MYTH: The COVID-19 vaccines were "rushed"

People think it is just a bureaucratic approval process but they are doing a lot of clinical trials and they take a long time if you do it right. That's why we have all these little sideeffects coming up with the new vaccines.

Of course they were rushed lol, no one is even arguing over that point

In this case rushed doesn't necessarily mean it's dangerous. It just means circumstances didn't allow us to go through the normal process at the normal pace. Any way you slice it though -> expoditing the development + approval of the vaccine is, by definition, "rushing" it to the market. Nice little analogy though

They have no idea how long the "vaccine" will work, or if you need a booster, and if so, how many you'd need.

And you're telling me they know what they're shooting into arms?

Clinical trials could have been sped up a lot using challenge trials.

FACT: You don't know jack

It's true!

Fellow libertarians unite!

Right.

We were told repeatedly this was a "novel" virus that the experts knew nothing about...well, except they somehow from the get-go that it could be passed asymptomatically (although Fauci recently re-wrote that history by saying they learned this later when defending his no need masks edict made at the start of this whole thing).

Despite this they also told us that they would somehow have a vaccine in 12-18 months to stop this "novel" virus they knew nothing about.

That was a red flag for me.

And then four different companies all come up with these safe and effective vaccines at about the same time in nine months.

Nothing to question here.

This is Jim Kiler wrote:

They have no idea how long the "vaccine" will work, or if you need a booster, and if so, how many you'd need.

And you're telling me they know what they're shooting into arms?

Good one. Amazing how much a part of this whole pressure campaign relies on the ignorance of the "experts"!

This is Jim Kiler wrote:

They have no idea how long the "vaccine" will work, or if you need a booster, and if so, how many you'd need.

And you're telling me they know what they're shooting into arms?

Not very smart.

How can we know a new vaccine works for X months when X > 11 months (when trials started, give or take)?

Immune response has seemed robust so far. You're criticizing scientists for saying "we cannot predict the future."

I do agree that it's overly cautious messaging. Scientists and doctors are prone to this. We can say "we expect vaccines to work for at least a year based on current serological trends" and I don't think that's too much of a risky statement.

[quote]Harambe wrote:

Immune response has seemed robust so far.

It's been robust has it? Vibrant? Has it been vibrant?

Harambe wrote:

This is Jim Kiler wrote:

They have no idea how long the "vaccine" will work, or if you need a booster, and if so, how many you'd need.

And you're telling me they know what they're shooting into arms?

Not very smart.

How can we know a new vaccine works for X months when X > 11 months (when trials started, give or take)?

Immune response has seemed robust so far. You're criticizing scientists for saying "we cannot predict the future."

I do agree that it's overly cautious messaging. Scientists and doctors are prone to this. We can say "we expect vaccines to work for at least a year based on current serological trends" and I don't think that's too much of a risky statement.

Who are you claiming to speak for and with what authority?

Who are We? wrote:

Harambe wrote:

Not very smart.

How can we know a new vaccine works for X months when X > 11 months (when trials started, give or take)?

Immune response has seemed robust so far. You're criticizing scientists for saying "we cannot predict the future."

I do agree that it's overly cautious messaging. Scientists and doctors are prone to this. We can say "we expect vaccines to work for at least a year based on current serological trends" and I don't think that's too much of a risky statement.

Who are you claiming to speak for and with what authority?

Do you disagree with my statements? Please post your latest 1040 to make sure we can trust you.

Pfizer began work on their vaccine in January. They announced plans for a clinical trial in March. On April 29th (27th?), the first Pfizer vaccines were given to 4 German test subjects.

So the Pfizer vaccine took only three months to develop.

What was Rojo saying yesterday about deleting a thread because people were putting harmful information out there? Fxin hypocrites

Any guess on the number of shots the average "vaccinated" person will have taken by the end of 2025 ?

5 ? 7 ? 10 ?

**********

Next year, people are likely to need an annual COVID-19 vaccination just like they need an annual flu shot.

That prediction is made by researchers at six of Australia’s leading medical research institutions, based upon their study of the levels of neutralizing antibodies needed to confer protection against COVID-19. The detailed paper appeared in a medRxiv preprint.

“For example,” they explain, “a vaccine starting with an initial efficacy of 95% would be expected to maintain 58% efficacy by 250 days. However, a response starting with an initial efficacy of 70% would be predicted to drop to 18% efficacy after 250 days.”

https://www.biospace.com/article/australian-researchers-say-best-covid-19-vaccines-58-percent-effective-at-250-days/

fisky wrote:

Pfizer began work on their vaccine in January. They announced plans for a clinical trial in March. On April 29th (27th?), the first Pfizer vaccines were given to 4 German test subjects.

So the Pfizer vaccine took only three months to develop.

BioNTech created it (as a couple dozen other companies tried to varying degrees of success). Pfizer then selected one that worked and made a deal to produce it.

Thank you sir!.can we please stop the nonsense and live a science based life!

Limousine Libertarian wrote:

FACT: Vaccines simply didn't take very long to create. They only seem "rushed" compared to drugs that take ten years to chug through the approval process. This is like saying a 5-hour marathon is "rushed" because most people didn't walk 26 miles in all of April.

No long-term tests conducted. But we already know from independent research that the numbers related to serious adverse events in the Pfizer clinical trials are more than 15 times lower than independent research (I believe made up). The Moderna trials numbers are very different from independent research, but a little closer to realty for short-term adverse effects. If you trust drug company research and don’t care about long-term tests, then maybe you’ll believe it’s safe.

twoggle wrote:

Limousine Libertarian wrote:

FACT: Vaccines simply didn't take very long to create. They only seem "rushed" compared to drugs that take ten years to chug through the approval process. This is like saying a 5-hour marathon is "rushed" because most people didn't walk 26 miles in all of April.

No long-term tests conducted. But we already know from independent research that the numbers related to serious adverse events in the Pfizer clinical trials are more than 15 times lower than independent research (I believe made up). The Moderna trials numbers are very different from independent research, but a little closer to realty for short-term adverse effects. If you trust drug company research and don’t care about long-term tests, then maybe you’ll believe it’s safe.

Do you believe every flu vaccine is rushed each year? Do consider those dangerous too? They

only guess what flu variant will be prevalent that year, then make a vaccine for it, all within 6-9 months. So every year the flu shot is a brand new shot that hasn't been through extensive clinical trials either.

With these vaccines, the delivery method to get the immune response is what's important. Tweaking it to the prevalent strain is what makes it effective. Though COVID-19 is novel, the research on the delivery method has been on going, and trials were being conducted doing the swing flu scare 10+ years ago. So this is hardly new,

Full disclosure: I did work for a drug development company for several years. So my bias towards the drug companies trying to put everyone in grave danger in the name of profits is high. Also, check out Pfizer's stock price....too the MOOOOOON since the vaccine was announced (for those two lazy to check, it's up $2 (almost 4%!) in the 52 weeks! Making TENDIES!!!)