undefined | Better HN

0 pointsprotomyth4y ago0 comments

There is always a risk with vaccination as with any medication. It's small, but why take it? Taking a vaccine to make other people feel better is emotional and not scientific. There is no debate, there are blood tests. The same logic has been applied to measles.

0 comments

bayesian_horse4y ago

You'd find that judging an individual's immunity by a vague notion of prior infection with Covid-19 is probably riskier than the vaccine.

Comirnaty had hundreds of millions of doses administered so far, and maybe - maybe - one woman died of myocarditis. This is nothing to potentially hundreds of thousands of prevented fatalities, much less the unpleasant to severe bouts of Covid-19.

labawi4y ago

How about judging by blood reactivity to virus protein in an ELISA test? [1]

Why is it riskier and to whom?

[1] https://www.fda.gov/media/141777/download

bayesian_horse4y ago

This kind of testing isn't exactly cheap and it is hard to standardize because of all the variables and the fickleness of the process. The one you link is specific to one particular laboratory. These tests also tend to fail a few weeks or months after the infection.

Nor does it actually prove any immunity against disease. You can only assume that these antibodies probe prior contact to the virus and that this prior contact resulted in a robust response. The strength of the immunity cannot be inferred from such titres...

1 more reply

sokoloff4y ago

Well, there’s a risk with the blood draw as well. It’s also small.

protomythOP4y ago

That's not even in the same realm.

bayesian_horse4y ago

Pretty much. There are some indications that myocarditis, the most serious, but very rare and even more rarely fatal complication of the mRNA vaccines, is caused by accidental intravenous injection of the vaccine.

geysersam4y ago

They are not the same. But the "risk" from the vaccines does seem negligible compared to almost anything else.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse