Re:Ask HN: Am I wrong to have honest concerns with the upcom...
by jfengel on Thursday November 12, 2020 @02:24PM
(#25073779)
You're not wrong to be concerned. You just have to weigh that concern against the concern of a pandemic.
This vaccine is being put on rush. That doesn't mean cutting corners, but it does mean that it won't have the decades of experience we have with the childhood vaccinations and flu vaccination (which is new each year but based on long-tested technologies).
That's a different calculus from the anti-vaxxer, who is ignoring mounds of evidence collected over many years, in favor of opinions from non-experts or agenda-driven fraudsters.
You do need to consider that there is both good evidence for it working safely, and solid theory why it should. It's not snake oil: you can't rule out unexpected interactions, but you do know that it's not just guessing or fakery.
I'd love for there to be more data than that, but there is no way to develop a vaccine with techniques that have a proven record without millions of people dying in the process. And tens of millions more suffering debilitating mental and physical illnesses, perhaps for the rest of their lives. These are the known effects of the disease.
As so often in life, you will have to make an important decision based on insufficient information. The best you can do in this case is to defer to people who have more information than you do. If the large consensus of the immunology community is that it's reasonably safe, that should carry considerably more weight than premature class-action lawsuits. You're right to be uneasy, but it would shift the balance to a belief that it's a risk worth taking over the known dangers of a disease.
Finally, since it's a worldwide test, it's less likely that it could be covered up or promulgated for local political ends. (Regardless of how you feel about the outcome of the US election, it is at least over.)
Fortunately, and grimly, the odds are the vaccine will have many months more of testing before it gets to you. It will be in very widespread use and side effects will almost certainly make themselves known.
This vaccine is being put on rush. That doesn't mean cutting corners, but it does mean that it won't have the decades of experience we have with the childhood vaccinations and flu vaccination (which is new each year but based on long-tested technologies).
That's a different calculus from the anti-vaxxer, who is ignoring mounds of evidence collected over many years, in favor of opinions from non-experts or agenda-driven fraudsters.
You do need to consider that there is both good evidence for it working safely, and solid theory why it should. It's not snake oil: you can't rule out unexpected interactions, but you do know that it's not just guessing or fakery.
I'd love for there to be more data than that, but there is no way to develop a vaccine with techniques that have a proven record without millions of people dying in the process. And tens of millions more suffering debilitating mental and physical illnesses, perhaps for the rest of their lives. These are the known effects of the disease.
As so often in life, you will have to make an important decision based on insufficient information. The best you can do in this case is to defer to people who have more information than you do. If the large consensus of the immunology community is that it's reasonably safe, that should carry considerably more weight than premature class-action lawsuits. You're right to be uneasy, but it would shift the balance to a belief that it's a risk worth taking over the known dangers of a disease.
Finally, since it's a worldwide test, it's less likely that it could be covered up or promulgated for local political ends. (Regardless of how you feel about the outcome of the US election, it is at least over.)
Fortunately, and grimly, the odds are the vaccine will have many months more of testing before it gets to you. It will be in very widespread use and side effects will almost certainly make themselves known.