Will the new vaccines be safe?

[Covidfears]

I’ve read a lot about the vaccines (mainly Oxford and Pfizer ones) and know that they have gone through all of the safety tests albeit in just a shorter amount of time as they have had money thrown at it so haven’t had to secure funding etc etc which takes the time.

However, does this mean that they haven’t had the chance to see if there are any long term effects?

I think I feel less worried about the Oxford one as that is based on old technology but the Pfizer one is the new r-DNA one. I’ve read a paper on it that says that the chance of it ‘getting into your dna’ is low. That doesn’t sound great! Am I worrying unnecessarily.

I’m certainly not an antivaxxer - the whole family had had everything going and I really need to the Covid vaccine as I’m very high risk (2% chance of death).

Is it just a matter of picking whether to take the risk of Covid or the risk of the vaccine when the long term effects of neither are known?

I am concerned about the speed

I’d be happier with the oxford one

To be frank though, my son can’t have immunisations due to neutropenia so if one of us not having it stops us being able to go abroad then there’s no point in any of me and my family getting it as I won’t be going without him.

Ironically the medication that injured me isn't even on the list. It was out of licence and is largely produced as a generic now so no-one can be sued for adverse effects

Ah, but look on the bright side - by that time the original manufacturers would have made the lion's share of their money out of it

You're wise not to single out any one company though, not least because so many have been convicted of illegality of various kinds. In a roundabout way this was once my field - which is where a lot of the caution comes from

Not really interested in talking to antivaxxers, aggressively or otherwise. I think a lot of people who don’t like the sound of the vaccine aren’t antivaxxers, though, they’re people who are dubious because they’ve heard so much about how it’s been “rushed through” and people muttering about long-term side effects.

I also wouldn’t trust Pfizer or any similar big company to act entirely out of the goodness of their hearts, but I DO trust them to not rank their company’s reputation forever by being known as “those people who said they had a Covid vaccine but then the regulators wouldn’t pass it because of safety issues,” so I’m fairly comfortable with whatever they develop on this one.

Yes I would agree the MHRA is about as good as it gets. I do actually trust scientists not to provide a vaccine knowing it does harm.

But that’s far away from understanding any long term implications from a newly developed type of vaccine. It’s not enough to say “we know vaccines don’t affect long term”. We don’t really know that at all - we just say it. There are many parents alleging long term harm to their daughters from the HPV vaccine and worryingly, as the reactions happened more than a day or two after, they are being dismissed as coincidental. This is what troubles me. I don’t think the system for recording side effects is robust enough. I don’t see any vaccine or medication is risk free. The chances to me personally from covid are very low - so why would I take the vaccine? After 6 months I can see the results and if there is a similar bunch of people being told their symptoms aren’t related to the vaccine yet they started soon after, I will avoid.

I keep coming back to the fact that childhood cancers, allergies and autoimmunity are increasing and we don’t really know why. It’s impossible now to do a proper RCT on an entirely unvaccinated group of children. But after one of my children developed eczema soon after one of her baby vaccinations, I have questioned what happens to the immune system. We know, for example, the SARS vaccine triggered narcoplexy in a small number of people. Some people don’t worry about small risks like that. I am someone who does and likes to see the numbers and studies for myself.

I don’t think the system for recording side effects is robust enough.

This is definitely the case. There is the Yellow Card system, for reporting adverse reactions, which your gp or prescribing doctor is meant to fill in, and you can fill it in yourself. Adverse events wind up being massively under-reported. Doctors seem weirdly reluctant to believe that the medication is responsible for the reaction unless it's very well-established, so they don't report, so it doesn't get fed back and the adverse reactions remain described as "very rare" which many doctors seem to think is synonymous with "never happens".

Again, I am not talking down the vaccine. It's clearly offering great hope especially for those who are genuinely at grave risk of having a severe or even fatal version of covid. But I really dislike the shouting down of anyone expressing concerns, because realistically for something that is going to be rolled out that widely, there are going to be some adverse events, and in consequence everyone deserves the right to weigh up the risk to benefit ratio for them personally, without people gloating at them being potentially excluded from work, travel or society, and without telling them to suck it up or accusing them of being stupid or anti-vaxx.

@RoSEbuds6
Trust the scientists?
What kind of cock eyed thinking is that then?
I suppose thalidomide never happened.

Article from FT

Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email [email protected] to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at <a class="break-all" href="https://www.ft.com/tour" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.ft.com/tour</a>.
<a class="break-all" href="https://www.ft.com/content/17a306cd-be75-48b4-996e-0c2916b34797?fbclid=IwAR2k5_Q8Ltv-jUiKdI4T61rcwyDeg544Xq_I3ObRlCCYaLAuCfHNELh13jw" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">www.ft.com/content/17a306cd-be75-48b4-996e-0c2916b34797?fbclid=IwAR2k5_Q8Ltv-jUiKdI4T61rcwyDeg544Xq_I3ObRlCCYaLAuCfHNELh13jw</a>

The UK drugs regulator is planning to use artificial intelligence to sift through the “high volume” of reports of adverse reactions to Covid-19 vaccines in the coming months, as it prepares for an inoculation programme of groundbreaking scale.

A government contract shows the Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Authority has paid a software company called Genpact UK £1.5m to develop an AI tool to “process the expected high volume of Covid-19 vaccine adverse drug reaction (ADRs) and ensure that no details . . . are missed”.

The need for a powerful tool to sort through what are forecast to be a huge numbers of adverse reactions, speaks to the scale of the vaccination programme in the months ahead.

The types of vaccine being developed by many of the pharmaceutical companies are also relatively new, such as the MRNA and chimpanzee adenovirus vectors, making it hard to predict how they will interact with millions of people’s immune systems when they leave clinical trials.

“You’re talking about vaccines that have potential liabilities, it’s an unknown unknown,” said Gary Nabel, chief scientific officer at pharmaceutical company Sanofi, which is currently working on two Covid-19 vaccine candidates. “As big as a 30,000-person trial is, when these go out into the world of millions of people, things will happen.”

Mr Nabel recalled the famous vaccine developer Maurice Hilleman telling him, “every time I launch a new vaccine, I hold my breath for the first 30m doses”.

The MHRA told the Financial Times that, based on previous vaccination campaigns, there would be between 50,000 and 100,000 reports of suspected side effects for every 100m doses over a 6-12 month period.

However, it added that all vaccines, including for Covid-19, underwent rigorous testing and that most reactions would be mild and short term.

The AI tool will be employed as part of the MHRA’s yellow card scheme for coronavirus, through which patients and healthcare professionals report suspected side effects and negative reactions. These are then evaluated to identify where updated advice or regulatory interventions are needed to protect the public.

The contract terms stated, “it is not possible to retrofit the MHRA’s legacy systems to handle the volume of ADRs that will be generated by a Covid-19 vaccine”. It added that the absence of an AI tool would “hinder its ability to rapidly identify any potential safety issues . . . and represents a direct threat to patient life and public health”.

The MHRA said that the scale of the Covid-19 vaccination campaign would be much larger than any adult programme seen in the past.

Recommended

AnalysisCoronavirus pandemic
Europe grapples with what went wrong in Covid-19 resurgence

It added that the reporting of side effects and adverse reactions could be influenced by “media attention, public concern and anti-vaccine social media activity and lobbying.” This would be “highly prevalent in relation to a Covid-19 vaccination campaign”.

“It is important to note that a report of a suspected ADR is not proof of a side effect occurring due to the vaccine but a suspicion by the reporter that the vaccine may have caused the side effect,” it added.

Mr Nabel and other experts thought that the move by the MHRA was a positive sign of proactivity by the UK’s regulator.

“I’m happy to hear there’s such a programme and AI is a great way to do it,” he said. “Why not use our most advanced technologies to get at these important questions.”

Kate Bingham, chair of the UK’s vaccine task force, said the use of AI was “just what the MHRA should be doing”, adding that the UK is “incredibly well set up to do this given we all have NHS records which are electronic and connected”.

In the US, where the health system is more fragmented, experts are not aware of there being a similar initiative.

Latest coronavirus news

The UK regulatory system (and those of many other countries) came about because of the Thalidomide tragedy. It is designed to minimise the chances of something like that ever happening again.

The yellow card system is far from perfect but it does pick up rare side effects in the post- marketing period and medicinal products have been withdrawn from the market as a result in some cases.

Of course I don't think anyone is an idiot for having the vaccine any more than I would think they're an idiot for taking any other medication.

I hope you didn't think my comment was directed at you @MaxNormal, I really don't blame you for having your doubts and I'm sorry you've had such a bad experience.

Doctors seem weirdly reluctant to believe that the medication is responsible for the reaction unless it's very well-established, so they don't report, so it doesn't get fed back and the adverse reactions remain described as "very rare" which many doctors seem to think is synonymous with "never happens".

I had a bad reaction to metronidazole. I had it intravenously in hospital and it affected my eyesight. I'm short sighted but it switched to long sightedness. I was terrified as no one would believe me and kept telling me it couldn't happen and it was because I was upset! The only person who has believed me to this day (apart from DH) was my lovely former GP as, although it's extremely rare she had heard of it before. I now tell doctors and dentists I'm allergic to it as it's the only way anyone will listen.

"the reporting of side effects and adverse reactions could be influenced by “media attention, public concern and anti-vaccine social media activity and lobbying.” This would be “highly prevalent in relation to a Covid-19 vaccination campaign”"

FWIW I completely accept this. Considering the effect SM's had on this whole mess, it won't be long until someone's aged and very ill loved one dies after the vaccine and the headlines start about "the jab killed my granny"

As said, what's needed is caution and a realistic, genuinely independent assessments instead of hyperbole, and there isn't enough of either for my taste

@PinkSparklyPussyCat yikes! It's incredible the sheer weirdness of what can sometimes go wrong, and how differently everyone reacts to things, isn't it? Is your eyesight reasonably okay now?

Mine was also an antibiotic - a fluoquinolone - and my original GP surgery were awful, total dismissal and quite hostile. I'd not long moved and they didn't know me from Adam so I guess had no before reference to realise that I was really not okay. Luckily I have a very good consultant now who totally has my back, and a different gp surgery, although I mostly try and avoid medical treatment in any way, shape or form these days

Oh no I didn't think you were directing any comments at me.

Dowser, that’s really interesting; thanks for posting that. They will need a system like that to make sense of the volume of data that will come in, IMO.

To the poster who read something about the mRNA getting into our DNA: where did you read that? I don’t understand how it could, so I’d like to see the source.

To the poster who read something about the mRNA getting into our DNA: where did you read that? I don’t understand how it could, so I’d like to see the source.

I think it was the OP, @Covidfears

@MaxNormal it went back to normal fairly quickly thankfully but it was scary when it happened. I can remember trying to tell the time but not being able to read my watch and you know how stupid things go through your mind? I suddenly thought ‘shit, I need new glasses and I’m broke!’

I need a lot of work done on a couple of teeth and I know metronidazole is used for dental infections so I’ve made it clear to the dentist I won’t be taking it under any circumstances!

I’m glad you’ve got a good consultant now and I don’t blame you for avoiding medical treatment, I’m the same!

trulydelicious you’re right, it was the OP, thanks!

my son can’t have immunisations due to neutropenia so if one of us not having it stops us being able to go abroad then there’s no point in any of me and my family getting it as I won’t be going without him.

So there’s no point in having it because you wouldn’t be going abroad. Would there be any point in having it so that you didn’t pass the infection on to your child? Some people have a weird value system.

And for the eleventy billionth time, the vaccine is not currently licensed for children so they won’t be getting it for the foreseeable future.

Mrs fezzlwig - they’ve said this vaccine doesn’t stop people catching it and passing infection on

This is not a traditional vaccine in that sense

It just makes the infection quicker and not as bad

@Onedropbeat

Mrs fezzlwig - they’ve said this vaccine doesn’t stop people catching it and passing infection on

This is not a traditional vaccine in that sense

It just makes the infection quicker and not as bad

Do you have a source for that please? I thought they had said they weren’t sure yet rather than it definitely being the case.

After the swine flu vaccine causing narcolepsy in some children I won’t be rushing to get it for my family.

However I understand why other adults want to have it immediately. Our family risk is very low so have the luxury of waiting and watching.

@MrsFezziwig

my son can’t have immunisations due to neutropenia so if one of us not having it stops us being able to go abroad then there’s no point in any of me and my family getting it as I won’t be going without him.

So there’s no point in having it because you wouldn’t be going abroad. Would there be any point in having it so that you didn’t pass the infection on to your child? Some people have a weird value system.

And for the eleventy billionth time, the vaccine is not currently licensed for children so they won’t be getting it for the foreseeable future.

They have plans to start testing on 12 year d children. Quick google will tell you.

@LauraBassi

After the swine flu vaccine causing narcolepsy in some children I won’t be rushing to get it for my family.

However I understand why other adults want to have it immediately. Our family risk is very low so have the luxury of waiting and watching.

There isn't lots of evidence for this and the occurrence was very small.

Do you use cars? You're far more likely to suffer life changing injuries by doing that than having a vaccine. You're being irrational.

SuperbGorgonzola, you could look at it a different way though. Consider the risk/benefit analysis. The pp might consider the benefit of using a car far outweighs the risk. Whereas the risk to most children of catching this Coronavirus is vanishingly small. So she might make a decision to risk not getting vaccinated bearing in mind the lack of testing in children etc.

Not saying I would make the same decision, but it’s always a balance of risks.

Probably an academic discussion since children are unlikely to be offered this vaccine until it’s been used in a lot more people, and if they didn’t include children in the trial they won’t get a licence for use in children anyway so vaccines for under-18s are some way off.

I notice the OP hasn’t been back with a link to the information about mRNA being assimilated into DNA @Covidfears.

A friend told me she wasn’t getting it because it changed your DNA

I just ignored it and assumed she’d got mixed up with something somewhere but there’s obviously some very misleading information being shared out there for people to believe this

@Lurkalot I just cannot bear the idea that these people will be happy enough to benefit from others having the vaccine, but are not willing to do it themselves. There's an air of hoping to be proved right about it that I find distasteful.

I may have no concerns about vaccinations, but others who are hesitant will read around, reassure themselves and ultimately do the right thing. I respect that. I do not respect conspiracy theorists and "I'm alright, Jack" attitudes.