> For what it's (not) worth, it prompted me to sign up today. :)
More for my understanding than anything else, and with every guarantee that I won't present any follow-up questions or statements, but why was this the tipping point and not the actual disease risk mitigation resulting from the vaccine?
Not me, but a coworker of mine is the only guy in my office who hasn't been vaccinated (rest of us got second dose at end of January) because of adverse reactions to past (milder) vaccinations. He correctly assesses that he's in a very low risk environment, but at some point he'll probably risk the vaccine to not have pariah status.
But for the last 3 months, there was nothing to make the tradeoff worthwhile to him.
Glad that he didn’t value not being a disease vector which could spread the virus to someone who may be at risk. Vaccines work when most of society get vaccinated, it only requires a small minority of egos to make a forgotten disease rear its ugly head again.
My guess: GP is young and healthy, so the chance of significant harm from COVID is nearly zero, and the vaccines for COVID have significantly worse side effects than pretty much any other vaccines given today. Thus, until today, it was a high-risk low-reward proposition.
Anecdotally, dozens of people in my social circle (aged 30-50) reported that the worst vaccine side effects were (1) a sore arm and (2) 24-48 hours of sleepy brain fog (even after the second dose). Among first and second degree connections on Facebook, I know of exactly two people who experienced the full gamut of flu-like symptoms, such as fever, chills, and whole-body aches for a day or two. Take this with a grain of salt, but I'd estimate an upper bound of 10% for "moderately unpleasant" side effects among young-ish, moderately healthy individuals.
Anecdotally, dozens of people in my social circle (aged 25-45 or so reported severe side effects, including at least three or four of sore arm, fever, chills, headaches, exhaustion, body aches, nausea, and brain fog. My girlfriend and I had five of them, for an entire day.
I'm not sure if your group's experience or mine is more typical. That's why comprehensive data is required to sort things out, and limited-number anecdotes are useless.
Basically none of which rises to the point of hospitalization and is gone in a few days.
The risk of hospitalization among even 18-29 year olds is not negligible. Neither is the risk of permanent side effects like diabetes. Those autoimmune conditions can and do strike even perfectly healthy individuals.
It is weird how the vaccine is probably 1000x safer than getting the virus, but young people in particular are happy with the idea that "that won't happen to me, I'm healthy and young" when it comes to the virus, while they're deeply concerned about vaccine side effects that really aren't concerning at all.
(And BTW "robust immune system" doesn't help you if your own immune system turns on you due to the virus).
You can't just weigh "The risk and severity of bad effects from COVID" with "the risks and severity of the bad effects from the vaccine". You also need to factor in that the probability of an unvaccinated person getting COVID isn't 100%.
About 10-30% of Americans got COVID-19 so far, depending on how you tally the numbers. Of those, approximately 8% can be expected to experience long-term effects that disrupt their daily lives:
https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/91270
>About 8% of all participants said at least one activity of daily living suffered long-term consequences, most commonly household chores.
That puts the net risk for non-vaccinated people at no less than 0.8%.
By contrast, the incidence of blood clots from the AstraZeneca vaccine, which caused its ouster, was about 0.001%. That's a factor of 800 in favor of vaccination with the worst of the vaccines.
And how do you measure the mid to long term risk of a novel mRNA technology which is effectively in trial now, under emergency approval, when vaccines typically take years of safety evaluations? Particularly considering that there are preprints out with a mechanism identified for reverse transcription of the spike producing mRNA, which could result in chronic inflammatory disease in some proportion of recipients, given that other preprints claim that the spike protein itself is a general inflammatory agent and may be responsible for clotting/vascular symptoms.
Note that reverse transcription of COVID RNA also is a convenient explanation for post symptomatic positive tests as well as long COVID symptoms.
I think it's irresponsible to downplay the risks associated with this novel technology, especially when people still have the option of continuing to socially isolate to some degree.
Vaccines either cause side effects in ~3 months or they don't. They could conceivably trigger long-term autoimmune conditions but they don't hide for years.
And we have a long track record of understanding this because viruses and vaccine cause the same kinds of autoimmune conditions. I had viral pericarditis once from a common cold that struck a month or two after I got over it. We've got hundreds of years of experience with it.
The issue with vaccines taking a long time to get approval is development time and efficacy data. Both of those were able to be done quickly due to the massive pandemic and due to the 10 years of preparatory work done on SARS-CoV-1 and mRNA vaccines.
And your interpretation of the reverse transcription article is just bullshit misinformation.
And you're still not escaping from being exposed to SARS-CoV-1 mRNA, it'll become endemic. You're getting it from the virus or the vaccine, there's not really going to be any skipping out.
(And if the LINE-1 results are correct this is how we pick up genetic material from all kinds of RNA viruses, our genome is littered with historical pandemics).
> The issue with vaccines taking a long time to get approval is development time and efficacy data. Both of those were able to be done quickly due to the massive pandemic and due to the 10 years of preparatory work done on SARS-CoV-1 and mRNA vaccines.
Not only that, but Operation Warp Speed (hate the name, but have to give it some credit) removed bureaucratic hurdles that allowed many of the normal steps to be done in parallel rather than serially. That doesn't mean that those steps were rushed or done in an unsafe manner.
>Particularly considering that there are preprints out with a mechanism identified for reverse transcription of the spike producing mRNA, which could result in chronic inflammatory disease in some proportion of recipients
This doesn't make sense because the mRNA-based spike protein, unlike the natural spike protein, is specifically tuned to annoy the immune system. Any cells incorporating the vaccine mRNA into their DNA will be summarily executed for the very same reason that the vaccine works as a vaccine in the first place: it's an antigen.
>I think it's irresponsible to downplay the risks associated with this novel technology
What's irresponsible is couch-quarterbacking the epidemiological community and the medical authorities of ~every developed country in the world, based on preprints, in the face of a pandemic that has claimed ~10M lives globally.
Newer variants are hitting young people harder. COVID is getting more dangerous to that group. Plus, as other posters have said, the vaccine is extremely safe.
Interesting, as someone who got vaccinated the first day it was available to all adults in Utah(3/24), I'm surprised that this news changed any ones mind. But either way I'm glad it did!.
The vaccine does carry the risk of side effects and adverse reactions. That risk, for most, is VERY small.
But if the person in question also has very low risk of contracting or spreading Covid (works from home, rarely goes out, young, healthy) and if being vaccinated doesn’t actually enable you to live any differently than you already are, then there’s no compelling reason to get vaccinated and assume the risk of side effects, no matter how small.
The logical decision here involves civic duty. I certainly fit into the low risk category, etc., but I also exist in society and am a willing participant, and as such have certain responsibilities to other people in my community.
As an American, I can tell you that most Americans aren't big on civic duty. And when we are, it's mostly limited to getting out to vote and not complaining too much when selected for jury duty.
American individualism also tends to downplay a person's responsibility to anyone outside their family, which some even restrict to their immediate nuclear family.
It's a shame, and I think it's one of our biggest failings as a culture. Ironically this is one of the few things where the American left and right are fairly on the same page, even if most won't admit it.
(I'm painting a pretty dire picture here, but it really isn't that bad. Communities exist everywhere, and people who care about others exist everywhere. It just seems like when the chips are down, people tend to turn inward rather than outward.)
It does... but again, if being vaccinated means that you still have to do all the other things that are done to limit the spread, then you are perceivably ALREADY doing your civic duty when you go out by masking up, distancing, and otherwise staying home.
Also, if vaccination doesn’t change the risk enough for you to drop some of the other precautions, that also lowers the perceived value of the efficacy of the vaccine as well.
vaccination is probably the most broadly effective, but there are many ways, big and small, to limit the risks of transmission, so don't fall for the fascist line of thinking that there is only one true way, especially when an understanding of the risks (airborne is highly unlikely) and effectiveness of the various mitigations (no, you never needed masks outside unless tightly packed for extended time) is so woefully lacking.
and civic duty is voting, educating yourself on policy issues, obeying reasonable laws, and tolerating and even celebrating differences of perspective and opinion. it's about participating effectively in our democratic republic. it doesn't encompass every possible responsibility to every other human, like the term 'moral duty' might.
I don’t understand this. Does the hypothetical low risk person hypothetically work from home and rarely go out.. forever? If no, when/what is the trigger that changes this behavior?
If going out means the hassle of wearing a mask, staying distanced, and all the other rules, then, yes.
Put another way, if going out feels like a big hassle, and getting vaccinated doesn’t remove enough of the rules to make going out NOT feel like a hassle, then there’s no reason to change one’s “going out” habits. And if there’s no incentive to change one’s “going out” habits, then there’s no reason to go through any process or procedure that only perceivably benefits you if you leave home.
I will be getting my vaccine soon myself.
But the world has changed. If I was isolated and nervous to “put myself out there” pre-pandemic, then I’m nearly agoraphobic now.
Nobody I work with wants to return to the office, nobody wants to return to having fun outings (at least not outside their own social circle).
There’s literally nothing for me to return to doing. I’ve built up a relatively solitary life with my dad in the last 12+ months, and everything outside of it is gone.
If you feel that you have so much to return to that the idea of rarely going out, forever, sounds unrealistic, then I would
consider yourself lucky.
I intend to get vaccinated just to be safe to anyone I might come in contact with, but to your point, even once I get vaccinated, I honestly see no trigger to change my behavior. I highly doubt I’m alone in this.
I would prefer to wear a mask at the grocery store, but not at work when physically on-site. I'm low risk, and don't really have any desire to go out and get vaccinated mostly because I'm lazy, don't like needles, antisocial, and generally anxious in public.
I don't really ever go out willingly, so I didn't really have an incentive to get vaccinated. Now I can get vaccinated and not wear a mask at work when it's 100+F in a few months.
Now that it's socially acceptable to wear a mask when in businesses and isn't a fashion trend, I will continue to do it since it should impede facial recognition. Except if it's a bit hot, I now can choose not to :)
I think this will be a great incentive to drive vaccination rates.
I'm really glad that you're going to get vaccinated!
But the thing that really bothers me about your previous rationale is that it doesn't take anyone else into account. What about people who would like to get vaccinated, but can't because they're deathly allergic to components of the vaccine (or some other medical reason)? What about people who would like to get vaccinated but can't afford to take time off work for the shot, or to rest during possible side effects?
You getting vaccinated protects those people too, when you walk past them in that grocery store. They deserve to be out and about without fear of infection just as much as you or I do.
Totally, at the store there's definitely other people to take into account as well as at work. I don't think about other people much in my daily life, so it's easy for me to fall into that (false) mentality of being unlikely to have any meaningful impact by not getting vaccinated.
If you were in a very low risk group, I can see delaying taking the vaccine to avoid blocking a higher risk person. Absent that I truly don't understand declining any of the vaccines for COVID. The risk of serious side effects is negligible. Meanwhile, every day you are alive you move into a higher risk group both for COVID and for longer recovery of mild side effects. So why wait?
I waited a couple weeks after it was open to everyone here. I waited because the only available vaccines were multiple hours away. I wasn’t going to make that trip twice (and potentially find out they screwed up their count or ruined doses or something) when I could wait a couple weeks and get one in my own town. Doubly so since I have less contact with strangers than most.
I was in a similar boat, but I went ahead and drove the couple hours out for the first shot...and then as supply opened up closer to me, scheduled my second 5 miles away. Totally understand the motivation to wait though; my wife got in due to some health stuff, and so there was more pressure for me to just hurry up and get it.
That makes sense. I too waited some extra time for supply to be available in my own area, rather than traveling and taking from others' allocations.
But I'm surprised that the "you can go maskless if you get the vaccine" is a deciding factor for anyone. Wearing a dust mask is so trivial compared to all the other changes and efforts I've made this year.
