That's a very confusing series of points. They are indeed rare, but appear much rarer from the vaccine, that's the point. As to pharmaceutical companies, I don't really care about them one way or the other - it's more about evidence in my opinion
-
-
Replying to @GidMK
And whats the evidence as to the long term impact of the vaccine in children?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BigSV
So, that's certainly a question worth considering. What evidence we've got: 1. long-term safety (6+months) in adults 2. short-term safety in kids 3. evidence from previous vaccines
2 replies 0 retweets 9 likes -
From this, we can make reasonable a reasonable inference about the likely risk to children from the immunization. We know that it's likely to be very low, but putting an exact figure is quite hard
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
Which previous vaccines in children have used this technology? Everyone is saying it is new, so presumably there aren’t any with any long term data?
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BigSV
Depends on the vaccine. mRNA vaccines are new in a sense, but they are also not entirely new technology (been in development for 25ish years). Other vaccines mostly use fairly similar methodology to previous shots
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
That’s kinda my point. AZ I’m ok with Mrna - development for 25 years and only approved because of an “emergency” no long term data@on humans, deffo not in children.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BigSV
Actually, I think it's fair to say that we've got quite reasonable long-term data on the vaccines themselves in humans at this point. Initial trials were started 12 months ago, and even the larger studies have been running for 6-9 months at this point
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @GidMK
Is that really classed as long term? Why is it that trails arent due to end until 2023, this is what I’d call long term, not 6–12 months
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BigSV
I suspect they'll actually end a bit sooner than that - recruitment was faster in these trials than expected I believe
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes
That being said, the standard full follow-up is 24 months from final immunization, but it's also literally unheard of for a vaccine to cause a side-effect commonly enough to be seen in a clinical trial past the 12 month mark. It's a safety precaution, of course
-
-
Indeed, what convinced me was the past evidence on vaccine side-effects - they almost *always* happen in the first week/month following immunization, which means that it's unlikely 12 vs 24 months will be substantially different
0 replies 0 retweets 8 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.