I have not yet completed a primary vaccine course and was planning on finally getting my first shot on Friday (I’ll probably choose one of the two mRNA ones). Obviously, there must be more data on the main vaccines now then there was almost 2 years ago.
So, is one of the mRNA vaccines better? Have any of you had legitimate long term unexpected problems that you think may have been caused by your response to the vaccine?
If your primary care physician can't address your concerns, as you've stated them here, then get a second opinion.
That said, myself and my family have taken the full course of mRNA vaccines from their earliest availability and continue to get boosters. One member of my family has a chronic illness and has also taken all the vaccines. None of us have had any side effects (beyond soreness from the injection site and maybe lethargy day of vaccination) and none of us have tested positive for COVID or been sick. That's my one data point for your collection. :-)
This doesn’t necessarily mean Covid vaccines are worse in any ways.
But it means that anyone very confident in their quality and safety is either mislead or not very professional (if it’s a doctor) or trying to mislead you.
Any single positive/negative comment you’d get from here has zero value for you for so many reasons.
how can you extrapolate from a few examples? How can anyone know for sure if any _long term_ side effect has anything to do with a specific vaccine?
Those are just a tip of an iceberg making the original question kinda pointless. With all due respect.
1. Mainstream news and other sources are talking about how the risk of myocarditis may have been underestimated; and that there is a potential risk of long-term damage in the months or years after vaccination.
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/myocarditis-covid...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33594175
2. Pfizer, in particular, has been guilty of more fines than any other pharmaceutical company, setting the record for most fines in both quantity and size. Canada in 2010 lambasted them as a "habitual offender" in 2010, with the US assessing the largest health care fraud settlement in US history in 2009.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2875889/
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-...
As for the other vaccines, the J&J shot was withdrawn due to risk of causing TTS or blood clots.
https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/coronavi...
Moderna meanwhile is in a big lawsuit versus Pfizer over the mRNA technology. The COVID-19 vaccine is Moderna's first and only commercialized vaccine. Note that Moderna was founded in 2010 on the mRNA premise, so to call them "new and inexperienced" in the vaccine field in comparison to Pfizer and J&J wouldn't be inaccurate.
https://hbr.org/2022/09/moderna-v-pfizer-what-the-patent-inf...
3. We know now from a study in Denmark that mRNA, rather than being localized to the site of injection as initially believed, may circulate in the blood for up to 28 days post vaccination - or longer, because the study did not continue after 28 days for subjects. This was very unexpected and the consequences, if any, are unknown.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apm.13294
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34876961
4. We now know in a study from The Lancet that previous COVID-19 infection is actually just as good as vaccination, if not superior, at preventing re-infection. Meaning that, if you have already had COVID-19, vaccination may have very little benefit, and depending on the above circumstances, may be more risky than beneficial.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/natural-immunity-...
There. I don't need to cite Project Veritas, or argue about the quality of data in VAERS, to make a case that right now, caution is warranted.