I'm an Anti-Vaxxer, Which Vax Should I Get?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m same OP. But yes will get this vaccine. I’m not anti vaxx tho .... just very thorough in my thought process of modern medicine. I have seen many drs not take their “do no harm” oath seriously enough.

I’m leaning towards J&J but I have no tendency towards blood clots ... and I was under the impression the mRNA also have a clot risk. Although rare for all around.

I would say Pfizer over Moderna, no question

What doctor actually "does no harm?" As a goal, it made sense when there wasn't much medicine could do, but it is entirely not appropriate anymore. Everything is benefit-risk analysis.

Can you think of a subspecialty or other part of the medical profession that actually does no harm?

You are talking to the wrong people. A vaccine that is less fatal than driving is a serious concern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m same OP. But yes will get this vaccine. I’m not anti vaxx tho .... just very thorough in my thought process of modern medicine. I have seen many drs not take their “do no harm” oath seriously enough.

I’m leaning towards J&J but I have no tendency towards blood clots ... and I was under the impression the mRNA also have a clot risk. Although rare for all around.

I would say Pfizer over Moderna, no question

What doctor actually "does no harm?" As a goal, it made sense when there wasn't much medicine could do, but it is entirely not appropriate anymore. Everything is benefit-risk analysis.

Can you think of a subspecialty or other part of the medical profession that actually does no harm?

I have seen many well regarded drs bring out the big guns of pharmaceuticals or procedures, when more accessible approaches with less downsides could have sufficed or been tried first. But it’s a product of an outdated curriculum in our medical schools. I was just listening to a podcast about how it can take 30yrs for a cause and effect to be identified to then to be included into curriculum. That’s pretty astounding if you think about it.

So yes there is a benefit risk analysis .... but without comprehensive knowledge of things that have less inherent risk, it’s an incomplete analysis

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m same OP. But yes will get this vaccine. I’m not anti vaxx tho .... just very thorough in my thought process of modern medicine. I have seen many drs not take their “do no harm” oath seriously enough.

I’m leaning towards J&J but I have no tendency towards blood clots ... and I was under the impression the mRNA also have a clot risk. Although rare for all around.

I would say Pfizer over Moderna, no question

What doctor actually "does no harm?" As a goal, it made sense when there wasn't much medicine could do, but it is entirely not appropriate anymore. Everything is benefit-risk analysis.

Can you think of a subspecialty or other part of the medical profession that actually does no harm?

You are talking to the wrong people. A vaccine that is less fatal than driving is a serious concern.

This is too simplified. I don’t think many people are worried about fatality. People are worried about unknown and/or long term side effects. Your comment is ignorant to what people’s concerns actually are

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m same OP. But yes will get this vaccine. I’m not anti vaxx tho .... just very thorough in my thought process of modern medicine. I have seen many drs not take their “do no harm” oath seriously enough.

I’m leaning towards J&J but I have no tendency towards blood clots ... and I was under the impression the mRNA also have a clot risk. Although rare for all around.

I would say Pfizer over Moderna, no question

What doctor actually "does no harm?" As a goal, it made sense when there wasn't much medicine could do, but it is entirely not appropriate anymore. Everything is benefit-risk analysis.

Can you think of a subspecialty or other part of the medical profession that actually does no harm?

I have seen many well regarded drs bring out the big guns of pharmaceuticals or procedures, when more accessible approaches with less downsides could have sufficed or been tried first. But it’s a product of an outdated curriculum in our medical schools. I was just listening to a podcast about how it can take 30yrs for a cause and effect to be identified to then to be included into curriculum. That’s pretty astounding if you think about it.

So yes there is a benefit risk analysis .... but without comprehensive knowledge of things that have less inherent risk, it’s an incomplete analysis

Okay, let me ask again:
Can you think of a subspecialty or other part of the medical profession that actually does no harm?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anecdotally, Pfizer seems to have a bit less side effects among people I know who got it. And only 3 weeks between shots so you have it over with faster. And Pfizer is an older, more established company which may give you some extra piece of mind.

+1. My DH and I have both had our first shots of Pfizer with zero ill effects so far!

[Anonymous]

Get Pfizer. I was tired and had a bad headache, but Advil helped. Second dose I had to take a nap. Get it now!!!!

[Anonymous]

I got moderna. Pfizer seems to have less side effects. Since it is the first vaccine that came out, there is more out there re it’s safety.

[Anonymous]

Did OP ever clarify what the “near death” side effects were? I may have missed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did OP ever clarify what the “near death” side effects were? I may have missed it.

He was pale and laid the eff up for 2 days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did OP ever clarify what the “near death” side effects were? I may have missed it.

He was pale and laid the eff up for 2 days.

This would make me nervous too. My husband was down for 36hrs and he never ever gets sick or complains. I was worried too. It’s just strange to me how significant these reactions are. Unlike any other vaccine

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op here.

THANK YOU!!!

I love that there is overwhelm support for Pfizer, which is where I was leaning anyway and I love the reasons given -- less side-effects, quicker (only 3 weeks apart), more established company, etc. It makes me feel more comfortable that there is a clear front-runner.

And, I love the idea to get it done at an actual doctors office or medical center or hospital. I will do that!

THANK YOU ALL!!!

My DH and I have had Pfizer. DH had no symptoms except short-lived mild fatigue. I was tired/sore arm after first shot (24 hours), and had mild flu symptoms after the second (low grade fever, achy back, neck, mild headache). After some Tylenol the next day the symptoms improved, and 48 hours later, I was completely fine. My friends mentioned everything from feeling awful (a friend with autoimmune condition) to no side effects whatsoever. Everyone improved to 100% within 24-72 hours.

[Anonymous]

Eh my husband slept for 13 hours the night after his second Pfizer shot. He had chills and felt feverish for about 48 hours. If he were unable to be awakened, I'd have taken him to the ER because that sounds serious. He just had flu-like symptoms, which are expected.

[Anonymous]

Pfizer and Moderna are incredibly similar except
Pfizer is 30mcg per dose and Moderna is 100mcg per dose.
This significantly higher dose likely accounts for more side effects but interestingly does not account for better outcomes as far as we know so far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Jeff would call me an anti-vaxxer. I call myself vaccine-conscious. DH is in the foreign service so I've been vaccinated for typhoid, yellow fever, and all sorts of things no one is normally vaccinated for. But, yes I'm nervous about new, unapproved, experimental vaccines that don't have 2+ years of research. And I read every crazy report (the latest one is on heart enlargement?)

Anyway, it really hasn't impacted me because I never leave the house. (I was laid off at the beginning of Covid.) But we are going to Seattle this summer at the end of July which is the middle of an outbreak right now so DH has put his foot down and I need to get a first-shot vaccine no later than the end of May. DH already got the Moderna (with terrible near-death side effects which then scared me even more.)

I won't do J&J -- I have a high risk of blood clots.

So my only options are Pfizer or Moderna. Please do NOT say "either." That does not calm me down. I need a reason for getting one vaccine over the other. I know both have a claimed (maybe false) risk of heart enlargement. But I know that Covid is a lot more dangerous. I know both are mRNA vaccines but what are the differences between them? I'm leaning toward Pfizer because of DH's experience with Moderna (2-days out cold in bed, sweating and pale and nearly unconscious the entire time -- could not stay awake).

TIA!

What do you mean "near death" side effects? Clotting? Some actual medical condition? Or did he just feel like hell? While the latter would no doubt be miserable, that's really not what near death should be used for.

+1 geez Louise!! Chill on the hyperbole, please.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's hard to take you seriously when you use "near-death" to describe what sounds like a typical man-cold. Useless drama.

Yup. Wtf?

That is not typical and normal and it was scary for OP. You are a vicious person if you cannot allow her to be concerned and allow it to be ok she was upset at her husband being that sick. Start your own thread to attack and bully people.

DP but of course OP is allowed to be scared and freaked out by her DH’s reaction - I would’ve been too. But clearly he wasn’t “near death” - that’s a needlessly alarming description that will freak people the F out.