False Pfizer vaccine myth

I’ve seen a rumor floating around that the Pfizer vaccine was developed from human fetal cells. Nope.

Pfizer’s vaccine was developed using genetic sequencing on computers without using fetal cells . As a consequence, the pro-life Charlotte Lozier Institute listed the vaccine as “ethically uncontroversial.”

I wonder if this myth arose because one of the Covid treatments the President had - Remdesivir, from Regeneron - was developed based on a line of cells derived from a fetus.

Trump’s COVID drug was developed using aborted fetal tissue (msn.com)

“The Administration’s policy on the use of human fetal tissue from elective abortions in research specifically excluded 'already-established (as of June 5, 2019) human fetal cell lines,” the official said. “Thus, a product made using extant cell lines that existed before June 5, 2019 would not implicate the Administration’s policy.” - White House official.

5 Likes

Thanks. I’ve seen some fairly strident anti-vaxxer posts here and there, vowing not to take any COVID vaccine. Another myth is that the RNA-based vaccine will permanently alter the recipient’s DNA. Oh well, I hope enough people are vaccinated to create the herd immunity we need.

1 Like

That will be the next conspiracy of course - well it already is. Bill Gates and tracking devices and such and such.

3 Likes

Conspiracy theories are fun to play with, but damn they get old fast.

As for my view on the vaccine. It’s more of a wait and see. I want to know if the effects are worse than the disease. I tend to have an unpleasant reaction to the flu vaccine, and the shingles vaccine was not fun either.

Hope that makes sense. I admit that there may be a false equivalency between the vaccines and reactions to them, and everybody reacts differently to them.

3 Likes

Starting to think maybe one of these companies ought to use CRISPR to develop a mental disease free brain for some of these folks.

Sitting here getting over a case of food poisoning, kicked on the TV, heard the nut bag theory, came here to chill myself, and got to read about Pfizer having to debunk the nut jobs.

Can I just get my shots and move on please?

6 Likes

I do think it is important for people to realize that those receiving the vaccines will likely have temporary flu-like symptoms as their immune system does its job. I’m fearful that people will start reporting that it is making them sick and that will really make the conspiracies run rampant at that point. So to be clear (and this isn’t directed at you @Carolina_Cycling_Ute)

YOU WILL LIKELY GET A LITTLE BIT SICK FROM GETTING THE VACCINE, WHICH IS NORMAL

In case anyone decides to gloss over that point.

10 Likes

I plan on taking a sick day the day after I get the vaccine (x2?). Sounds like it’s likely, but just saw something that 10-15% have ‘noticeable side effects’ (feeling crummy, aches, slight fever). So that’s small, but not insignificant. Effects appear to be for about a day in most cases.

@Carolina_Cycling_Ute - you should talk to your doctor or could wait until there is a little more data and experiences on side effects and you might consider planning on feeling sick for a little longer. Some feel short term effects, but you probably know about that better than most.

My understanding of the RNA vaccines is that they are short genetic segments that match parts of the virus to make your system recognize them and create antibodies which creates a response. One technological development is that they figured out what pieces to NOT include because prior trials showed inflammation issues. The whole approach is actually VERY promising for future quick turnaround vaccines. I don’t think it can be worse than the virus itself because on top of your body fighting the invader, the virus is replicating in cells and bursting them to release new virus’. And the RNA doesn’t join into your DNA - it’s not CRISPR. This isn’t going to become ‘I Am Legend’.

2 Likes

Thank @DataUte and @RockerUte. I understand the potential risks of getting and not getting the vaccine. I’m considered high risk for flu, and other upper respiratory issues due to asthma, on top of an autoimmune issue as well.

I’ve been watching the press releases and articles on the vaccines. They look promising. Aside from the obvious issues for me, I’m waiting to see which of them travels or stores better.

As it sits now, I tended to avoid groups prior to covid, covid just adds to my avoidance of them. Frankly, I’m more leery of the flu, not because covid isn’t potentially dangerous to me, but I know what the flu does to me.

So, yes I’ll chat with my doc about the vaccine. In the meantime I’ll just watch and observe what happens. Like most things, people talk about the negatives more than the positives. So that means we’ll hear more about the side effects from the whiners. I’ll wait for more data, and a doc visit to decide what I’ll do.

1 Like

I’m one of the recipients of the Moderna vaccine. I received my first vaccine in early August and a booster in mid September. The first shot feels just fine with minimal short term side effects. On a scale of 1-10, I had body aches of about 1.5. Barely noticeable and they lasted about 18 hours. The booster vaccine created slightly greater body aches (about a 4), some easily managed fatigue and nothing else. All symptoms subsided after about 24 hours. I share this info because I want people to trust and have comfort with this vaccine. I’ve had it now for 4 months and have no side effects. Reply back if you have any questions. I’m happy to answer them.

8 Likes

The good news is you won’t be eligible until after all the doctors and nurses get it first, so you will have some data. My wife has asthma, and she’ll get it as soon as she’s eligible.

2 Likes

So true.

I’ve also wondered if there will be difference between Pfizer, Moderna, Novavax vaccines both from efficacy, side effects, etc. And I assume we won’t have too much of a choice on which one we get (well, I’m under Kaiser, so I’m pretty sure we will get what we are given)…

I think you’re just being smart. Big difference between that and sharing scary rumors seen on Facebook. I also will be watching the vaccine’s rollout carefully, but I’m pretty optimistic because I’m lucky enough not to have reactions (so far) to vaccines. I’m someone who is marginally in the higher risk group (kind of an old guy) so I’d get the Pfizer vaccine tomorrow if it were available.

1 Like

The staggered dosing of Pfizer & Moderna suggest maybe a more individualized approach may be coming to help folks who are more sensitive to vaccinations, like CCU. (Where I work everyone gets the Flu vaccine, yearly. A few folks definitely feel it worse than others.)

Why not 3 smaller doses to get the immune system programmed?

What tests can be run to assess the effectiveness in individuals?

The precision and sophistication of medicine keeps pushing us away from one-size-fits-all treatments.

The sheer number of Covid vaccines that will be available is staggering… and encouraging. By May I think there may be 4 or 5 options, with emerging guidance on which ones to consider.

@UtahFanSir posted this on the COVID thread, but I found it interesting. What caught my eye is that trials for Moderna focused on 56+ age range. Pfizer was 18-55. Novavax 18-59. Obviously, those age ranges will expand, but it’s likely Moderna will be used on older folks and Pfizer for middle ages first.

I don’t know about 3 doses, but 2 seems to usually be sufficient. The holy grail of course is 1, but none of those have made it yet or had the same efficacy.

Edit: Just found this
Biotechnology company Moderna has started enrolling children as young as 12 years old in trials to test its coronavirus vaccine. It’s the second coronavirus vaccine maker, after Pfizer, to test its vaccine in children and teens. The trial seeks to enroll 3,000 volunteers who are 12 to 18 years old

The issue of conspiracy theories fascinates me so I have done quite a bit of reading about the phenomena over the last few years.

Here is a scholarly article entitled The Psychology of Conspiracy Theories, published June 2017 in the professional journal Current Directions in Psychological Science. The article is a comprehensive survey of prior research. If I have posted this prior, excuse me. Note, the article is heavy on the arcane language, as most research papers are. But not hard to understand.

Abstract:

What psychological factors drive the popularity of conspiracy theories, which explain important events as secret plots by powerful and malevolent groups? What are the psychological consequences of adopting these theories? We review the current research and find that it answers the first of these questions more thoroughly than the second. Belief in conspiracy theories appears to be driven by motives that can be characterized as epistemic (understanding one’s environment), existential (being safe and in control of one’s environment), and social (maintaining a positive image of the self and the social group). However, little research has investigated the consequences of conspiracy belief, and to date, this research does not indicate that conspiracy belief fulfills people’s motivations. Instead, for many people, conspiracy belief may be more appealing than satisfying. Further research is needed to determine for whom, and under what conditions, conspiracy theories may satisfy key psychological motives.

3 Likes