>>
|
No. 38442
[Edit]
>>38053
>>38396
I think you're right, and in particular the current vaccines for this are non-sterilizing which means that not only is there possibility of transmission, there's also the increased selective pressure for it to mutate to evade antibodies. So ironically vaccinated people would be accelerating the mutation more than unvaccinated since vaccinated people are primed to produce only the narrow set of antibodies targetting that specific spike protein whereas unvaccinated people would probably generate a broader set. And given that coronaviruses are prone to mutation anyway, this is going to be an inherent flaw to any vaccine developed.
And of course they're going to use the fear over the new "delta" variant to re-impose lockdowns and mask wearing. I wonder how long this is going to play out, but there really doesn't seem to be a clear solution that doesn't pose risks to some segment of the population.
>>38390
(Same person as quoted) – Luckily I haven't had any other symptoms crop up, and upon some research I think what I'm (still) experiencing is costochondritis rather than myocarditis. Definitely not planning to take the second dose though, and I do slightly regret taking it under pressure from family whom I'm living with rather than waiting a few more months to see how things pan out.
>>38392
After doing some more digging, I think I was mistaken on my initial guess that J&J was "safer." While this isn't backed by anything rigorous, my intuition is that all of the current range of side-effects seen are a subset of the so-called "long covid" symptoms that people have experienced, and should be attributed to immune-system over-reaction rather than the spike protein itself. Consider the fact that from the CDC data we know that the increase in risk for myocarditis was greatest for those < 18, and that too after the second dose. If this was caused by the spike-protein itself circulating and disrupting activity, then I don't think there would exist this discrepancy between age groups and dose. Instead, what we see is that those affected the most are those with hair-trigger immune systems (the young, or possibly those with existing auto-immune conditions) and only after the body has already been primed for a strong response by the first dose. This parallels what the data shows with "long covid," which is experienced primarily by the young who recover from the virus itself but whose immune-system still remains overactive. Although maybe the age-discrepancy could be explained by differences in the rate at which cells express mrna...
I strongly suspect J&J would elicit the same condition as well, it's just that since pfizer is the only one approved for ages 12-18 it's easier to see the effects there. And theoretically novavax shouldn't be any different since it should trigger the same inflammation, although the total amount of spike protein delivered might be smaller than that which is expressed by the mrna which should help prevent this.
But given this, I think in terms of long-term and possible side-effects the worst that is likely to happen is that you develop symptoms similar to long-covid. The younger or more prone to auto-immune conditions you are (e.g. history of allergies), the more likely this is to happen.
>>38395
I've been down the rabbit-hole, and at this point I consider the CDC (& FDA) as agencies that are actively harming the people. They (and the rest of the media) had been dismissing treatments like Ivermectin outright, and only now are they beginning to study whether it could indeed be effective (previous studies have been mixed, but annecdotal reports have said that it works to speed recovery and help reduce "long covid" symptoms). And yet at the same time as they completely reject Ivermectin and stonewall further research, they approve Aducanumab which is even more controversial in its efficacy and for which we have no easy means of verifying its effectiveness. Similarly for vaccinating young people < 18 – despite other countries taking the rational approach and recommending against it or only a single dose, FDA has made no changes to recommendations.
In fact, it's almost like politics has become mixed into what should be purely objective discussions involving people's health.
|