Covid-19 vaccines: excitement or fear?

In summary: I heard from a reliable friend of mine. But I will be glad if it's not mandatory.I heard from a reliable friend of mine. But I will be glad if it's not mandatory.
  • #1
When I heard or read the news that giving vaccines will be mandatory, I have a feeling of getting paranoid about it and can’t control myself not to worry about it. Are you guys feel the same way around?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Why should we? Every member of PF was mandatorily vaccinated against many common diseases and we are all happy, healthy and kicking.

Actually if not for those mandatory vaccines number of happy PF users would be substantially lower.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes Lisa!, pinball1970, StatGuy2000 and 9 others
  • #3
waternohitter said:
When I heard or read the news that giving vaccines will be mandatory...
Where did you hear that? I've actually heard it won't be mandatory for most people, which disappoints me.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.usatoday.com/amp/3797885001
 
  • Like
Likes pinball1970, Motore, hutchphd and 1 other person
  • #4
By the times us common folk will have a chance to get it I think it'll be considerably safer than taking a bath.

Likely I'll have a somewhat elevated heart rate while getting it, but nonetheless. Can't wait to finish worrying.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters, hutchphd and berkeman
  • #5
I like mandatory. Hard to be mandatory without also being free.
 
  • Like
Likes StatGuy2000, bhobba, Mondayman and 1 other person
  • #6
waternohitter said:
When I heard or read the news that giving vaccines will be mandatory, I have a feeling of getting paranoid about it and can’t control myself not to worry about it. Are you guys feel the same way around?
No. The Phase-3 results are irrefutably hard-empirical-data. I recall a documentary I once watched about polio: The doctor, grimacing, looking up from the little girl and telling the parents . . . "infantile paralysis".
 
  • #7
aheight said:
The Phase-3 results are irrefutably hard-empirical-data.

Yes, but.

A trial of 30,000-40,000 people can detect problems at the 10-4 level. Twice as many people in the trial, and you are a factor of 2 more sensitive. So zero bad reactions in a trial of this size means fewer than 30000 to 35000 bad reactions in the US as a whole if everybody is vaccinated. That's less than 10% of the current Covid integrated fatalities.

Odds not good enough? Nothing says one needs to claw one's way to the head of the line. If a million people go first, and they do not show any bad reactions, your sensitivity is about 3 x 10-6 level, or about 1000 bad reactions. This is less likely than going to the ER because of a pogo-stick injury.

Still not good enough? Let ten million people - still only 3% of the population - go ahead of you. Now the sensitivity is 3 x 10-7, and we can be sure there will be fewer than 100 bad reactions. This is less likely than being struck by lightning.

Still not good enough? Let 100 million people go ahead of you - you're still in the front half of the line. Now the sensitivity is 3 x 10-8, and we can be sure there will be fewer than 10 bad reactions. This is less likely than becoming President.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Love
Likes hutchphd, bhobba, Algr and 3 others
  • #8
russ_watters said:
Where did you hear that? I've actually heard it won't be mandatory for most people, which disappoints me.
I heard from a reliable friend of mine. But I will be glad if it's not mandatory.
 
  • #11
Some people I know were throwing around the fact that 4 people out of 43,000 developed Bells Palsy shortly after taking the vaccine as reason to not take the vaccine. Sometimes I hate Alberta..
 
  • #12
Mondayman said:
Some people I know were throwing around the fact that 4 people out of 43,000 developed Bells Palsy shortly after taking the vaccine as reason to not take the vaccine. Sometimes I hate Alberta..
You haven't read the details of that, have you? Maybe you should. You should not rely on "some people said"...

https://www.businessinsider.com/what-we-know-link-between-bells-palsy-covid-19-vaccines-2020-12

The rate of Bell's Palsy in the group was not much different from the rate in the general population, and one person who received the placebo also developed Bell's Palsy. Maybe we should outlaw placebo injections?

The FDA has said that it can't rule out with absolute certainty that Pfizer and Moderna's vaccine did not have an impact on these seven cases, and the agency will continue to investigate the issue. But based on the evidence we have, there's no reason to think the vaccine caused the facial paralysis, according to Dr. Nate Jowett, director of the surgical photonics & engineering laboratory at Mass Eye & Ear, and an associate professor of otolaryngology at Harvard Medical School.
 
  • #13
I think you misread the post @berkeman -- he's not questioning the safety, he's mad that some people he knows are.
 
  • Like
Likes Mondayman
  • #14
russ_watters said:
he's not questioning the safety, he's mad that some people he knows are.
Oh, oops. Apologies, @Mondayman and thanks Russ.
 
  • Like
Likes Mondayman
  • #15
Mondayman said:
Some people I know were throwing around the fact that 4 people out of 43,000 developed Bells Palsy shortly after taking the vaccine as reason to not take the vaccine. Sometimes I hate Alberta..
Nothing to do with Alberta. Normal people just talk like that to flush out their own apprehensions and misgivings in all sorts of situations.
It's the ones given air time on radio and TV that should be turned off

Plus there is a lot of reasons to not get vaccinated
- don't like needles.
- I have to get up and go somewhere for the shot, simply inconvenient, and twice too!
- allergies
- etc

Good reasons to get the vaccine is that of the 43000 who took the vaccine, they won't
- be part of the 400 to 800 case fatality if they would acquire the disease.
- they won't be held up sickly, or in a hospital bed with more severe symptoms.

It's counter information that can convince those sitting on the fence.
I think most of the populations have already expressed that they would be willing and able to receive a shot, so it's not as dire as one would think listening to talk around the cooler.
Mandatory is probably not necessary generally speaking.
 
  • #17
You are all missing the difficult sell. It is easy to argue the logic of short-term testing and safety. But we have zero data on long-term effects. It can only be argued that there is no known biological reason why there should be long-term effects.

That is an abstraction and not hard data. Therefore it is much harder to sell. And that is what worries most people.
 
  • Like
Likes Jarvis323
  • #18
It is also the very first vaccine of it's kind. So it seems that we are in uncharted waters.
 
  • #19
Is that spike protein or one like it found anywhere else in humans? Could there be some biological function that might depend on a similar spike protein that is important to our biology, that could be affected by this vaccine?

Not something I've worried about but certainly easy enough to imagine and wonder about.
 
  • #20
Ivan Seeking said:
You are all missing the difficult sell. It is easy to argue the logic of short-term testing and safety. But we have zero data on long-term effects. It can only be argued that there is no known biological reason why there should be long-term effects.

That is an abstraction and not hard data. Therefore it is much harder to sell. And that is what worries most people.

While that is true, you also have to consider the other side of the risk-benefit equation. We also don't know much about the long term consequences of COVID-19 (though there is increasing literature documenting "long COVID" patients with symptoms persisting for months). Uncertainty about long term effects poses risks on both sides of the risk benefit equation.

Ivan Seeking said:
Is that spike protein or one like it found anywhere else in humans? Could there be some biological function that might depend on a similar spike protein that is important to our biology, that could be affected by this vaccine?

Not something I've worried about but certainly easy enough to imagine and wonder about.

No. The Spike protein is found only in the SARS-CoV-2 virus and is not encoded in the human genome. In fact, if you search for proteins with similar sequences to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein in the human genome, you find no human proteins with significant similarity.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes Motore, hutchphd, russ_watters and 2 others
  • #21
Saw a meme the other day:

Less than 1% chance of death from Coronavirus: "We will not live in fear!"
Less than 1% chance of side-effects from vaccine: "We fear it."

waternohitter said:
When I heard or read the news that giving vaccines will be mandatory..
Well getting the Coronavirus is mandatory (in that you don't have a choice), but that doesn't seem to bother these people...
 
  • #22
Ivan Seeking said:
Is that spike protein or one like it found anywhere else in humans? Could there be some biological function that might depend on a similar spike protein that is important to our biology, that could be affected by this vaccine?

Not something I've worried about but certainly easy enough to imagine and wonder about.

If this is true, you are equally screwed if you get Coronavirus and your body develops antibodies, right?
 
  • Like
Likes hmmm27
  • #23
This thing is really stressful and to cope up this feeling I spend time reading articles and I found this one, https://www.who.int/publications/i/...6icr6c2uUAKmWSvEGNWngzzAq-rH__zRoCHRsQAvD_BwE

1608732745474.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #24
Ivan Seeking said:
And that is what worries most people.
It's a risk my elderly relatives are willing to take. We've lost one of them already, so it's very serious for my family. COVID's immediate danger seems greater than the vaccine's potential long-term negative side effects.

You can die within weeks of contracting COVID.
 
  • #25
kyphysics said:
It's a risk my elderly relatives are willing to take. We've lost one of them already, so it's very serious for my family. COVID's immediate danger seems greater than the vaccine's potential long-term negative side effects.

You can die within weeks of contracting COVID.
Yup, I agree with you. I am more worried about the vaccine than the virus.
 
  • #26
kyphysics said:
...COVID's immediate danger seems greater than the vaccine's potential long-term negative side effects.

This part always buggin' me. Why do people think that Covid can't have: won't have long term effects?
 
  • #27
Rive said:
This part always buggin' me. Why do people think that Covid can't have: won't have long term effects?
It can. The difference is the long term effects decrease over time whereas it is speculated that long term effects of a vaccine may manifest/increase over time.
 
  • #28
russ_watters said:
The difference is the long term effects decrease over time whereas it is speculated that long term effects of a vaccine may manifest/increase over time.

Is there a source for these claims?
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba and symbolipoint
  • #29
A source that people are speculating?
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters
  • #30
Ygggdrasil said:
Is there a source for these claims?
As far as I know, there isn't (edit: it's logically impossible to prove/disprove); they are primarily just vague fears. Please note: they aren't my claims/I'm not making any claims here; they are an explanation of the fears being expressed by others in the thread.
 
  • #31
Vanadium 50 said:
A source that people are speculating?

Is there a reason why people would expect adverse "effects of a vaccine may manifest/increase over time." Certainly we don't have long term data on vaccine safety that goes beyond ~2 months, so we can't say that there are no adverse effects that would manifest over a longer time period. However, this is different than making the claim that we would expect a vaccine that shows good short term safety to have adverse effects that would manifest over a longer time scale. For example, from our experience with many other vaccines, adverse events from vaccines tend to manifest fairly soon after vaccination and are temporary. While the mRNA vaccines are different from other vaccines, there is no reason to think that the technology would be more likely to cause longer-term effects as the mRNAs are quickly degraded in the body.
 
  • Like
Likes bhobba and Motore
  • #32
russ_watters said:
The difference is the long term effects decrease over time...
With that possible damage made to vein walls, I would expect side effects becoming considerably worse over time.

Anyway. The point is, I can't understand why there are such expectations glued to the 'dead' vaccine while seemingly no such fears for the 'wild' virus itself. Beats me.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Ygggdrasil
  • #33
Ygggdrasil said:
[reverse ordered]
However, this is different than making the claim that we would expect a vaccine that shows good short term safety to have adverse effects that would manifest over a longer time scale.
Nobody has made such a claim, that I've seen.
Is there a reason why people would expect adverse "effects of a vaccine may manifest/increase over time." Certainly we don't have long term data on vaccine safety that goes beyond ~2 months, so we can't say that there are no adverse effects that would manifest over a longer time period.
The lack of long-term data is exactly the "problem" for people who have a fear of the unknown. For all we know, everyone who gets the vaccine could drop dead a year after getting it. We have no data to say one way or another whether that is possible, and people fill-up the information gap with wild speculation and fear. Is it even remotely likely? No, but good luck trying to prove it to someone with fear/trust issues.

[edit] I used to have the same argument with people who were afraid of/against genetically modified crops. The question is: how much long-term data is necessary to prove there are no adverse long-term effects? The answer is always: "more".
 
  • #34
Let's put this convo a rest and celebrate the new year with our family. How are you guys doing right now?
 
  • #35
Rive said:
Why do people think that Covid can't have: won't have long term effects?
Long, bad Covid

And this is just part of the thing. I suppose there will be more coming with long term effect of (parially recovered) blood vessel damages.

Vaccine vs. Covid 'live' - hard to expect worse from a vaccine, yet fear from 'long term vaccine' is driving the refusal, while 'long Covid' is kind of taken as no concern.

Homo Sapiens Weirdos
 

Suggested for: Covid-19 vaccines: excitement or fear?

Replies
10
Views
943
Replies
2
Views
842
Replies
5
Views
944
Replies
1
Views
790
Replies
18
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
596
Replies
1
Views
858
Replies
3
Views
873
Replies
37
Views
3K
Back
Top