If you put anything in your body for the first time it is a risk as to how you will react to it. So if you are taking a risk what is the reward? Given we have absolutley no way of knowing what if any the long time side effects of the 4 (if you count the Russian Sputnik) vaccines are I suggest the very minimum you'd want is:
- To prevent you becoming symptomatic with C19
- To prevent you spreading C19
- To have long term immunity
So having read as much as I can on Pfizer/BioNtech, Moderna (which are both mNRA Vaccines i.e. you don't actually need to have the virus to produce the vaccine you model its DNA and the vaccine causes the body to produce antigens which triggers the immune system to fight the virus) and Oxford Astra Zeneca which is an 'old Skool' one based on using a weakened version of the virus here are my observations (all others welcome):
So how do these vaccines stack up against the three tests?
1. To prevent you becoming symptomatic with C19
Well maximum claimed effectivenss is 95%. Yet 99.9% of us will neither die nor have serious illness with C19. So immediately nature triumphs science. Also, these vaccines have only been tried on healthy humans below the age of 55 (as I understand it) i.e the least at risk universe. As far as I am aware (happy to be corrected) there have been no trials on the over 70s who have co-morbidiites (yet that is the most at risk universe).
2. To prevent you spreading C19
At this stage (as far as I can find) there is no evidence, yet, that any of these vaccines prevent you spreading C19. Wait a minute, isn't that the key reason to vaccinate the healthy to stop killing Granny? Well there is no evidence these will do this in the same way the flu jab does not prevent flu mortality in the senior population.
3. To have long term immunity
This one is simple; we don't know because we can't know yet.
So I'd suggest the Vaccines to date score about 1/2 out of 3 in the above tests. And let's not even go there on the logisitcs of rolling these out which our government are already failing at spectacularly, if entirely predictably, against their own aspirations.
Side Effects
I don't know if there are as yet unknown side effects (previous attempts to have vaccines for similar viruses did - see EMA challenge below). However, I should draw your attention to the following petition this week to the European Medicine Agency to stop further roll out until Pfizer produce a Design Study followed by Sangar Sequencing on the vaccine. The summary sets out the clear risks that this is meant to address, if you are thinking of taking the vaccine you might want to consider this first as part of your overall risk assessment..
On December 1, 2020, the ex-Pfizer head of respiratory research Dr. Michael Yeadon and the lung specialist and former head of the public health department Dr. Wolfgang Wodarg filed an application with the EMA, the European Medicine Agency responsible for EU-wide drug approval, for the immediate...
2020news.de
Oh and you should be aware the UK Health authorities have not approved this vaccine under normal health protocols but under the ones contained under Regulation 174 of the Human Medicine Regulations 2012, which enables
rapid temporary regulatory approvals to address significant public health issues such as a pandemic. Think about that carefully and weigh up the possible additional risks. For more detail see here:
The first COVID-19 vaccine for the UK, developed by Pfizer/BioNTech, has today been given approval for use following a thorough review carried out by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA).
www.gov.uk
Whether you want to take a vaccine is and always should be a risk based personal choice. I have my own view for myself based on my research and personal circumstances. As ever, make your own minds up; all I suggest is you inform yourself of the evidence, such as it is, first.
Regards
NHP