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

More on Vaccine Side Effects

blogs.sciencemag.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 96 posts

Re: More on Vaccine Side Effects

#61

Post by AndrewBissell »

cunthorpe wrote: post #58
CarelessExpert wrote: post #36

I wish I could get skeptics to believe this kind of evidence. I've had deeply frustrating conversations that went along the lines o Them: The vaccines are more dangerous than the virus! Me: No they aren't. There's very few cases of severe side effects. Blood clots with AZ are about the worst we've seen, though GBS is always a small risk with vaccinations. Them: No, the vaccines are super dangerous. People have gotten…

I think in some cases either people are stupid or are just unreasonably scared. I discussed this with a family member when AZ side effects started appearing on the news. I tried showing him the numbers (millions of inoculations, few “vaccine-related” deaths) but even presented with “The chances of getting sick with a vaccine are 0.00005%” (I don’t remember the exact number) he would not budge. I told him “The chances…

Haha, multiple European countries have halted administration of the AstraZeneca vaccine in people under 60 because they can't be sure that the benefits outweigh the risks, and you still have people fretting that "these darn skeptics just won't listen to Stats And Logic!"

This whole line of argument that "the population-wide risks of the virus are outweighed by the (publicly acknowledged) population-wide risks of the vaccine" is extremely innumerate when addressed to a non-elderly, healthy person without co-morbidities. Your family member's instinct that his risks may be higher from the vaccine might be entirely in line with the reality.

Re: More on Vaccine Side Effects

#62

Post by mywittyname »

elric wrote: post #54
awoimbee wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I could maybe agree if the restrictions were put in the winter, but not in the summer. People have already booked their vacation, and now they need to do a PCR every 2 days to take a train, enjoy restaurants ? That's insane ! To get the "pass sanitaire" you need: first shot -> wait 3 weeks -> second shot -> wait 2 weeks. That's more than a month !

> People have already booked their vacation Booking vacations in the middle of a global pandemic and massive restrictions ... seems a tad ... reckless.

Also, why would you do all that planning and not get a vaccination. Like, in all their planning, it didn't occur to someone that, hospitality places might start requiring proof of vaccination?

Service workers are people too. They want to earn a wage, while keeping themselves and their families safe. And given the labor shortages, these people have a lot more influence over their working conditions than they've had in the past.

Re: More on Vaccine Side Effects

#63

Post by justwanttolearn »

CarelessExpert wrote: post #36

I wish I could get skeptics to believe this kind of evidence. I've had deeply frustrating conversations that went along the lines o Them: The vaccines are more dangerous than the virus! Me: No they aren't. There's very few cases of severe side effects. Blood clots with AZ are about the worst we've seen, though GBS is always a small risk with vaccinations. Them: No, the vaccines are super dangerous. People have gotten…

> there's a solid contingent of people who get their "news" from Facebook conspiracy groups and use social media to reinforce bad information in their bubbles. Getting to them is proving damn near impossible...

I think it's a bit unfair that the ones that are cautious towards the vaccines are default labeled as "news" from Facebook conspiracy groups. I've joined a couple side effect groups myself to read what other people have been experiencing (and these people CHOSE to get vaccinated, one or both doses!) so they're looking to join support groups. I join support groups for other reasons all the time and I don't consider my own experiences "conspiracy".

For sure there are the fringe groups but just because it's not documented in a clinical trial ran by a giant corporation doesn't mean they aren't true. This goes the same for the metoo movement, it's as if saying what these women are scared of or what they're experiencing aren't real because there isn't "evidence" that it happened (and of course you have the real ones that make up fake stories too).

I personally know 3 people that have and are still experiencing side effects from their shots in Jan through March. 1 went deaf in one year (she's still running through a lot of tests with the doctors to find out why), one continues to have swollen ankles, lymph nodes, brain fog (again, running a lot of tests as well to find alternative cause, nothing so far), and one (local doctor at the emergency hospital)'s alopecia came back.

The first two are now seriously questioning now (months later) why the doctors aren't looking at the possibility that the vaccine may have triggered it. They've instantly ruled it out right away.

Re: More on Vaccine Side Effects

#64

Post by [deleted] »

oceanplexian wrote: post #59
CarelessExpert wrote: post #36

I wish I could get skeptics to believe this kind of evidence. I've had deeply frustrating conversations that went along the lines o Them: The vaccines are more dangerous than the virus! Me: No they aren't. There's very few cases of severe side effects. Blood clots with AZ are about the worst we've seen, though GBS is always a small risk with vaccinations. Them: No, the vaccines are super dangerous. People have gotten…

> Them: The vaccines are more dangerous than the virus! Children under age 14 are between 6.8 and 17 times less likely to die of Covid-19 than the seasonal flu or pneumonia. And here we are, trying to preemptively vaccinate them against a disease that they are not particularly susceptible to. I'm not sure if the vaccine is more dangerous but if it were, I doubt it would be making headlines. The argument could be made…

[deleted]

Re: More on Vaccine Side Effects

#65

Post by CarelessExpert »

justwanttolearn wrote: post #63
CarelessExpert wrote: post #36

I wish I could get skeptics to believe this kind of evidence. I've had deeply frustrating conversations that went along the lines o Them: The vaccines are more dangerous than the virus! Me: No they aren't. There's very few cases of severe side effects. Blood clots with AZ are about the worst we've seen, though GBS is always a small risk with vaccinations. Them: No, the vaccines are super dangerous. People have gotten…

> there's a solid contingent of people who get their "news" from Facebook conspiracy groups and use social media to reinforce bad information in their bubbles. Getting to them is proving damn near impossible... I think it's a bit unfair that the ones that are cautious towards the vaccines are default labeled as "news" from Facebook conspiracy groups. I've joined a couple side effect groups myself to read what other p…

> I think it's a bit unfair that the ones that are cautious towards the vaccines are default labeled as "news" from Facebook conspiracy groups.

You seem to have missed the part where they made specific claims about dangerous side effects or major adverse events, but when pushed for sources or evidence, demurred.

It's clear they formed an opinion based on very bad information. Where did that information come from? I think the answer is obvious.

As for the rest, honestly, you have three pieces of anecdata, none of which align with any other reported adverse events from the vaccines. I'd be a little surprised if the doctors did explore that theory before ruling out more traditional avenues of investigation first.

Re: More on Vaccine Side Effects

#66

Post by slumdev »

sofixa wrote: post #5
phtrivier wrote: post #3

I would have noded and approved this article 24 hours ago. Now vaccination is about to be made de-facto mandatory in France (with a snarky timing that will prevent some people from getting all their shots before restrictions pop in.) ; and I know that I'm going to be a bit less receptive, because of the tension between "this is sane science" and "this is a terrible bet on the future from a politician that got a lot o…

> with a snarky timing that will prevent some people from getting all their shots before restrictions pop in. It's not mandatory, unless you consider restaurants and travel to be necessities one needs ( and you can still use a test in lieu of a vaccine certificate, and tests are still free)

> It's not mandatory, unless you consider restaurants and travel to be necessities one needs

Have you ever been to France?

Most in the cities live in tiny flats with insufficient space for gathering and dining. The bistro/brasserie/cafe is largely considered an extension of one's own living room.

Travel is also a normal part of life verging on necessity. Families travel for multiple weeks every summer. France even has a nationwide peer-to-peer lodging rental arrangement that predates Airbnb and Vrbo by decades: https://gitelink.com/

Re: More on Vaccine Side Effects

#67

Post by slumdev »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #61
cunthorpe wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think in some cases either people are stupid or are just unreasonably scared. I discussed this with a family member when AZ side effects started appearing on the news. I tried showing him the numbers (millions of inoculations, few “vaccine-related” deaths) but even presented with “The chances of getting sick with a vaccine are 0.00005%” (I don’t remember the exact number) he would not budge. I told him “The chances…

Haha, multiple European countries have halted administration of the AstraZeneca vaccine in people under 60 because they can't be sure that the benefits outweigh the risks, and you still have people fretting that "these darn skeptics just won't listen to Stats And Logic!" This whole line of argument that "the population-wide risks of the virus are outweighed by the (publicly acknowledged) population-wide risks of the…

> Your family member's instinct that his risks may be higher from the vaccine might be entirely in line with the reality.

Based on the VAERS data, this is probably the case for anyone under the age of 60.

It is definitely the case for anyone under the age of 30.

But everyone gets similarly bludgeoned with population-level data to convince them to make an individual-level decision. If you want to call them selfish, go for it. But they're not stupid.

Re: More on Vaccine Side Effects

#68

Post by cunthorpe »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #61
cunthorpe wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think in some cases either people are stupid or are just unreasonably scared. I discussed this with a family member when AZ side effects started appearing on the news. I tried showing him the numbers (millions of inoculations, few “vaccine-related” deaths) but even presented with “The chances of getting sick with a vaccine are 0.00005%” (I don’t remember the exact number) he would not budge. I told him “The chances…

Haha, multiple European countries have halted administration of the AstraZeneca vaccine in people under 60 because they can't be sure that the benefits outweigh the risks, and you still have people fretting that "these darn skeptics just won't listen to Stats And Logic!" This whole line of argument that "the population-wide risks of the virus are outweighed by the (publicly acknowledged) population-wide risks of the…

They halted it because they have a choice now, not because the vaccine is worse than COVID. Did you read the article? Probably not because you’re spouting the same nonsense as antivaxers. Look at the stats and remember this is a pandemic: Your choice affects others. The reality is that you’re just selfish.

Edit: Rereading some articles about the stop reminded me that the stop was a political decision more than anything. In short they’d rather slow down vaccination a bit to avoid scaring the population with numbers they don’t understand and off of the vaccines altogether.

It was akin to “shooing the ghost away” so the kid stops being scared.

Re: More on Vaccine Side Effects

#69

Post by [deleted] »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #61
cunthorpe wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think in some cases either people are stupid or are just unreasonably scared. I discussed this with a family member when AZ side effects started appearing on the news. I tried showing him the numbers (millions of inoculations, few “vaccine-related” deaths) but even presented with “The chances of getting sick with a vaccine are 0.00005%” (I don’t remember the exact number) he would not budge. I told him “The chances…

Haha, multiple European countries have halted administration of the AstraZeneca vaccine in people under 60 because they can't be sure that the benefits outweigh the risks, and you still have people fretting that "these darn skeptics just won't listen to Stats And Logic!" This whole line of argument that "the population-wide risks of the virus are outweighed by the (publicly acknowledged) population-wide risks of the…

[deleted]

Re: More on Vaccine Side Effects

#70

Post by CarelessExpert »

elric wrote: post #57
CarelessExpert wrote: post #36

I wish I could get skeptics to believe this kind of evidence. I've had deeply frustrating conversations that went along the lines o Them: The vaccines are more dangerous than the virus! Me: No they aren't. There's very few cases of severe side effects. Blood clots with AZ are about the worst we've seen, though GBS is always a small risk with vaccinations. Them: No, the vaccines are super dangerous. People have gotten…

It's a problem with interpreting risk and control. Allow me to explain: 1. People think (wrongly) that they can control catching the virus. They can wear a mask, keep their distance, etc. This gives them a false sense of security and control. They think that if they do catch covid, they're unlikely to get really sick from it. 2. People (righly) think that they have very little control over what their bodies do after…

Yup, all great points, though I'm a lot more skeptical that #1 and #3 can be addressed with better awareness.

The problem is that for every PSA from the government, message from a doctor, or conversation with a trusted friend or loved one, there's a hundred posts on that are designed to appeal to folks looking for a reason not to take the vaccine. It's basically a fight against an at-scale, technology-assisted gish gallop.

Add in things like the primacy effect and it's incredibly difficult to deprogram people once they've internalized bad information.

Post reply on HN