I am a research scientist - it is complicated

Well, not that complicated. IMHO it is not reasonable to oppose having a vaccine on the grounds that Bill Gates is trying to steal your DNA / 5G Illuminati mind control / the ants are out to get you.

It is, however, reasonable to expect that the vaccine will have been properly tested and that any long term implications have been assessed.

In my experience when politics and science become entwined you end up with poor politics and poor science. I am sure there will be political pressure on the regulatory bodies that need to approve the use of the vaccines - even if they are not comfortable doing so.

So I am not against a vaccine and not against a Russian vaccine but am minded to balance the potential risk from an untested vaccine against the clear risk from contracting covid.

Now, this gets a little more complex when you consider that several covid vaccines aren't just novel vaccines, they are novel vaccines developed using novel techniques. The leading US vaccine candidate is made by a company called Moderna. It is my understanding that Moderna have never brought a product to market before.

Like I said, it is a risk balance. It would like to look at the trial data myself to try to asses the risks.

I imagine the UK will get the AstraZeneca vaccine which may not work as well as we had hoped - potentially reducing the worse effects of covid rather than inferring complete immunity - and may have some minor side effects. I will most likely have the vaccine as soon as it is available but may also consider paying for an alternate vaccine (Moderna/Bointech/etc) if I feel there is a basis for that decision and that is a viable option.

Sorry, too many words

Posted By: Timmy_Goat, Aug 11, 18:24:39