We know about as much about “long covid” as we do about the long term effects of the vaccines. So surely if you’re going to make that argument it should apply both ways?
“ We're still very unclear on the long-term effects of COVID, after all.”
Nor do we know the long term effects of the vaccines. What we do know is that children have “statistical immunity” to dying from covid right now. Long term consequences could come from either covid or a vaccine, worry about what you can control. And covid is out of control so stop worrying about it.
Something I've noticed: when people in my surroundings bring up worries of long-term effects of the fast-tracked vaccines, they somehow tend to not consider the unknown long-term effects of covid. Even though the argument that we cannot know the long term effects yet should apply equally.
When I bring this up they do seem receptive to this argument though, provided I'm not dismissive of their own skepticism. I'm not trying to convince them to get vaccinated, but I do wish that my friends stay safe until the pandemic is over at least, so I ask them to please be consistent and be worried about the unknown long-term effects of getting covid. Especially given that for the latter we do know that it's an actual disease that has already taken lots of lives and given lots of people long-term symptoms.
> dismiss equally unknown long-term effects of covid?
If you believe vaccines have no potential negative effect beyond 1 week, you'll have to give a serious thought as to why you believe Covid can have long term effects.
Also past vaccine history means absolutely nothing. You can't assume the next bridge is built safely just because you have never seen a bridge fall before.
True but the same goes for covid itself. In fact we already know of long covid. Which we still don't know much about. We don't even know if it ever goes away. So there's a known long-term effect already.
The vaccines are a lot better understood than the virus. We don't know of any long-term issues so far.
It's still a much safer bet to get the vaccine IMO. And it will also help with the societal problem around the covid measures. We can't keep going on lockdowns for years to come. It will destroy the economy which has its own associated health risks.
"(and as far as I can tell no one does, unless we have time travelers about)"
The CDC and others have looked at at long term effects, which is where I got those estimates. If you mean it's too early to tell because not enough time has gone by, then we could say the same about the vaccine (which is somewhat valid for both sides, but lacking evidence relegates it more to a belief than fact-based opinion).
The comment wasn't minimizing the impact. They were simply stating that people didn't take it as seriously as they would have if covid was more impactful. I think this is a valid point. We see similar issues in attitudes for other infections that can carry longterm impact (even lack of education and protective measures around stuff like hepatitis and HIV).
I agree. Its a coin flip. We don't know what the long term effects of COVID are, we don't know what the long term effects of the vaccine are. I'd argue that we know more about what COULD happen with the vaccine long term and I'd rather place my bets on that. The alternative is hiding away for 20+ years and not getting vaccinated or contracting COVID, obviously not feasible.
I think my original comment was maybe misconstrued. I stated plainly that COVID could cause lasting damage just as any other virus. It just doesn't seem there is much to support that it causes damage above and beyond that of other viruses are capable of and for which long term therapies and treatments exist and are well understood. Certainly there isnt anything that I have seen which substantiates that COVID itself can persist in the body and continue to wreck havoc after the body is able to clear the infection, but no doubt it can do serious and potentially lasting damage.
I absolutely cannot agree more strongly that the long term consequences of any of the COVID vaccines will be far fewer than those of the virus itself.
And what is your point? So yes we have no idea what the long term (I'm talking 3+ year) effects of covid are. That doesn't make us understand the vaccines any better. You still have to make a choice between two somewhat unknowns. Yes so far the data does show the vaccine is the better option, but we can't know for sure. So you still should be as informed as possible before making a decision.
Yeah I think that basically sums it up. The dangers of long term COVID far, far outweigh the potential risks of the vaccine. It seems many people have a fundamental distrust of vaccines and many also still don't understand how dangerous COVID seems to be for people who have relatively little risk of dying from the disease.
I haven't been able to come up with a theory as to why public health departments and the media haven't been making the long term effects a key part of their messaging.
How do you weigh that against the long tail of a COVID infection having long term effects? We already have evidence of that, and zero evidence of that with the vaccine.
> We still do not know the long term effects of COVID vaccines using the expiremental design.
First, the CoVID vaccines have been more extensively studied than most other vaccines by this point.
Second, "long-term effects of vaccines" reveals an unfamiliarity with how vaccines work. Vaccine side-effects show up quickly, within weeks at most. After months or years, the only thing left of the vaccine in your body is the immune system memory it induced.
People who argue against vaccines don't seem to think enough about that aspect.
reply