Are there any vaccines with unexpected late side effects?

[oxcat1]

The danger of unexpected late side effects seems a very real fear for people. I was just wondering, are there any vaccines for which side effects have appeared many months or years on?

I hear about the Pandemrix vaccine and GBS. That affected 1 in 500,000, and developed within weeks of the vaccine, so would already be showing if a similar effect was happening with the Covid vaccine.

Just wondering if there is any precedent that gives evidence for these fears?

Info from: www.nhs.uk/news/medication/swine-flu-vaccine-link-to-deadly-nerve-condition/
This study found an found an increase in risk of developing GBS in the four weeks following the H1N1 swine flu vaccination, and the excess risk was observed only among older people.

Pandremix has been associated with narcolepsy (researchers have not yet been able to conclusively prove or disprove the link)

The vaccine was banned in several countries and compensation paid out

I've not heard of any. And can't logically think how that could happen - a vaccine isn't a drug or chemical that might linger around in your body and plausibly have some slow to detect effect - say the way that asbestos did. It's just introducing something that looks to your body like a virus, so that it learns to fight it. That's something that your immune system does all the time when it encounters new germs. The viruses that do occasionally cause long lasting effects - eg glandular fever or Covid for that matter, have usually made the person quite ill to start with. I've not heard of that happening with vaccines, as there's no live reproducing virus involved.

In the interests of full disclosure, I am CEV and have been properly shielding since March - only times outside the house have been for hospital visits. I rely on carers 24/7 in order to remain at home and I had naively assumed they would all be pro-vaccine. At least half of them are worried about these 'unknown late effects' and I have to admit it has thrown me totally. I thought the end was in sight.

I have multiple allergies requiring Epipens so will not be getting vaccinated with the Pfizer at least. I do recognise the right of every individual to make the correct choice for them, but I did not expect such scepticism from those ostensibly on the front line.

Thalidomide.

@Ellmau

Not a vaccine. Was used as an anti-emetic.

I think that 1 of the MMR components kicks in about 6 weeks post vacc, that's about as late as it gets for vaccines

@Ellmau

Thalidomide.

Thalidomide isn’t a vaccine.

Oops, of course.

Good question, I've no idea so I'm posting for replies.

Fwiw I would take the vaccine as soon as I'm offered it, because I think the chance of covid itself having unexpected long term effects are much higher than the chances of the vaccine having them.

@Firefliess

I've not heard of any. And can't logically think how that could happen - a vaccine isn't a drug or chemical that might linger around in your body and plausibly have some slow to detect effect - say the way that asbestos did. It's just introducing something that looks to your body like a virus, so that it learns to fight it. That's something that your immune system does all the time when it encounters new germs. The viruses that do occasionally cause long lasting effects - eg glandular fever or Covid for that matter, have usually made the person quite ill to start with. I've not heard of that happening with vaccines, as there's no live reproducing virus involved.

I suppose the other ingredients could have long term effects? Or the combinations of them?

Why would other ingredients of the vaccine be any more likely to have long term health impacts than the multitude of other new substances people consume and apply to their body every day? New fertilizers, insecticides applied to crops, cosmetic ingredients, other medicines you might be prescribed for just about anything? They're all tested and found to be safe, and we trust and accept that We all eat non organic foods all the time without worry. People are a bit bonkers about vaccines IMO.

@Firefliess

Why would other ingredients of the vaccine be any more likely to have long term health impacts than the multitude of other new substances people consume and apply to their body every day? New fertilizers, insecticides applied to crops, cosmetic ingredients, other medicines you might be prescribed for just about anything? They're all tested and found to be safe, and we trust and accept that We all eat non organic foods all the time without worry. People are a bit bonkers about vaccines IMO.

Agree with this

@oxcat1

In the interests of full disclosure, I am CEV and have been properly shielding since March - only times outside the house have been for hospital visits. I rely on carers 24/7 in order to remain at home and I had naively assumed they would all be pro-vaccine. At least half of them are worried about these 'unknown late effects' and I have to admit it has thrown me totally. I thought the end was in sight.

I have multiple allergies requiring Epipens so will not be getting vaccinated with the Pfizer at least. I do recognise the right of every individual to make the correct choice for them, but I did not expect such scepticism from those ostensibly on the front line.

Hopefully once the vaccinations have been happening for a few weeks people will change their minds about not having them.

I can't imagine how this must feel to you

Pandremix (GSK swine flu vaccine). There's been a number of settlements over unexpected late side effects.

The GBS connection with Pandremix was already evident by this stage in the process, wasn't it?

The possible narcolepsy link is clearly of concern.

Looking at my medical records, I can see that I did not receive anywhere near the number of vaccinations that I would if born now - and yet I received every vaccine for which I was eligible.

Presumably those that have come on the market since did not have years of data from which to rule out any potential long-term side effects before they were widely introduced - just the standard vaccination trials abs processes, which include independent scrutiny. What therefore is so different about the Covid vaccine that makes it so much more frightening a prospect?

Nothing. There is nothing about this vaccine that would suggest it might have any unwanted side effects over and above the standard tiny risk of any vaccine having side effects or provoking allergies, including the ones that everyone has been happy to have in the past so they can honeymoon/holiday in Africa, Asis or wherever.

And pandemix is an inactivated virus vaccine, Pfizer one isn't. It also used the thiomersal preservative, which has been questioned (and removed from childhood vaccines like MMR as a result) - does Pfizer vaccin contain it?

@oxcat1

What therefore is so different about the Covid vaccine that makes it so much more frightening a prospect

mRNA (Pfizer/Moderna) has not been used in a vaccine (in humans) before. I know it has been researched for a number of years and used in some medical treatments (e.g. cancer, when you are unfortunately ill so undestandably likely to take more risks, not healthy), but still

For the rest of the Covid vaccine candidates there's no long term data either

Andrew Wakefield has a lot to answer for. Despite overwhelming evidence against the link between MMR and autism, I think his theory made a lot of people feel nervous about the long term effects of vaccines.

There is long term days for the oxford one a sits a repurposed MERS vaccine.

Data

So might many who have concerns over the Pfizer vaccine be happier with the Oxford vaccine, if the methods have already been used previously?

And for use of mRNA as a delivery method in cancer therapies, have any long-term side effects ever become apparent?

The main, tiny, risk with any of these vaccines is allergic reactions to the components. People know if they have hypersensitive immunes systems already (carry epipens) and that why they're given by medically trained people carrying adrenalin.

@pinbinpin agreed. But that would occur at The time.

I am just trying to establish what potential 'late effects' people are worried about. For those caregivers around me to accept the vaccination seems to be the only way forward for me, abs yet many seem reluctant because of these 'late effects'. I wish it were just 'each wo/man for him/herself', but the trouble is that each individual choice contributes to the collective return to life as we knew it.

I do feel you you OP. You're one of the people who really need others to have the vaccine to keep you safe, but as you realise they aren't going to be forced to have it so could decide not to and put you at risk. Do you get any control over who your carers are? Is there any way you can ask to have only vaccinated carers? Or can you insist on high levels of PPE being worn at all times by any unvaccinated carers? (And hope that that's uncomfortable enough for them to encourage them to get the vaccine?!) Though hopefully either the Oxford vaccine or the Moderna one might not have any problems with allergic reactions and you'll be able to have one of them.

trulydelicious There's "no long term data" on that latest flavour of fruit juice until lots of people have had it.

I think generally there's a suspicion about 'chemicals' as though they are completely different from what makes up everything we are and everything we touch and eat.