Maybe this will help among health care workers - including nursing homes. Time will tell if it moves on beyond a recommendation:
3 Likes
2 Likes
The point is that all the information they needed was already out there in the form of the trials. Period. They chose to ignore and/or remain ignorant of it.
2 Likes
Or give more credence to other views, often also with MD after their name. You and I can disagree that those voices were worth listening to, but they were out there with their theories and had their following. Such was life.
Now data is so much more significant - multiple millions vs multiple thousands. Even if one had thought the opposing view was accurate, itâs been well proven not to have been beyond more than âmereâ trials.
Many of those opting to get vaxed now have looked at the recent data and it has been the reason for their change of mind.
Thanks - Iâm going to look through those nowâŠ
Not quite true.
Paul Offit from CHOP, who has been involved in the development of a vaccine, and who is on an FDA vaccine committee, has said you never know all the side effects until get it into millions of people.
What the first few months of vaccines have taught us are
-
Itâs probably better for women under 50 to get an MRNA vaccine due to the risk of clotting. And if you canât get one of those, be aware of symptoms of clotting and talk to your doctor.
-
Itâs probably better to get an adenovirus vector vaccine if youâre a man under 30. And if you donât have the option, itâs good to know the signs of myocarditis.
-
GBS is a risk with J&J but not with the MRNA vaccine.
We donât qualify for the first two - not long enough since we were fully vaxed and not old enough. The third would be a possibility and one place itâs being done is where medical lad is. Iâve sent him an email asking. If nothing else, his getting involved in it would give me more peace of mind. If we could too it would give us an excuse to see our grandkittens more often as a bonus.
They arenât accepting many though, so Iâm not sure if there are still openings or if weâd be deemed âgood enoughâ candidates or not. Time will tell.
1 Like
âProbablyâ
âProbablyâ
and
a completely unquantified âriskâ do not in any way qualify as new data, as much as youâd like to believe it does.
3 Likes
The statistical difference - and resulting recommendations - between the data in the trials and the data in the population is insignificant, which people would know if they understood statistics. Or accepted that they didnât know better.
4 Likes
No doubt there, and Iâm glad.
Over 160 million Americans are fully vaccinated (as are over 1 Billion people worldwide.) So while you may never âknow,â scientists know. This includes Dr. Offit, who you are taking out of context. Here is some of what Dr. Offit said in a May interview:
Not only has it been shown to be safe in tens of thousands of people before approval, itâs been shown to be safe in tens of millions of people post-approval . . . It doesnât even have a rare side effect. It is remarkable how effective and safe these vaccines are . . . But you know, the proof is in the pudding, and the pudding is at hand . . . There was reason to be skeptical initially, but that skepticism should melt away in the face of all these compelling data.
(https://live.healthday.com/healthday-now-vaccine-myths-vaccinated-guidelines-2651104578.html)
Except now it hasnât been only a âfew months.â The vaccine rollout began in December of last year, clinical testing began months before that, and as I said over a billion people worldwide have been fully vaccinated.
Also, while I am sure you mean well, I am not sure you are the best, most qualified, person to be describing what all this has âtaught us.â Quite obviously, it has âtaughtâ you very different lessons that it has taught others, especially the scientists.
Likewise, I am not sure you are in any position to be advising or suggesting what vaccines different segments of the population should âprobablyâ be getting or not getting. That is the job of scientists and medical professionals, not those who are personally morally opposed being vaccinated.
5 Likes
I could be wrong, but I as I read it, @MACmiracle was referring to Jan/Febâs beginning of the vaxes and what has been learned since via those with very rare side effects, not any sort of âunknownsâ now after millions have been vaccinated.
I see no reason to be dissing their post even from those of us who were willing to trust the trial data.
One canât change the past. One can only react to what is known now to affect the future.
Some people opted to latch onto the minority view (among a few MDs and others) at the beginning. Such is life. Look at the mountains of data now and move forward.
5 Likes
Interesting.
I agree. @MACmiracle is simply musing as a non-professional, not providing actual advice that is expected to be followed. They may be incorrect, in which case, you can point it out, and provide more accurate information.
My point is not that you are wrong, but you and @DroidsLookingFor should save your annoyance for the next time somebody pops up here making claims of vaccinated people dropping like fliesâŠ
3 Likes
Rejoicing here - esp since I have relatives who need the VA for significant health issues!
5 Likes
Regardless of what was intended, the information is extremely misleading, and Dr. Offit is being taken completely out of context to support a position that is the polar opposite to what he actually has been saying, then and now.
Also, even regardless of their personal moral reluctance regarding the vaccine, this poster has no business advising others what vaccine they should or shouldnât take based on extraordinarily rare possibility of a side effect that may or may not actually have been related to the vaccine.
As Dr. Offit pointed out in the same interview, âWhile it is very easy to scare people, it is very hard to unscare people.â Yet this poster is repeatedly sowing doubt and passing anecdotes where there is very little or no scientific support. While I am sure their heart is in the right place, it borders on concern â â â â â â â â .
Iâm assuming that this addition was meant for me. We arenât talking about a single post here, we are talking about dozens of posts from the same poster subtly casting doubt on the safety and effectiveness and advisability of the vaccines. It may be more subtle (and effective) than the poster who claims vaccinated people are dropping like flies, but that seems a good reason to call it out.
5 Likes
The source of any âannoyanceâ is in the continued insistence upon the part of some that they know more, better, or otherwise than that which is established in the science. And yes, when someone does something like e.g. quote a physician out of context in an attempt to raise some sort of question or imply weâve learned something important that was not already understood from the trialsâŠthen yeah. Thatâs that.
1 Like
Uh, we did learn things from the vax releases that werenât seen in the trialsâŠ
Why does âyour sideâ want to paint everything as perfectly rosy as if no one died from a vax or whatever? Some poor folks did - far less than Covid for sure - but some did. Every medical person I know will admit that while still saying itâs better odds getting vaccinated than not coupled with mass vaccination is our only possible way out of this.
Why is it wrong to admit it on a message board discussing Covid and addressing those who have been reluctant honestly with pure facts?
I understand many of those who were reluctant even though I chose differently myself with no regrets. I see absolutely no benefit out of dissing them. It only serves to drive them away and make the person doing the dissing look bad in some sort of elitist âbetter than youâ sort of way. It drives wedges that donât need to be there. One canât change the past.
I wish we could take the âsidesâ out of Covid and just look at it from reality. Covid is ugly.
4 Likes
Maybe Iâm the oddball, but Iâm not getting this at all from their posts.
1 Like
Science is science. Facts are facts.
Covid is indeed ugly. Imagine how less ugly it could have been had so, so, so many people not deluded themselves into somehow thinking they knew better?
6 Likes
To me, people like this snake oil salesman are the enemy - solely in it (and several other deceptions) for the money, probably laughing all the way to the bank as he invents things, tests them to see which will go viral better, then reaps the reward off of people wearing blinders. If anyone reading this follows him (or his ilk) at least realize who youâre dealing with. Heâs not a saint. Heâs after money:
2 Likes