Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

mindhive.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 121 posts

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#21

Post by Galanwe »

logicchains wrote: post #9
jtbayly wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might be one reason they are uncomfortable with mandatory vaccination orders, but there's also the fact that the government is putting a gun to your head and saying, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help. Now I'm going to stick this needle in you. Don't resist and nobody will get hurt."

It's also a violation of the UN "right to be free from non-consensual medical treatment" ( https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/Factsheet31.pdf )

Apologies, but could you clarify "non-consensual" for non native English speakers?

Does this mean "no consent given for the medication" or "medication that is not part of an agreed consensus"?

If the former, then there are literally tons of occurrences of this everywhere.

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#23

Post by jonnypotty »

_-___________-_ wrote: post #5
wegs wrote: post #3

Well, it's being done for all the wrong reasons, but I'd gladly take a relaxing of safety measures to be done with COVID, depending on the vaccine and the risks. The relatively known risks of some types of a vaccine seem a lot better than the unknown ones of COVID. I would want to wait for full phase III before we had a mandatory vaccine, relied on this fully, or otherwise did too much with it. But we can't ramp up p…

Really? The risks of COVID are pretty well known at this point, and for the vast majority of people they seem quite low.

Wow.

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#24

Post by macintux »

henrikschroder wrote: post #14
andybak wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still get the feeling there's still a lot to discover about this disease. And some will quibble over the precise definitions of "vast" and "low" in that statement.

If you're below 40 your risk of dying of the regular influenza is higher than the risk of dying of covid-19. If your fear of the flu doesn't motivate you to take the flu vaccine every year, rationally, you shouldn't want to take the covid-19 vaccine either.

Death is not the only metric that matters.

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#25

Post by querez »

logicchains wrote: post #9
jtbayly wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might be one reason they are uncomfortable with mandatory vaccination orders, but there's also the fact that the government is putting a gun to your head and saying, "I'm from the government and I'm here to help. Now I'm going to stick this needle in you. Don't resist and nobody will get hurt."

It's also a violation of the UN "right to be free from non-consensual medical treatment" ( https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/Factsheet31.pdf )

This could be said of all required vaccines, though, and the same counter-arguments apply: One individual's freedom to not vaccine hurts other people's right to health (e.g. via reduced herd immunity which hurts people who cannot get vaccinated) and should thus take a backseat.

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#26

Post by logicchains »

Galanwe wrote: post #21
logicchains wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also a violation of the UN "right to be free from non-consensual medical treatment" ( https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/Factsheet31.pdf )

Apologies, but could you clarify "non-consensual" for non native English speakers? Does this mean "no consent given for the medication" or "medication that is not part of an agreed consensus"? If the former, then there are literally tons of occurrences of this everywhere.

It means the former. What are some examples of medication being given without consent in developed countries?

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#27

Post by rjtavares »

henrikschroder wrote: post #14
andybak wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I still get the feeling there's still a lot to discover about this disease. And some will quibble over the precise definitions of "vast" and "low" in that statement.

If you're below 40 your risk of dying of the regular influenza is higher than the risk of dying of covid-19. If your fear of the flu doesn't motivate you to take the flu vaccine every year, rationally, you shouldn't want to take the covid-19 vaccine either.

> If you're below 40 your risk of dying of the regular influenza is higher than the risk of dying of covid-19.

Do you have a source for that?

As far as I'm aware they're both pretty low, but we haven't had a study that concluded what you're saying.

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#29

Post by logicchains »

querez wrote: post #25
logicchains wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's also a violation of the UN "right to be free from non-consensual medical treatment" ( https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/Factsheet31.pdf )

This could be said of all required vaccines, though, and the same counter-arguments apply: One individual's freedom to not vaccine hurts other people's right to health (e.g. via reduced herd immunity which hurts people who cannot get vaccinated) and should thus take a backseat.

>This could be said of all required vaccines, though, and the same counter-arguments apply: One individual's freedom to not vaccine hurts other people's right to health (e.g. via reduced herd immunity which hurts people who cannot get vaccinated) and should thus take a backseat.

The whole point of rights is that they're non-conditional. That's why most western countries currently don't do any forced vaccinations (although some may deny certain government services to people who are unvaccinated). Without a strong commitment to human rights, there's nothing to stop the next racist dictator who comes along from sterilising ethnicities or political groups he doesn't like (as is allegedly happening in Xinjiang).

Re: Alarm as FDA willing to issue Covid-19 vaccine before stringent safety testing

#30

Post by bryanrasmussen »

hedgew wrote: post #15

Every day vaccines are delayed costs thousands of lives. Bioethicists who have forbidden challenge trials in vaccine trials have firmly taken the no-action stance in the trolley problem. A normal phase 3 trial gives the vaccine to volunteers and waits for them to get sick (or not). A challenge trial is the same, but infects the volunteers intentionally, which significantly speeds up the trial and reduces the sample s…

https://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/medicin...

Thalidomide changed our relationship with new medicines for ever.

It took five years for the connection between thalidomide taken by pregnant women and the impact on their children to be made. Not only did thalidomide change people’s lives, but it resulted in tighter drug testing and reporting of side-effects.

Post reply on HN