pandemrix. While cautioning that the increase in risk for children is still uncertain in magnitude, it recommends they not be vaccinated."

Pandemrix - Wikipedia

Example press report:

"Six million people in Britain, and more across Europe, were given the Pandemrix vaccine made by GlaxoSmithKline during the 2009-10 swine flu pandemic, but the jab was withdrawn after doctors noticed a sharp rise in narcolepsy among those receiving it."

Swine flu vaccine case settled but hopes for legal precedent dashed

boarding now ... back later ..

Spoiler: ... the docks ...

edit: before I forget @Macallik86

 

[Professor Emeritus]

Less lazy than you not looking it up in the first place. I'm travelling. The link was enough for you to read it.

Not sure why you think I should be the one to do the ground work to prove claims that I'm not making. Usually that onus falls on the one making the claim.

"Pandemrix was found to be associated with narcolepsy from observational studies, increasing the risk of narcolepsy by 5-14 times in children and 2-7 times in adults. The increased risk of narcolepsy due to vaccination in children and adolescents was around 1 incident per 18,400 doses.[5]"

"In February 2011, THL concluded that there is a clear connection between the Pandemrix vaccination campaign of 2009 and 2010 and the narcolepsy epidemic in Finland. The probability of developing narcolepsy was determined to be nine times higher in those who received the Pandemrix vaccination than those who didn't. A total of 152 cases of narcolepsy have been found in Finland during 2009–2010, and ninety percent of them had received the Pandemrix vaccination. Authorities believe that the number of cases may still increase.[29][30][31]"

"At the end of March 2011, an MPA press release stated: "Results from a Swedish registry based cohort study indicate a 4-fold increased risk of narcolepsy in children and adolescents below the age of 20 vaccinated with Pandemrix, compared to children of the same age that were not vaccinated."[32] The same study found no increased risk in adults who were vaccinated with Pandemrix. While cautioning that the increase in risk for children is still uncertain in magnitude, it recommends they not be vaccinated."

Pandemrix - Wikipedia

Example press report:

"Six million people in Britain, and more across Europe, were given the Pandemrix vaccine made by GlaxoSmithKline during the 2009-10 swine flu pandemic, but the jab was withdrawn after doctors noticed a sharp rise in narcolepsy among those receiving it."

So reading further into the part you didn't quote suggests that narcolepsy due to the body's own immune response was an issue for about 1 in 20,000 vaccine recipients only within one age subgroup, and that the same issue was present in some sufferers of the disease itself, so vaccination was still likely to be a superior option.

A low probability of a rather tame auto-immune disorder likely to be worse with the disease than with the vaccine is not a very frightening worst-case scenario. Were there any worse than that?

 

[null]

Not sure why you think I should be the one to do the ground work to prove claims that I'm not making. Usually that onus falls on the one making the claim.

So reading further into the part you didn't quote suggests that narcolepsy due to the body's own immune response was an issue for about 1 in 20,000 vaccine recipients only within one age subgroup, and that the same issue was present in some sufferers of the disease itself, so vaccination was still likely to be a superior option.

A low probability of a rather tame auto-immune disorder likely to be worse with the disease than with the vaccine is not a very frightening worst-case scenario. Were there any worse than that?

1. I'm in the UK now

2. Do you agree that is a valid answer to your question?

The vaccine was withdrawn.

3. It is not a "worst case scenario". No one said it was.

 

[Professor Emeritus]

1. I'm in the UK now

2. Do you agree that is a valid answer to your question?

The vaccine was withdrawn.

3. It is not a "worst case scenario". No one said it was.

Yes, it was a valid answer, and makes me even less worried than I was before, which wasn't much. A very low-rate occurance of a mild auto-immune disorder that was potentially even more likely if you caught the disease.

The vaccine was withdrawn because there were even better vaccine options, not because its impact was worse than the disease.

Was that not the worst case? Do you know of a worse case?