Re: The Vaccine Thread
Originally Posted by
beeatnik
However, do you think it would be dangerous, reckless, or criminal to properly or methodically disclose an accurate number or rate of adverse events with these covid-19 vaccines? And, as would be expected with hundreds of millions of shots, the number of AEs could seem high. That's where education would come in. Education instead of suppression.
As someone working in the pharmaceutical industry, I do not think this is dangerous, reckless, or criminal. TEAEs in particular (rather than overall AEs, which are not conclusively linked to the treatment) should be discussed as a rate, just as they are for every medication and pharmaceutical product. Head over to the public Clinical Trials database and you can gorge yourself on these data until your eyes bleed. Rates of TEAEs are more informative than total numbers, as of course tens of millions or billions of doses given in a single year will yield relatively high raw numbers, even if the rate is quite low. That being said, just like tracking and reporting breakthrough infections and reinfections, these data should be used to inform people within context of the nature of these drugs.
What boggles my mind is how easily people accept side effects and mediocre efficacy rates for drugs they're willingly taking for minor issues (antidepressants, anxiolytics, BP regulators, painkillers, statins...etc.) while eschewing a quite safe and surprisingly efficacious drug to protect them from a virus with substantial consequences. I have a neighbor who takes a moderately efficacious BP-regulating drug with significant side-effects but refuses the vaccine for the reasons stated quite commonly: fear of side effects and not being a fool-proof, 100%, no-fail cure. But people with give themselves weeks of diarrhea taking ivermectin with zero proven efficacy? At this point I'm a full supporter of medical triage for the willingly unvaccinated.
"Do you want ants? Because that's how you get ants."
Bookmarks