There are vaccines and there are vaccines

https://www.science.org/content/blog-post/there-are-vaccines-and-there-are-vaccines

by herodotus • 3 years ago

16 33 3 years ago

COGlory• 3 years ago

5 paragraphs that basically say "some vaccines work better than others" with no analysis, no data presented, not even a heuristic. Somewhat pointless article.

monkeynotes6• 3 years ago

Seems in keeping with most of the vaccine policy for COVID. Don't need solid data, just say "it stops the virus spreading, trust science" then roll that back laster.

Science these days has become more political than fact based. Any questioning is stopped at the source and from scientist, medical doctor, or pundits get socially shunned.

We truly are living in Orwellian times. Journalists more or less don't bother asking big questions, too afraid to challenge the hot pick that comes down from politicians who are so openly bought by lobbyists it's quite frankly scary.

All we get in the news is political finger pointing, it's all treated like entertainment. The best I can come up with as an analogy is pro wrestling. Which isn't actual wrestling, doesn't even look like real wrestling, it's all theatre but the crowds all behave as if it's real, even though they know it's not.

America has lead here, and it seems so attractive to other leaders that the rest of the world is following suit.

Edit: Downvotes without a counter essentially harden my opinion of social shunning over evidence based science. We just can't have these discussions in the open without "you are a conspiracy theorist" and such.

bryanlarsen2• 3 years ago

COVID vaccines do a fabulous job of stopping vaccine spread for the 3 months after a booster.

mizzack• 3 years ago

The term for that is kayfabe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kayfabe

CodeWriter23• 3 years ago

It’s an opinion piece. Those wanting something to reinforce their belief system will find value in it. And those wanting data-driven answers to questions won’t.

monkeynotes6• 3 years ago

COVID specifically has very little data, we are literally building data as we go. That was not the narrative I received during the pandemic.

linuxftw6• 3 years ago

There's no new information here. There is, however, some misinformation. The author makes the claim that the 'vaccines' don't stop infection and transmission due to mutations in the virus population.

In fact, in the case of Pfizer, they never even tested the product to prevent transmission. Naturally, they didn't admit this at first, which allowed public officials to make unfounded claims that legitimized their coercive polices.

willcipriano4• 3 years ago

I suspect once the dust settles we will learn that the vaccine net increased transmission. Without the vaccine patients suffer a more serious illness and are more likely to stay home and self isolate, if the illness is less serious that is less likely.

aintgonnatakeit• 3 years ago

Perhaps you are forgetting that the original COVID-19 strain did not present symptoms before it became infectious. Or perhaps you don’t care as it doesn’t reflect your intention.

linuxftw6• 3 years ago

Actually, if you look at the data Pfizer give to the FDA (the stuff that was initially released), there were more 'suspected by not confirmed' cases of COVID-19 in the control group than the test group.

Pfizer did not actively test each participant. It only selectively tested some patients and not others, based on symptoms. They provided no explanation of 'suspected but unconfirmed' cases. If they suspected them, perhaps they should have tested them, but they didn't.

gwbas1c6• 3 years ago

I doubt it. People were going stir crazy, and it was really, really hard to keep people home or masked in public.

Most likely people would have decided they were going to live their lives, and then we'd see a lot more elderly people pass from it.

I remember some lady barging through my door the day after Halloween, without a mask, because she had to give my kids treats.

monkeynotes6• 3 years ago

If you ask me it's massively irresponsible for your top medical advisor to say something as factual if it's not backed up by evidence. You cannot ask the public to trust science when the truth is there is no science, but your medical advisory leaders speak as if it is science. No wonder so many people are skeptical.

https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/553773-fauci-...

disambiguation• 3 years ago

Not pfizer, but i'll always think back to this statement from moderna

Moderna's chief medical officer, Tal Zaks, said last month that he believed it was likely the vaccine would prevent transmission but warned that there was not yet "sufficient evidence" of it.

https://www.businessinsider.com/who-says-no-evidence-coronav...

debacle2• 3 years ago

(3) that vaccines are still not easy.

Have some qualms with this one. Not all viruses are created equal. Mostly as a hobby, I did a lot of reading during the pandemic into the 50 years of work that has gone into trying to create vaccines for this class of virus.

I don't believe we will ever develop a satisfactory vaccine for any coronavirus. I don't know the specific biological reasons for this, but the efficacy of vaccines for these viruses are always low and short lived.

monkeynotes6• 3 years ago

If a hobbiest can draw that conclusion why didn't the top medical folks of our governments not relay that information to the public at the start of all of this?

willcipriano4• 3 years ago

I wonder: https://katv.com/news/nation-world/nih-slow-walks-disclosure...

debacle2• 3 years ago

We were in the midst of a terrible pandemic. It was a monumental attempt (really, dozens of them globally), and I can't blame anyone for trying.

But we've been trying to vaccinate against these infrequent pandemics for a long time, and it hasn't worked.

colechristensen2• 3 years ago

Can we please get someone official to say out loud that for most people the risk from vaccines is very low but not zero, and also the risks from covid are very low but not zero unless you’re quite old or have issues?

You get labeled as a “death shot” person for trying to say this.

The promise of the vaccines has been oversold and walked back consistently. The risks, though small, have been diminished. All for “The greater good”, but this is how you get people to not believe you.

bryanlarsen2• 3 years ago

You're implying the risks are equal by using the same words for both. Each "very low" statement is true in isolation but together they're not.

colechristensen2• 3 years ago

It is indeed hard to compare and reason about very rare occurrences. It is not obvious to me that there isn’t a young age at which vaccine risk vs covid risk approaches 1:1.

I personally know someone who had serious vaccine related complications who never became a statistic as he was never able to get a definitive diagnosis.

gwbas1c6• 3 years ago

TLDR:

So it’s important to remember that (1) some of the coronavirus vaccines truly are more efficacious than others, (2) that the ones we have are only a small set of the ones that people attempted to develop, which means (3) that vaccines are still not easy. Infectious-disease vaccines have a better success rate in the clinic than most other areas of drug development, it’s true, but that just means that the chances improve from Godawful to Pretty Bad. We’re fortunate to have what we have, and that good fortune is the result of an awful lot of hard work.

Basically, vaccines are hard work and we still can't just "whip one up" at the drop of a hat.

There are vaccines and there are vaccines

Related Stories