This is in regards to the COVID-19 vaccines.
As far as I am concerned, the speedy availability is the conjunction of 3 things coming together:
- superior biotech compared to even 10 years ago, both in genomic analysis and vaccine tech;
- running all the paperwork in tandem with the development, rather than sequentially;
- lots of money and resources and just the highest priority.
Some people are concerned, and say that this is so new that we don't know about long-term side effects.
What are the historical examples where significant harmful side effects showed up long after a Phase 3 trial of a vaccine?
The examples I've been able to uncover are:
- A vaccine issue in the Philippines in 2017: dengvaxia. Dengue vaccines can under certain conditions make things worse if you catch a different strain, but I am not sure it came to light after initial trials gave the OK or if the trials were run well enough to catch this effect. I assume that with the large-scale attention given to the various covid vaccines, we would have caught them out if they reinforced infections instead.
Dengvaxia is approved for sale in 19 countries, including the European Union and the United States, and has saved an estimated 1 million lives. ...
No one reportedly died from the vaccine. Many of the victims' parents nonetheless blamed the dengue vaccine for their children's deaths.
Dengvaxia controversy - Wikipedia
- There are plenty of cases where things go wrong in medical trials or with released medication, for example, thalidomide. Or medications that caused problems which only became apparent over time. In that list, only one is a vaccine which caused problems with infants who are NOT covid vaccination targets.
Unlike a regular medication, it would seem to me the problems with a vaccine should become apparent relatively quickly after administration, as you don't keep on taking it. Additionally, the medical community has been pretty clear that they don't advocate giving this vaccine to young children and are not committing much to pregnant women either.
So, historically, aside from the dengvaxia - which is not a clear-cut failure either as it seems to protect more than it hurts - do people who claim dire risks have anything concrete to back their statements?
Vaccines have been the subject of disinformation campaigns in the past, but on the other hand, there have been cases with non-vaccine medications where, in hindsight, the signs of adverse long term effects weren't sufficiently taken into account.