The COVID vaccines are really, really safe
I got my first COVID shot in August 2020 as part of the Moderna Phase III trial. Since then, I’ve had four additional jabs. Today, I’ll get another booster with the latest Moderna vaccine. I’m looking forward to it.
I did contract COVID last November during a trip to Colorado. I tested positive for a few days and had mild symptoms, but completely recovered. The vaccine doesn’t prevent you from getting infected, it keeps you out of the ED and the morgue.
Normally, I wouldn’t call attention to anti-vaxxer hoaxes, but together with the mindless attacks on Tony Fauci, there are attacks on the highly effective and safe COVID vaccines. Look, nobody is forced to get the COVID vaccine. Don’t want it? Don’t get it. But don’t lie about it.
“The COVID vaccines, administered over 13 billion times, are really, really safe. A massive review looking at 41 randomized controlled trials of 12 different COVID-19 vaccines on a total of nearly half a million participants concluded that there was probably little to no difference between most vaccines and placebos when it came to serious side effects. Yes, rare serious side effects do happen, and scientists are trying to figure out why, with their early clues misused by anti-vaccine activists to paint these vaccines as genocidal. But if the spike protein encoded by these vaccines was so deadly, you would not survive receiving 217 of these injections. Yet a German man did. Why? The article reporting on this oddity mentions “private reasons,” but his immune system was fine and he did not die.”
debunking attacks on COVID vaccine safety
I refused the vaccine. However, I am not what you’d call an “anti-vaxxer” as I believe it is a personal choice and is up to the individual. I fault no one for getting it or refusing it. I never demonized and besmirched those that made either choice.
For me, I saw no logical reason to take a first of its kind vaccine, rushed through trials and was only able to get emergency use authorization to protect me against a disease for which and as according to scientific data I had a less than 1% chance of having a fatal outcome from as I did not fall into any of the high-risk categories. I’m under 60 years old, not obese and no pre-existing conditions or co-morbidities. I do however take issue with the part of your article that states: “The vaccine doesn’t prevent you from getting infected”.
That was not the original findings.
The original findings stated under it’s conclusions: and I quote directly from the publishing’s on 12/30/2020 of the New England Journal of Medicine titled “Safety and Efficacy of the BNT162b2 mRNA Covid-19 Vaccine”: “Two doses of an mRNA-based vaccine were safe over a median of two months and provided 95% protection against symptomatic Covid-19 in persons 16 years of age or older. After some time we found this to be untrue. I think this needs to be at least acknowledged and at the most addressed.
@matt,
“The vaccine doesn’t prevent you from getting infected. That was not the original findings.”
Actually, it was. I don’t know where the 95% number came from, but 95% ≠ 100%, ergo the vaccine doesn’t prevent you from getting infected. The fact that the vaccine doesn’t provide 100% protection from infection has always been acknowledged.
The vaccine was not “rushed through trials.” It was tested in an animal model, then went through Phase I, Phase II and Phase III trials. The Moderna Phase III trial was 30,000 subjects, double blind and placebo-controlled. The Pfizer Phase III trial was 45,000 subjects, double blind and placebo-controlled.
Please point out the evidence that the vaccine *does* prevent you from getting infected. Take all the time you need.
mRNA technology has been around for decades and could never receive FDA approval. It wasn’t until a year after Covid that they received Emergency Use authorization only. There’s a lot of unknowns when issuing any kind of drug in its infancy stages. Again, we saw that when they originally thought it would have an efficacy rate of 95% against either transmission and or symptomatic covid. Then of course that was walked back only to be revised to “protects against sever symptoms and hospitalization.”. So, you see there’s little wonder why some would be skeptical and even less wonder why those in low risk categories of having a serious case of Covid declined the vaccine. We also saw the lies surrounding Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin. Which of course we now find out is completely acceptable forms of treatment for Covid. So when I see these inconsistencies that I’m hoping is just from ignorance and not something more nefarious, I can’t help but use my critical thinking skills and common sense to make a decision that is most logical to me.
@matt,
By spring of 2020, mRNA technology was approved for phase I trials. The Emergency Use authorization applied to the general public *after* over 75,000 subjects were enrolled in the FDA-approved Moderna and Pfizer phase III trials, half of them in the vaccine arm of the trials.
“Again, we saw that when they originally thought it would have an efficacy rate of 95% against either transmission and or symptomatic covid. Then of course that was walked back only to be revised to “protects against sever symptoms and hospitalization.”
If you actually read the NEJM article, you’ll see that efficacy was measured based on symptomatic COVID.
Of course, now that billions have been vaccinated, there no basis for some to be skeptical.
The only lies about hydroxychlorquine and ivermectin were the ones that claimed they were effective. The current data do not demonstrate significant efficacy in treating COVID. When I see posts like yours, I’m hoping it is just from ignorance and not something more nefarious. As a PhD research scientist for 42 years and a medical school professor for over 37 years, I can’t help but use my critical thinking skills, my knowledge of the relevant literature and my common sense to make a decision that is logical. YMMV.
@matt,
By the way, while it is technically true that mRNA technology has been around for decades, the biggest challenge was that mRNA would be taken up by the body and quickly degraded before it could “deliver” its message—the RNA transcript—and be read into proteins in the cells. It didn’t receive FDA approval because of technical limitations that weren’t overcome until shortly before the COVID pandemic.
The solutions came from RNA modifications to stabilize the RNA from cellular RNases and from advances in nanotechnology: the development of lipid nanoparticles that wrapped the mRNA and allowed stable entry into the cells.
Results on vaccine performance after 2 months is preliminary of necessity. Only the most vulnerable were getting the vaccine that early. How did they define symptomatic Covid-19? The clinical trials all used different criteria for severe Covid-19.
Scientific preliminary findings did not hold up after more data was available. That is the way science works.
What part of that statement has been proved untrue? That more than 5% get symptomatic Covid-19 within 2 months of receiving that particular vaccine?
Bottom line it was originally reported to have a 95% efficacy in protecting against Covid. That turned out to be untrue. Why that is, is a whole other debate. I’m simply pointing out what was originally told to us was not accurate. Now you and I may differ but when it comes to a vaccine, I think the reported efficacy from trials is pretty darn important. But you don’t have to take my word for it. Read it for yourself: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577
@mike,
If you actually read the paper, not just the abstract, you’ll find this:
“Confirmed Covid-19 was defined according to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) criteria as the presence of at least one of the following symptoms: fever, new or increased cough, new or increased shortness of breath, chills, new or increased muscle pain, new loss of taste or smell, sore throat, diarrhea, or vomiting, combined with a respiratory specimen obtained during the symptomatic period or within 4 days before or after it that was positive for SARS-CoV-2 by nucleic acid amplification–based testing, either at the central laboratory or at a local testing facility (using a protocol-defined acceptable test).
“Major secondary end points included the efficacy of BNT162b2 against severe Covid-19. Severe Covid-19 is defined by the FDA as confirmed Covid-19 with one of the following additional features: clinical signs at rest that are indicative of severe systemic illness; respiratory failure; evidence of shock; significant acute renal, hepatic, or neurologic dysfunction; admission to an intensive care unit; or death. Details are provided in the protocol.”
So efficacy is measured as protection against COVID *symptoms*, not protection against COVID infection. There were no tests for infection among asymptomatic subjects, from what I can tell. I’m simply pointing out that what was told to us was accurate at the time, and that you have to read and understand the entire report to see that, not just the abstract. As someone who participated in the Moderna phase III trial and has received six shots since August 2020 (most recently, yesterday), I think an accurate reading of the reported efficacy is pretty darn important. But you don’t have to take my word for it. Read it for yourself.
matt:
I edited your comment to make it more readily readable and not to correct or critique it.
No worries
I donate whole blood regularly.
In 2024 the in check questionnaire and the In check person continue to ask if I had a Covid vaccine and what brand.
Anyone know why.
In Fall 2022 a call was made in a group I participate in for blood from donors not vaccinated for Covid, the recipient was a cancer patient, unknown type.
Scanning CDC excess deaths post covid vaccine deployment two odd peaks happen in 2021 and 2022.
Currency with boosters remains a condition of employment in some companies and U.S. government did fire those who did not get the vaccine
@paddy,
Inoculation for smallpox was a condition to serve in Washington’s army.* There are many types of employment that have conditions. That’s not the same as forcing someone to have the vaccine. Life is full of choices.
There’s no evidence that any excess deaths were caused by the COVID vaccine. None.
As for blood donation and the COVID vaccine, read the link I posted and feel free to point out what is wrong with it. Take all the time you need.
*note that I wrote “inoculation,” not “vaccination.” The smallpox vaccine was invented by Jenner in 1796. But inoculation against smallpox was already well known and practiced at the time of the revolutionary war; it was introduced in Europe in 1721 and was already established in the Ottoman Empire by then.
Those excess deaths (two bad flu seasons months apart) were not effected by the vaccine one way or the other.
You are the professor! Was asking a question.
Still too early in the game for me to have an opinion. I look forward to a discussion about the overall risks and benefits of these products 5-6 years from now. The bio-distribution data, the ability of manufactures to consistently produce clean product at scale and the choice of spike protein rather than the highly conserved nucleocapsid remain major concerns of mine. I’ve never in my adult life witnessed such infidelity against the practice of the Scientific Method as I have in the past four years.
@Pitcher,
Your concerns are noted. I’ll follow the evidence. YMMV. The choice of the spike protein as antigen has to do with blocking virus binding to ACE2. A vaccine against the nucleocapsid protein won’t do that.
“Personal reasons?” That piques my interest. As reported previously due to my spouse’s ongoing MGH/MIT adventures hence self-preservation I am double vaccinated fully boosted with an extra. That I’ve never had a flu shot is moot, I’ve never had the flu.
I’m not sure but what she was flirting with me when not too earnestly admonishing at my age I really should get one even if I am as fit and healthy as I was half a lifetime ago. Piqued interest in over the course of the trump-flu spouse had three brain and three spine surgeries, and for all the time I’ve spent hanging around hospitals I haven’t gotten sick
My training schedule is remarkably improved over the past three to five years. I’m doing stuff I haven’t done since I was in the Army, or since I was a runaway in SF and Seattle
I wonder if all that messenger is reinforcing other messages elsewhere …
since we’re having a bit of a summer uptick, i’ll include my little spiel on Covid from my weekly environment newsletter:
all the CDC’s Covid metrics were higher in this week’s report, and in some cases sharply…among the so called “early indicators“, “test positivity”, or the percentage of tests for Covid that came back positive, was at 6.6% during the week ending June 8th, up from 5.4% the prior week, and almost double the 3.4% positivity rate three weeks before that…there also was a 14.7% increase in emergency room patients who were diagnosed with Covid, and they now account for 0.7% of all emergency room visits, up from 0.4% three week ago…the CDC is also showing a 25% increase in the “trend in the hospitalization rate” between May 26 and June 1; i don’t know what that means, or what they’re counting, since hospitals are no longer required to report that data…
meanwhile, Covid deaths accounted for 0.7% of all US deaths during the week ending June 15th, which they’re calling a 16.7% increase (from 0.6% a week ago), while the CDC’s confirmed Covid deaths graph, which lags current data by 3 weeks, indicates there were 316 US deaths from Covid during the week ending May 25th, the same death count as during the week ending May 18th, and down from a revised 320 US Covid deaths during the week ending May 11th, with both of those prior weeks revised about 2% higher…note that all those figures, while rising, are still quite low by historical standards..
the CDC is showing increasing viral activity in wastewater for 6th week in a row, with their national viral activity index rising from 1.76 to 2.00, while Biobot is reporting a downtick…the CDC has an interactive map showing current viral activity levels of the Covid virus in wastewater by state, and there are some pretty stark contrasts; five states are colored black, indicating “very high” levels: New Mexico, Missouri, Florida, Alaska, and Connecticut, with New Mexico and Missouri an even darker black, indicating the highest subset of “very high” levels of viral activity…in addition, California, Texas and 6 other states are in shades of dark blue, indicating high levels of viral activity in their sewers…on the other hand, West Virginia is a lighter shade, indicating a low level of viral activity, while Ohio is in a quite pale blue, indicating just a minimal level of viral activity in wastewater…
the Covid relevant paragraphs from this week’s Biobot report on virus concentrations in US sewers are again included below (week 24 ended June 17th); i cannot reconcile the differences between the CDC and Biobot, it is as if they are in a different country…
this was also the week for updating the CDC’s variant proportions page, and it continues to show increasing dominance of Covid variants of the immune evasive KP lineage; in fact, the JN.1 variant, which was the dominant strain in this winter’s surge, with upwards of 80% of the virus samples sequenced for several months, now just represents 1.6% of current Covid infections…the KP.3 variant, which is a descendant of JN.1.11.1, continues as the most common Covid mutant circulating, accounting for 33.1% of US Covid infections during the June 9th to June 22nd period, up from an upwardly revised 25.9% share of the total during the May 26th to June 8th period period, and up from 16.9% of the total during the two week period before that…the KP.2 variant, which is also an offspring of JN.1.11.1, continues as the second most common Covid variant in the CDC’s national sampling, at 20.8% of US Covid infections during the June 9th to June 22nd period, but it’s down a bit from the downwardly revised 21.6% share of the total during the May 26th to June 8th period, while up from 18.7% of the total during the two week period before that…the LB.1 variant, a direct descendant of the original JN.1, continues to be the 3rd most common Covid variant, accounting for 17.5% of US Covid infections during the June 9th to June 22nd period, up from a downwardly revised 13.5% share of the total during the May 12th to May 25th period, and up from 8.8% of the total during the two week period before that…meanwhile, the KP.1.1 variant, also a JN.1.11.1 offspring, continues as the 4th most common Covid mutant infecting Americans, now at 9.0% of the total, down from an upwardly revised 9.5% of the total during the prior period, and down from an upwardly revised 9.7% during the period before that…the fifth most common cause of Covid infections during the June 9th to June 22nd period was the JN.1.16.1 variant, at 4.4% of the total, down from an upwardly revised 5.1% during the May 26th to June 8th period, and down from 5.6% during the period before that, while the JN.1.11.1 variant, the parent of the three KP mutants we’ve previously mentioned, is holding on at 3.2% of CDC’s sampling of Covid variants circulating during the May 26th to June 8th period, down from 4.0% in the prior period, and down from 4.7% during the period before that…no other variant accounted for more than 2% of US infections during the June 9th to June 22nd period, and although there are six more variants that accounted for more than 1%, none of those seems to be increasing as a percentage of the total…
* * *
current vaccines target the recombinant XBB.1.15 variant, which isn’t even circulating anymore….the JN.1 family of variants have over 35 spike protein differences…the vaccines being designed tor release this fall will target KP.2
i got the J&J vaccine to start with because i didn’t understand the mRNA vaccines well enough to be confident in them…all my boosters since have been Moderna’s…
@rjs,
Even the earlier vaccines are protective against the current variants, just not as protective.