Thread to ask stupid questions about the vaccine

[FiftyWaysToWinInDenver]

I know several high-risk people who are very concerned about the vaccine so can I ask anyone to point me in the direction of reliable sources about how safe it is etc. I just want to give proper info, not necessarily force them to change their mind btw.

They ask things like how is it safe when it’s taken far less time than usual? Also can someone explain the chimpanzee aspect as I’ve read that’s a normal thing for vaccines but I’m not a scientist so I can’t explain it well!

If you have your own stupid question feel free to ask!

@confuseddotcom090

But there's not NO reason to think it won't impact fertility. I mean there is no evidence to suggest it does (and how could it? It's way too soon to tell). But there are theoretical reasons as to why it might and why they cannot rule it out and say this.

The vaccinations are expected to produce antibodies against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. However, spike proteins also contain syncytin-homologous proteins, which are essential for the formation of the placenta in mammals such as humans. A vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 could trigger an immune reaction against syncytin-1, as otherwise infertility of indefinite duration could result in vaccinated women.

Equally infection with sars-cov-2 could trigger an immune response against syncytin-1 and infertility so if this were to be an issue it wouldn’t necessarily be restricted to vaccinated women.

There are also studies showing sars-cov-2 can impact on sperm production in men.

I have read that people in the vaccine trials so I expect that the drug companies are compiling information on fertility all the time so hopefully will be able to report back on fertility as time goes on/more people are vaccinated.

Sorry that was supposed to say people in the vaccine trials fell pregnant.

@MrsGradyOldLady
Anti vaxxers won't be getting any insults from me. Instead they'll get a thank you for stepping aside and freeing up a space in the queue.

As research indicates Long Covid and Covid can cause infertility, there's nothing to lose by taking the vaccine. It can't be any worse can it.

listening to the radio about how they approved so quickly: they were reading the data as the studies progressed so only had to read the last bit.

-70 they were saying it has to be stored at -7o and is going to be available in hospitals first as they can keep it cold and it comes in batches of 900 or so doses. they need to have a lot of people in one place in a relative short period of time because it can only be warmed up a few times before I suppose it goes off. which makes sense really.

@Denthelp

Do you know how lawyers work? They don't care whether a risk is 50% or 0.00005%. All they care about is getting someone else to accept liability. For anything. In the context of Covid, the vaccine manufacturers have the upper hand so their lawyers will be pushing for governments to take the risk irrespective of how likely it is. It really has no significance.

1. Is it a one off thing or does it require eg annual boosters.
2. Does it deal with transmission and, if not, will those vaccinated and all others (ie everyone) still be required to wear face masks and observe social distancing, etc to be ‘safe’.

@earsup

All I know is that something with a 99.9% recovery rate doesnt really need a vaccine...why not focus on other illnesses etc..??...I find the rush to vaccinate against covid very odd !..None of my neighbours and very few friends said they will have it....wait and see....

That figure is incorrect. 20% of Covid patients become seriously ill. Lots have died. Plenty more only lived because we had spare hospital capacity and staff.

How do we focus on other illnesses when there's no hospital beds and staff are ill or dead? How? The vaccine, that's how.

We have 76,000 dead in the UK. Including NHS workers, who died doing their job trying to save others.

As well as having one of the highest death rates in the whole world, we have many thousands long-term (potentially permanently) disabled with Long Covid. Heart, lung, and kidney damage, blood clots, developing type 1 diabetes, male infertility, neurological and psychiatric issues.

[quote SheepandCow]@MrsGradyOldLady
Anti vaxxers won't be getting any insults from me. Instead they'll get a thank you for stepping aside and freeing up a space in the queue.

As research indicates Long Covid and Covid can cause infertility, there's nothing to lose by taking the vaccine. It can't be any worse can it.[/quote]
Ok well that's very nice of you but I'm not a bloody anti vaxxer! I had all my childhood vaccines plus ones recommended to go abroad. As did my 3 children. All delivered on time and as recommended.

I asked ONE question and I've been labelled as a thick anti vax conspiracy theorist. Which is weird AS FUCK.

[quote SisyphusDad]@Denthelp

Do you know how lawyers work? They don't care whether a risk is 50% or 0.00005%. All they care about is getting someone else to accept liability. For anything. In the context of Covid, the vaccine manufacturers have the upper hand so their lawyers will be pushing for governments to take the risk irrespective of how likely it is. It really has no significance.[/quote]
Yes they like to have disclaimers for absolutely everything. Sleeping pill information leaflets warn of causing drowsiness, packets of nuts warn of containing nuts...

[quote SheepandCow]@MrsGradyOldLady
Anti vaxxers won't be getting any insults from me. Instead they'll get a thank you for stepping aside and freeing up a space in the queue.

As research indicates Long Covid and Covid can cause infertility, there's nothing to lose by taking the vaccine. It can't be any worse can it.[/quote]
Loads of attacks on this thread

@JS87

Sorry that was supposed to say people in the vaccine trials fell pregnant.

Thank you JS87 that's kinda the information I was looking for.

Sorry @MrsGradyOldLady
I didn't intend to suggest I thought you were an anti vaxxer. I was speaking more generally.

@LightasaBreeze
Well not from me. With very limited supplies and huge demand, I welcome anti vaxxers freeing up spaces in the queue.

@MrsGradyOldLady

I understand what you're saying but it's not really answering why that paragraph is there on the government website.

Is it a general disclaimer on all vaccines?

I'll admit I was directed to that website from what I'd read on Twitter. It doesn't affect me personally as I'm past child bearing age but that doesn't mean I don't want to be a grandparent some day. It's not really answering my question to just say there are nutters who even deny covid exists.

My question is - for clarity as I've perhaps convoluted my original question - should it not be a concern that affects on fertility are unknown on a vaccine programmed to be rolled out worldwide? And if not why not?

I'm guessing a bit here but, in order to assess effects on fertility, you would have to vaccinate one group, not vaccinate a control group, double blinded so the participants would not know if they had the vaccine or not then assess over a number of years if there was a difference in conceptions, live births, etc which there is clearly no time for here and who would volunteer to take part in that?

Most drugs have a disclaimer on their information stating that safety cannot be guaranteed in pregnancy for the same reason, no pregnant woman would volunteer for a drug trial so safety only becomes known over years of use

As others have said we do have a certain amount of predictability from previous vaccine use and fertility has not been impacted

@earsup

All I know is that something with a 99.9% recovery rate doesnt really need a vaccine...why not focus on other illnesses etc..??...I find the rush to vaccinate against covid very odd !..None of my neighbours and very few friends said they will have it....wait and see....

Wait and see what?

Are your neighbours in possession of some knowledge that the world's medical community doesn't have?

Could you explain a bit more?

@SheepandCow

Sorry *@MrsGradyOldLady* I didn't intend to suggest I thought you were an anti vaxxer. I was speaking more generally.

Sorry I might be feeling ever so slightly touchy. I apologise.

children, the elderly and pregnant and breastfeeding women are often excluded from drug trials and information only appears over time as the medicine is used. sometimes the risks of prescribing are less than the risks of not prescribing a drug. usually done with caution.

after thallidomide, people are now extremely cautious with drugs for pregnant women. rightly so.

no drug is comletely safe. you have to weigh up the risks to benefits. and the risks of doing nothing.

I am slightly nervous as I have found no mention of the conditions I have either for the effect of covid or the effect of the vaccine. Sometimes you ahve to make the best decision you can on the information available depending on your own circumstances and attitude to risk.

No worries @MrsGradyOldLady
This pandemic has been hard for everybody. I think we're all a bit touchy at times.

@SheepandCow

No worries *@MrsGradyOldLady* This pandemic has been hard for everybody. I think we're all a bit touchy at times.

Ain't that the truth!

And I don't think all this turning on each other is helpful. Well it's maybe helpful for the government but not for us. I shouldn't have reacted angrily and I'm sorry to you and to@queenblueberries

I do genuinely think we are all trying to do what we consider to be the best for our families and each other.

More vaccines will be approved soon. So there will be more doses available.

Re the document where effects on fertility are mentioned in para 4.6, it looks like this is from the summary of product characteristics which is part of the official licence. It’s a document with a specific structure which is the same for every medicine with a licence. Para 4.6 is “Fertility, pregnancy and lactation”. So the manufacturer has to address this aspect of the product in that section of the document.

In this case they are saying they don’t know the effect on fertility because there is not yet enough data. I expect you would find this is the case for a large number of products on the market, if you looked at the Summary of Product Characteristics for them. But most people never see this document-it’s a technical document, although it forms the basis for the Patient Information Leaflet that you get in the pack.

Re fertility, it seems likely that the only women of childbearing age to have the opportunity of a vaccination will be those who are extremely clinically vulnerable and possibly those who are clinically vulnerable. They are a little way down the list and not expected to be imminently vaccinated, right? So my stupid question is would we have enough herd immunity after the, say, 50+ CV and CEV population had been vaccinated to protect the under-50 cohort if they did not want to take the fertility risk?

For instance, the drug Trulicity, which is used to treat Type 2 diabetes, has a similar statement on fertility in section 4.6, although they do have some data in rats, but it’s been on the market for a while. See here www.medicines.org.uk/emc/medicine/29747#gref

"would we have enough herd immunity after the, say, 50+ CV and CEV population had been vaccinated to protect the under-50 cohort if they did not want to take the fertility risk?"

We don't know yet, because the extent to which the vaccine prevents transmission is not yet known (as opposed to rendering the disease mild, even trivial in the recipient)

This vaccination campaign will protect the vulnerable (by bringing their risk in line with the healthy u50s - where only 5% or so get serious form)

Bumping to ask if anyone can answer about the chimpanzee vector thing. I’ve read that it’s commonly used in vaccines but what does it mean?