One difference is that the vaccine is intended to be administered to the entire population, most of whom are healthy. So, if a certain % of people suffer an adverse reaction, that's a lot more people suffering an adverse reaction than would be the case for a typical drug which is administered to a relatively small number of sick people. The acceptable margin of error with a vaccine is lower.
Will you take the COVID-19 vaccine?
- Thread starter probyn
- Start date
- Status
Fair enough but to a single individual taking a drug for the first time that does not apply. In fact, with what you say an individual would be safer with the vaccine since the margin of error is lower.
This is all lies, and clearly RFK jr should stick to the family business of politics and leave medicine and science to the pros. mRNA DOES NOT permanently alter your genetic makeup. mRNA is degraded completely within hours. It does not get inserted into your DNA. Anti vaccine charlatans are using confusion between mRNA and DNA to stoke fear and further their warped agenda at the expense of the health of society.
You'll show us how smart you are, way to go...I guess those Health Canada people are just stumbling around in the dark acting recklessly for the public's health.
Not necessarily reckless, sometimes just being too quick to approve some drugs
Have a look at this (its FDA but HPB has made similar mistakes in the past):
Nearly a third of FDA-approved drugs had problems, study finds | CNN
About a third of the drugs the FDA approved between 2001 and 2010 were involved in some kind of safety event after reaching the market, according to a new study.
www.cnn.com
Nearly a third of FDA-approved drugs had problems, study finds
Patients might think the US Food and Drug Administration’s stamp of approval means that a product is the last word on safety, but about a third of the drugs the FDA approved between 2001 and 2010 were involved in some kind of safety event after reaching the market, according to a study published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
The authors found that in that time, 222 novel therapeutics were approved, and there were 123 postmarket safety events involving 71 products that required FDA action. Manufacturers needed to add 61 boxed warnings, also commonly called a black box warning, to call attention to serious or life-threatening risks.
In 59 cases, some kind of communication had to warn users about a product’s safety.
Three therapeutics were withdrawn from the market.
Drugs used to treat mental illness and drugs that went through an accelerated approval process had a higher number of “events,” the study found
Again, don't take it...wow, you just proved it, I don't think anybody should take it now...a COVID vaccine that has been approved by Health agencies, what a scam.Not necessarily reckless, sometimes just being too quick to approve some drugs
Have a look at this (its FDA but HPB has made similar mistakes in the past):
Nearly a third of FDA-approved drugs had problems, study finds | CNN
About a third of the drugs the FDA approved between 2001 and 2010 were involved in some kind of safety event after reaching the market, according to a new study.
Nearly a third of FDA-approved drugs had problems, study finds
Patients might think the US Food and Drug Administration’s stamp of approval means that a product is the last word on safety, but about a third of the drugs the FDA approved between 2001 and 2010 were involved in some kind of safety event after reaching the market, according to a study published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association.
The authors found that in that time, 222 novel therapeutics were approved, and there were 123 postmarket safety events involving 71 products that required FDA action. Manufacturers needed to add 61 boxed warnings, also commonly called a black box warning, to call attention to serious or life-threatening risks.
In 59 cases, some kind of communication had to warn users about a product’s safety.
Three therapeutics were withdrawn from the market.
Drugs used to treat mental illness and drugs that went through an accelerated approval process had a higher number of “events,” the study found
You mean to say that you're not concerned? Trump's Warp Speed project removed a lot of hurdles to keep the "vaccine by the end of the year" promise. A 3 to 5 years process was compressed to about six months. I got to say, your faith in the system is on a whole different level.
You too have reading comprehension fail.
I never said I wouldnt take the vaccine, I said I was going to wait a year or two
No, I'm not concerned and I do have faith in the system...
Thats good, thats why you'll serve as the perfect guinea pig for the rest of us
You can be a good citizen AND a guinea pig at the same time.
The two are not mutually exclusive
They are, but not over a very short period of time. You need to give it at least 1 or 2 years.
Some people think its even longer (like 8 to 10 years). But I'm not gonna wait that long
The longer it takes to vaccinate the people the longer it’ll be to open up businesses/entertainment/etc...if you want to be that selfish with an arrogant attitude than you will be one of the causes for a slow recovery.
Here is the thing, if you get vaccinated you should be safe from the virus, so why are you worried about me possibly passing it along to you after you've been vaccinated??
I’m not worried about it...the government officials will be slower to green light the reopening phase if only a small percentage of citizens get vaccinated...
Not necessarily. Those who have been vaccinated can start going to bars, restaurants, cinemas.....etc. And those who havent simply will have to wait a while. Also we might have a vaccination passport soon, and that means you cannot enter public places without them:
Vaccine passport coming to Ontario?
Ontarians may have to produce proof of COVID-19 vaccination to attend theatres or work, Health Minister Christine Elliott cautioned Tuesday.
torontosun.com
- Status
