Re:Some states push to ban “discrimination” against unvaccin...
by Nursie on Wednesday July 14, 2021 @06:40AM
(#27831579)
They've been given emergency approval, sure.
> You have to realize that they did not have their own "bunch" of trials.
Yes, they did. Sorry but this is where you veer into outright misinformation. There have been trials ongoing for a while. The specific two mrna vaccines you are concerned about have had trials, with phase 1/2 reporting last summer and phase 3 interim reporting starting late last year. Your own link above puts these at the end of the process, and your other link says development can take years, not that it must or always does.
Are all trials complete? No, they aren't. But to state they haven't had trials is incorrect.
So in summary -
The tech has been studied for 30 years.
Human vaccine trials using it started 10 years ago.
Trials have taken place and have reported, though phase 3 is ongoing and will continue to report (this is not the same as it not happening, there has already been useful clinical data).
We now also have several months of data from worldwide rollout, with multi-hundred-million doses administered, all of which is continuing to make these things look incredibly safe.
That's not enough for you? Do you need some sort of an absolute guarantee of safety handed down by god himself, amidst a raging pandemic?
There's no reason to think that there should be long term health consequences to these. We have lots of data saying short/mid term consequences are rare and mostly very mild, we have a fair body of data going back ten years which leads us to expect that mRNA vaccines are not long term dangerous as a category (or they would not be given their emergency authorisation)... at this point I think the judgement needs to be that any long term consequences that might appear are far less likely to be a problem than covid itself, yes, even for those age groups affected by pericarditis/myocarditis.
> You have to realize that they did not have their own "bunch" of trials.
Yes, they did. Sorry but this is where you veer into outright misinformation. There have been trials ongoing for a while. The specific two mrna vaccines you are concerned about have had trials, with phase 1/2 reporting last summer and phase 3 interim reporting starting late last year. Your own link above puts these at the end of the process, and your other link says development can take years, not that it must or always does.
Are all trials complete? No, they aren't. But to state they haven't had trials is incorrect.
So in summary -
The tech has been studied for 30 years.
Human vaccine trials using it started 10 years ago.
Trials have taken place and have reported, though phase 3 is ongoing and will continue to report (this is not the same as it not happening, there has already been useful clinical data).
We now also have several months of data from worldwide rollout, with multi-hundred-million doses administered, all of which is continuing to make these things look incredibly safe.
That's not enough for you? Do you need some sort of an absolute guarantee of safety handed down by god himself, amidst a raging pandemic?
There's no reason to think that there should be long term health consequences to these. We have lots of data saying short/mid term consequences are rare and mostly very mild, we have a fair body of data going back ten years which leads us to expect that mRNA vaccines are not long term dangerous as a category (or they would not be given their emergency authorisation)... at this point I think the judgement needs to be that any long term consequences that might appear are far less likely to be a problem than covid itself, yes, even for those age groups affected by pericarditis/myocarditis.