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

Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise

news.ubc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 532 posts

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#371

Post by msandford »

watwut wrote: post #317
Markoff wrote: post #292

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However if we’re going to talk about moral responsibility for vaccine mandates, we also have to consider moral responsibility for non-vaccination leading to spread of a dangerous virus during a pandemic. that's all nice and dandy except COVID "vaccines" (remember, they had to change vaccine definition for this very reason) did NOT STOP the spread, they were at best protecting some old people, it was completely poin…

I remeber that time too. In fact, vaccines slowed spread and also made symptoms easier on those who caught it anyway. And that is exactly what was promissed to me. You are just full of it, that is it.

Prior to COVID I seem to remember that the point of a vaccine was so that you didn't get the disease at all. That's where the herd immunity argument comes from. If 85-90% of the herd has immunity (immunity meaning you can't catch it at all) then even the people who can't get the vaccine are protected because the susceptible are too spread out for the infection to spread.

Do you see how this absolutely requires not just a lowered infection rate with lowered severity of infection? You need a less than ~10% chance of infection in the vaccinated/otherwise immune for the math to work. If the chances of infection after vaccination are still 80% then there is still a large reservoir of potential carriers and you don't have herd immunity.

For most of history what people expected out of a vaccine was immunity from infection not still getting infected but with less severity.

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#372

Post by teamonkey »

logifail wrote: post #332
teamonkey wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you’ve had Covid twice then you’ll have had the antibodies in your system, however there were several strains and getting boosters to maximise resistance was important. Remember that you caught Covid twice , because your body’s immune system was still not strong enough to make you asymptomatic the second time. You likely caught Covid several times but several of those times you were asymptomatic. It’s incorrect to…

> It’s incorrect to say that catching the virus gives you “better” protection than a vaccine. An expert in the field would appear to disagree: Dr F: "the best vaccination is to get infected" https://www.c-span.org/clip/washington-journal/user-clip-pre... (00:50) > however there were several strains and getting boosters to maximise resistance was important Our family doctor said the opposite: "your antibody count is s…

That’s what Dr Fauci said for seasonal flu in 2004.

Yes you will have antibodies from being exposed to one strain of flu. You won’t for the next strain.

Catching COVID carried a far greater risk because although symptoms can be mild in many cases it can kill vulnerable people and it spreads incredibly quickly. At the peak of the pandemic, hospitals were being overrun by people sick with the virus, which affected everyone’s access to care. Vaccines helped prevent the spread of new strains to vulnerable people and reduced pressure on the hospitals.

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#373

Post by tlogan »

krmboya wrote: post #147
tlogan wrote: post #130

If these mRNA vaccines had not been pushed or mandated, more people would probably think they are safe: there will be no need for any of these reviews. But because they were pushed by the government, many people do not trust them. Sure, they were pushed and mandated for good reasons, but the problem is that a lot of people have already lost trust in the government. That trust was not lost because of one big decision.…

One word, transparency. Being open about the research and outcomes. This is a situation good science communicators can help with. Engage the skeptics in open debate and address their concerns, not censorship and embarking on cancellation campaigns. However uncomfortable it seems, the median person in society isn't going to do a thorough literature review to make up their mind, they'll do it based on personal instinct…

I think that can work if you narrow the issue only to medical advice.

But trust is also eroded by completely unrelated things, like “Iraq has WMDs” and other stories pushed by our governments. Or even the recent argument that we need ID to access the internet in order to “protect children.” Sure.

The key point is that for things like vaccines, people need to trust the goverment and the process. Most people are not going to read medical papers. They should rely on government health agencies to tell them what to do.

So when trust is damaged (even by unrelated government decisions), it affects how people respond to medical guidance too.

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#374

Post by ethbr1 »

xboxnolifes wrote: post #337
estearum wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Similar for vaccines, just give us the numbers clearly and upfront. You are aware that literally anyone can go and literally find exactly these numbers, correct? The trial results are published!

Yes, but the point of science/health communication sources is to communicate . People aren't going to spend an afternoon figuring out where to find medical trial results, learn how to read them with a bunch of unknown terms, and form a risk tolerance analysis. I know this. You know this. Everyone know this. The health and science communicators must improve how they communicate with the public.

Hence things like the US FDA's major statement / CCN standards: https://www.fda.gov/media/184312/download

Providing accurate-in-effect summarized information is a difficult balance to strike.

Ultimately though, if people really care, they should be parsing through study results.

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#375

Post by marcosdumay »

Sammi wrote: post #359
moralestapia wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate? What was the change?

Not 100% sure but I think it was this: Never inject into a vein. Always inject into a muscle.

Yes, they mandated a test to check if it was being injected into a vein.

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#376

Post by ethbr1 »

smallstepforman wrote: post #215
estearum wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% of people who Google something like "how do we know the covid vaccines are good" would discover that the tool we use to figure that out is called a "clinical trial." Then they can look up "covid vaccine clinical trial results." The reality is none of these "do your own research" or "just asking questions" people are actually curious whatsoever. Curiosity requires more than zero effort. Simply saying you're "doin…

The rushed clinical trials were only done with 122 people and a control group. During the very short trial, 1 person died in the first group, 2 in the other. The “conclusion” was its better to be vaccinated and it protects you better. 12 months later AstraZenica vaccine pulled from market everywhere ….

Which clinical trial are you referring to for which vaccine?

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#377

Post by ceejayoz »

jasonvorhe wrote: post #347
petilon wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not many people know that Trump had a hand in starting the pandemic. Here's what we know: In 2014, Obama administration halted the so called "gain of function" research because of risk of laboratory accidents. In 2017, the Trump administration restarted this dangerous research. See links below. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/18/us/white-house-to-cut-fun... Excerpt: [Obama administration] White House announced Friday…

[flagged]

Well, no shit. Every administration does. There are several every year.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_epidemics_and_pandemic...

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#378

Post by watwut »

qsera wrote: post #350
watwut wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They did not said they were unlucky. They said that if they knew their kid will die without vaccine, they would still skip vaccine to protect the kid from bigger harm. They said that, not me. That is the problem here, you ignore what they are actually saying while twisting their position into much different and more palatable. It is consistent problem with right wing - insistence on ignoring what they say, push for a…

> They said that if they knew their kid will die without vaccine, they would still skip vaccine to protect the kid from bigger harm.. They probably didn't. Because what is "bigger harm" than death? >You can do that only if you are intent on twisting conversations and meanings into unrecognizable. Eh..what?

> They probably didn't. Because what is "bigger harm" than death?

They literally explicitely did. Ask them what is the bigger harm. Anti-vaccine circles have multiple flavors and interview did not went that deep.

But this "they could not possibly say X, because I disagree with X" is repeated pattern with conservative and right wing movements.

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#379

Post by watwut »

msandford wrote: post #371
watwut wrote: post #317

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remeber that time too. In fact, vaccines slowed spread and also made symptoms easier on those who caught it anyway. And that is exactly what was promissed to me. You are just full of it, that is it.

Prior to COVID I seem to remember that the point of a vaccine was so that you didn't get the disease at all. That's where the herd immunity argument comes from. If 85-90% of the herd has immunity (immunity meaning you can't catch it at all) then even the people who can't get the vaccine are protected because the susceptible are too spread out for the infection to spread. Do you see how this absolutely requires not ju…

Yes some diseases were eradicated that way. Not all of them and we keep vaccinating.

Herd immunity means the disease wont cause epidemic, if it comes from elsewhere. It does not mean that no single person will get the disease if he encounters it.

Notably, flu vaccine did not stopped flu entirely, is the most common yearly vaccine and I really never seen anyone claim it 100% stops flu.

Re: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise 

#380

Post by ethbr1 »

Schiendelman wrote: post #363
doginasuit wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Point taken, but it isn't just a matter of individuals, it is a popular movement that has captured a significant part of role of regulators. The research is still valuable, but its lack of influence is not a problem that is safe to dismiss.

Unfortunately, fighting the movement doesn't do anything for anyone. We both agree you need to fix the regulators - that's the thing you can change, and the actions that help there look nothing like arguing with the movement.

The problem with the recent (Tuesday) Supreme Court overturning of Humphreys Executor^ is that it makes Congressionally-intended independent regulatory agencies (read: FDA) much more behold-to and controllable-by any current President.

Which turns "fixing the regulator to use facts" back into "convincing enough people to elect a President who believes in the scientific method."

^ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humphrey's_Executor_v._United_...

Post reply on HN