Could this be the first thing they’ve got right during this pandemic or have they jumped too early?
Moderna applying for approval in Singapore and if everything goes as planned, we could have the first shipment to Singapore as early as this month. I am no conspiracy theorist and marvel at some of the anti-vaxxers but even myself, I am a bit skeptical whether I will jump straight onto the vaccine. SElfishly, I might let whoever take it first and observe what are the real impact in real time. But overall I think I will go with the flow of the masses.
I understand how you think, but want to remind you that possible side effects of a vaccine would likely not be found until long after a lot of people are vaccinated. In Norway we have several people who developed chronic issue after the swine flue vaccine, but I think it was years before a correlation with that vaccine was found.
Anyway, if offered a vaccine that my government deems good, I will take it. I probably won’t be offered a vaccine before quite some time though, since I am not in the risk zone. First we are going to vaccinate the elderly, weak and those with conditions. Then important people, then the rest of the population.
Wait. What?
It is my assumption, yes. Critical people who works in the Ministry of Defence, Ministry of Interior, the defence forces in general, people who works in the health sector. Obviously, these people must be vaccinated before the general population, I assume this is the policy everywhere where one have a well functioning state ?
What I know for sure, is that the elderly and those with conditions will be vaccinated first along with the health sector. The other bit is my assumption, I would be shocked if critical people in our infrastructure was not vaccinated before the general populace and it would be a travesty if that would be the case.
To be honest, I don’t understand you reaction. Of course people who are important for the functions of the state and society must be prioritized. Isn’t that just completely common sense ?
2 Likes
Good luck to all the guinea pigs. 
4 Likes
I’m less concerned about the vaccine than I was. The speed at which it was developed appears to have been because of how quickly the resources could be brought together to get it done - not from shortcuts to the science or testing. From what I have read, such projects are much slower normally because of the bureaucracy and funding.
3 Likes
It’s just the way you said it mate. All good.
‘Frontline workers’ sounds a bit more palatable…
2 Likes
Got it. But it would involve a lot more than “front line workers” though, which is why I said important people. People who work in strategic industry, the entire health sector and much, much more. Most of those prioritized for a vaccine in such a case, would probably not work on the “front line”, but be deemed to be too critical to end up on long sick leaves.
3 Likes
Yeah I’d hope so. On the other hand, medium and long-term effects on general health won’t be known before years. In that sense, anyone taking a vaccine now will serve as a guinea pig for further, more efficient and secure generations of that same vaccine.
2 Likes
Ya like I said, I will likely go with the masses, meaning I might not be the first batches of vaccine takers but once our government says that the rest should take it, I probably will. Its also important to note that in Singapore, we do trust our government to a high degree, at least most of us. And to me, the vaccine is also more than just a medical solution, its also psychological that gives a peace of mind to people over time to start travelling and give some needed boost to the economies.
2 Likes
Narcolepsy in children?
There were question marks around Pandemrix even before it was administered.As such i opted for the other vaccine(Celvapan) for both my children but took the former vaccine myself as it was the one being pushed by the government at the time.The nurse who administered the vaccine to my children told me i was being ridiculous and had a go.In response i told her to mind her own ********
business and give the kids the one i asked for,which she eventually did.
I’m not an anti-vaxer,i’ve had all vaccines on offer(from what i know) but i do try to look at all the information provided and then make a judgement call on what i think is safest for my kids.
2 Likes
Yes vaccine dev is slow because of the risk - typically low profit and targeted at a disease that may no longer be relevant by the time the vaccine is ready. The fast tracking of this was mostly about backstopping the funding and guaranteeing manufacturing contracts. The regulatory cooperation helped but that only takes time off the process on the edges compared to the financial derisking.
Despite all the scares about vaccines, there are vanishingly few side effects of them as a class that occur outside of the 2 week post-inoculation period. What a lot of people miss when evaluating the risk of vaccine, they dont factor in the risk associated with the “conservative” approach of doing nothing. That still leaves the risk of catching covid and then getting yourself and other people seriously ill. On balance, the risk from vaccines are really small.
5 Likes
Yes which makes the fact that people that do suffer some very serious side effects don’t get any compensation even more alarming!
I see the big problem on this issue the denial that some vaccines have a few far between adverse effects. This dishonesty I feel fuels the anti vaxxers.
In any case as soon as I get my ordonnance I’m off to the pharmacy to get my dose (if they don’t have any left in stock I’ll get my son to save me a shot at his pharmacy).
I dont think it is dishonesty, but context.
Even Guillen Barre, probably the issue most in the minds of people with vaccine concerns grounded in reality (i.e. not anti-vax), occurs at a rate of about 2 cases per million vaccinations. It is tragic when it happens, but it is a vanishingly small chance. It is also quite possible that the individuals in whom this happens would have developed the condition if left unvaccinated and subsequently produced a natural immune response to that or similar pathogen.
2 Likes
So why aren’t so few people compensated?
1 Like
Some vaccines can have negative side-effects though? For instance the one against smallpox?
Not arguing with the highlighted at all btw. It’s merely a balance of risks on both sides of the balance. In some cases, for instance if you’re beyond 80 and are fed up of being confined at home all the time, the vaccine is very much an option, although obviously not a 100% secure or reliable one.
I’m against mandatory vaccination for everyone though. People should be asked to make his/her own decision if they want to get the vaccine or not.
3 Likes
Outside the immediate 2-week reaction period, reactions to the smallpox vaccine incredibly rare to the point of not being clearly linked - I think one postulate is a heart condition. But the smallpox vaccine has been a poster child for anti-vaccination campaigns, including faux-scientific studies discredited a generation ago (including falsified data) that somehow have a zombie existence.
Societies cannot really allow individuals to choose to carry an infectious agent with massive externalities. At the very least, if an individual declines to be vaccinated against coronavirus, there have to be consequences that limit the ability of that individual to expose others, imposing risks and costs on the broader society. For example, as an employer, I face costs dealing with the virus, and a workplace outbreak risks dramatically increasing those costs. I do not wish to expose myself, my organization, and my employees to those risks, therefore I do not wish to employ anyone who has declined to protect themselves. If individuals have the right to make their own decision, surely we all have the right to make our decisions on how to engage with that individual as a member of society?
5 Likes
Completely agreed. To go back to my initial point though, I pushed back on the idea that the speed of this approval process should influence that individual risk/benefit assessment because of how incredibly rare adverse events are outside of the initial post-vaccination period. If you look at how long past vaccination participants have to be before the Sponsor can apply for approval, the risks of something substantial existing downstream that has not been observed are vanishingly small. The larger issue, as it is with all approval studies, is the size of the effect rather than the timescale its been studied for - something that happens 1 times in a million is important if its going to be given to 7 billion people and is very unlikely to have been seen in even a large phase 3 trial. But even still, those sorts of issues shouldn’t really affect the individual risk assessment because you as an individual are incredibly unlikely to experience such an issue…far less so than you are to experience the issue you are being protected against.
3 Likes
I’m getting it as soon as a I can get my hands on it, if people don’t want it, fine, more for me 
4 Likes