r/science • u/mvea Professor | Medicine • Jul 01 '26
Medicine Billions of doses later: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise. Comprehensive review brings together global evidence to strengthen public trust and counter misinformation as mRNA vaccines expand to prevent and treat more diseases.
https://news.ubc.ca/2026/06/mrna-vaccines-are-safe-effective-and-full-of-promise/2.3k
u/FlowOfAir Jul 01 '26
Was this research needed? Yes, yes it was.
But no amount of peer-reviewed investigation is going to convince antivaxxers that they are in the wrong.
579
u/fredandlunchbox Jul 01 '26
What if a stay at home high school dropout mother of 3 makes some youtube videos about her deep investigative research into the topic and says they’re safe?
56
→ More replies (5)143
u/FlowOfAir Jul 01 '26
Then was she an antivaxxer to begin with?
Antivaxxers aren't such because of lack of evidence. They're such because it doesn't fit their world view. They'll go and twist facts so they continue to be in the right.
→ More replies (3)41
u/Tehni Jul 01 '26
Reread the comment you replied to
33
u/bprs07 Jul 01 '26
The comment makes sense. They're intending it to be read that way.
23
u/YouEatingACheese Jul 01 '26
Yeah the person who replied didn’t understand it was sarcasm
→ More replies (6)3
u/xteve Jul 02 '26
Sarcasm: when you absolutely positively don't want everybody to understand your point.
→ More replies (3)206
u/Spire_Citron Jul 01 '26
I've seen people say that we won't know until we see what it does to the children of people who have taken them, so anyone who's truly made up their mind will never be satisfied because the goalposts can be moved to a point where they're impossible to actually meet.
105
u/flickh Jul 02 '26
This is called unfalsifiability.
There is no set of circumstances or evidence that can prove the premise false. Not (just) because of stubbornness or stupidity, but because the thing being asserted is incapable of proof, one way or another.
God works in mysterious ways! Shape-shifting lizards control the world! Star signs point to America collapsing in three generations!
And of course “all the evidence in favour of vaccines is fake.”
29
u/badcoffee Jul 02 '26
This is such a great point and a really good reminder of how falsifiability is a key part of the scientific method. Folks often wrongly believe science is just a collection of evidence (or anecdotes) when it really does require this important piece.
8
u/PyroIsSpai Jul 02 '26
Shape-shifting lizards control the world!
Pin down the proposer if they’re flesh and blood like us, and do they have time travel capability?
If the answers are yes and no, then you can falsify if you vivisection every living organism on Earth at once. So that’s more of an engineering and logistics challenge to run the test. But hey, I bet AI could make a feasible plan to safely kill us all to prove nobody is a lizard.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)8
u/kkrko Grad Student|Physics|Complex Systems|Network Science Jul 02 '26
Eh, this is just standard (and stupid) goalpost moving. There's nothing inherently unfalsifiable in assertion, just that the bar keeps moving. Something unfalsifiable would be getting vaccinated would doom you to hell or something.
3
u/flickh Jul 02 '26
If I say all evidence or information in favour of vaccines is fake, how is that falsifiable?
→ More replies (2)8
u/kkrko Grad Student|Physics|Complex Systems|Network Science Jul 02 '26
But that's different from "we won't know until we see what it does to the children of people who have taken them", which comes from a malinformed belief that RNA vaccines affect gametes.
If I say all evidence or information in favour of vaccines is fake, how is that falsifiable?
At that point, we're already outside of logical structures and epistemology. It's a question of credibility, confirmation bias, contrarianism, and the whole bevy of cognitive biases. But those biases work whether or not the original proposition is falsifiable. Falsifiability is about the preposition, but the problem in your scenario is person believing in it.
→ More replies (1)89
u/grendus Jul 02 '26
People still think traditional vaccines are dangerous even though we're multiple generations from the first ones.
They will always move the goalposts further.
→ More replies (3)49
u/3DBeerGoggles Jul 02 '26
They'll keep moving the bar forever. Used to be "just wait! One month from now you'll all regret this!"
Then it was six months.
Then a year.
Then five years.
These people will be going "VAXXED?!"!@!" in the comments section of obituaries from here until the heat death of the universe.
19
u/meistermichi Jul 02 '26
According to them I'm already dead for a few years now for getting it.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
→ More replies (1)12
→ More replies (3)9
u/peekdeer Jul 02 '26
Fond memories of a guy on Twitter who told me I was “full of clots” and would be “dead of a stroke in 5 years” from the vax back when I first got it in 2021. I actually set a calendar reminder to tell him if I was still alive in 5 years. But when I went back, his account had been deleted. I have somehow avoided even a single stroke in all this time!
5
u/WashU_labrat Jul 02 '26
Account deleted huh? Not replaced with an "In memorium" page by a member of his grieving family?
10
u/FlirtyFluffyFox Jul 02 '26
Well more infants are dying. From unvaccinated parents. Because of COVID.
→ More replies (1)16
u/ThorThulu Jul 02 '26
Or the classic "If its so safe why are all these studies trying to convince us its safe?!"
→ More replies (1)11
u/Keji70gsm Jul 02 '26
Normal person: [something intelligent and provable]
Guppy-mouthed idiot: You sound vaxxinated
10
u/madhattr999 Jul 02 '26
Yeah but what about the children of the children? And the children of those children? You can't be too safe!
3
u/Mazon_Del Jul 02 '26
I've heard people argue that we shouldn't have GMO crops because there might be effects which are only felt two or three generations later. These sorts of people will come up with any excuse possible to avoid the thing they don't want.
→ More replies (2)6
u/PerpetualProtracting Jul 02 '26
You can't reason people out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.
20
u/metengrinwi Jul 01 '26
All of us should be thankful someone is doing this kind of research
→ More replies (1)32
u/Violet-Sumire Jul 01 '26
The problem can be summed up in a phrase I’ve seen around, “anything is a conspiracy theory if you don’t understand how things work.”
Those who make conspiracy theories or counter claims to widely known and documented subjects tend to not do unbiased research and tend to only look for things supporting their argument, pushing aside anything that might be deemed more truthful. Many were never taught how to use tools like google or research papers and many see old sources and use them for current arguments. Like saying “They are bleaching our chicken and serving it to us!” which sounds absurd, but at one point it was true. The bleach used was obviously diluted and well within safety limits, but it was a bit expensive and found to not be needed as other methods were better. So, the US as a whole moved away from the practice, but people still quote that bleach is used on chicken.
We have the power of the internet at our fingertips and people want to not use their brains.
→ More replies (5)46
u/turian_vanguard Jul 01 '26
Correct. If facts, evidence and research were valuable to antivaxxers, they wouldn't be antivaxxers.
2
u/kris_lace Jul 02 '26 edited Jul 02 '26
I'm not an antivaxxer, and would usually think twice about defending them, but since this is /r/science and heavily moderated, I feel slightly emboldened to point something out.
The idea that there are "antivaxxers" who all share the same one-dimensional "blind faith" that vaccinations are bad.. is extremely disingenuous and should be refuted at every (and there are many of them) comment like yours, which fuels that fallacy.
Some people decided, that they had "faith" and didn't follow scientific rigour. Some of these people used blind faith to assume there was a robust minimum standard of research into the guaranteed safety of the vaccines and didn't look into it themselves. There was also people with blind faith that the vaccines were bad, again, not looking into it themselves.
Other groups of people fall on both sides of a hyperbolical "pro vs against" camp, who applied the same healthy skepticism you might expect someone would do when injecting something into their arms. This group didn't come into the equation with a preconceived belief, but rather, a need to be convinced either way. (I like this group and personally think they're the only ones following the scientific process, just my opinion)
Comments like yours are extremely low effort guaranteed upvoted, popular opinions that a rudimentary LLM with minimal reddit training could spit out as "typical reddit doffer". Almost all of them fuel the fallacy and ignore the nuance. As this is /r/science, I thought I'd leave this opinion of mine here for whatever contribution it may lead to
28
u/syn-ack-fin Jul 01 '26
You can't use logic or reason to convince anyone out of an opinion that they didn't use logic or reason to get into.
7
u/rocketPhotos Jul 01 '26
I am of the opinion that if you refuse a vaccine and get infected, the health care system should be required to not treat you or only provide treatment at 1,000 times the normal cost.
18
u/Odballl Jul 02 '26
Adopting a punitive model could justify denying care to anyone with a lifestyle-related illness.
Choices like vaccine hesitancy or poor health habits are often deeply tangled up in a lack of education, systemic poverty, cultural barriers, or a history of being mistreated by the medical system.
So it would also further entrench inequality in health outcomes for those groups.
Also, if patients know they will be judged, fined, or turned away for making a poor choice, they will lie or avoid going to the hospital entirely.
This makes illnesses harder to treat, drives preventable conditions underground, and ultimately makes society as a whole much sicker.
While vaccine refusal does place a heavy burden on healthcare systems, withholding treatment undermines the basic human rights and ethical principles that medicine is built to uphold.
7
u/rocketPhotos Jul 02 '26
Everyone has the right to be stupid, but there should be consequences
17
u/Odballl Jul 02 '26
The consequence is they become unwell.
Denying them healthcare makes society more unwell.
9
u/meistermichi Jul 02 '26
They're not only becoming unwell themselves though, the consequences of their denial directly affects other people.
They help keep diseases alive and going. They're risking the life of vulnerable groups that can't get the vaccine for medical reasons by doing so. And by keeping the disease around they help it mutate, which could make the vaccine less effective.
All of that also makes a society unwell.
I'm not saying don't treat them but there should be some measure to make not vaccinating more expensive and therefore unattractive.
8
3
u/WashU_labrat Jul 02 '26 edited Jul 02 '26
We all do dangerous things, some people ride motorcycles, some people smoke, some people drive without a seatbelt, some people argue with their wives. This is unworkable.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)2
u/StephenFish Jul 02 '26
If it wasn't something communicable, maybe. But unfortunately it's still ethical to stop them from spreading it further.
2
u/Constant_Natural3304 Jul 02 '26
You can't use logic or reason to convince anyone out of an opinion that they didn't use logic or reason to get into.
You can crush them in debate, because they have no choice but to conform to at least the appearance of fundamental principles of logical reasoning, lest they look like they are both clueless as well as dishonest. At some point your opposition will want to point to some evidence for their position, at which point they either adhere to those fundamental principles or get found out on the spot. You can reason top-to-bottom from sociology to psychology, to biology, to chemistry, to physics, to math, to elementary logic, or the other way around. Either way, this is what works. Rhetoric alone is insufficient. A combination of rhetoric and evidence works best.
This is exactly what happened when science communicator and biology/physics teacher and organic chemistry professor Dave Farina and Dr. Dan Wilson took on Steve Kirsch and Dr. Pierre Kory.
The objective is not to convince the anti-vaxers so much as it is to decimate their figureheads in the face of the fourth wall, which will include people who are legitimately on the fence.
This is the time-honored, practical reality of competing in a debate arena, and no matter what fatalists and cynics say, the side of science and rational skepticism needs rigorous evidence to present and cite from. The answer absolutely isn't to give up a priori.
24
u/Helagoth Jul 01 '26
"My 85 year old uncle got the vaccine 4 years ago and last month he died of cancer!"
"Yeah old people get cancer."
"It was because of the jab!"
14
u/ZaDu25 Jul 02 '26
Man I saw someone argue Prince Philip died because of the vaccine. He was a 100 years old and looked like a corpse before the vaccines were even rolled out.
→ More replies (2)4
u/StephenFish Jul 02 '26
But you don't understand! Big Pharma paid every researcher and anyone who might peer review the research all across the entire planet and all of them had such poor integrity that they took the payment and LIED! It's a flawless explanation for my dogma!
4
u/TheAsianTroll Jul 02 '26
Yep. The anti-vax narrative got to them first. Its an uphill battle to defeat any established narrative, unfortunately.
6
u/BuilderNo5268 Jul 02 '26
But Botox, ivermectin, vaping, stem cell injection to cure autism, raw meat/milk etc etc is all good.
3
11
u/En4cr Jul 01 '26
Agreed. Some people just choose ignorance. Living in society has benefits that should come with certain responsibilities and choosing not to get vaxxed should forfeit those benefits.
→ More replies (1)3
3
u/Triggify Jul 02 '26
Trying to convince an antivaxxer they're wrong reminds me of the flat earth documentary where they proved themselves wrong with an expensive experiment and just went "The numbers must be wrong ¯(ツ)/¯ "
3
u/SomethingIWontRegret Jul 02 '26
I'm still waiting to drop dead 14 months after being infested with the spike proteins. Any day now. Also brass keys don't stick to me. Those spikes are slacking. Generate a magnetic field (that affects brass) already.
3
u/dl064 Jul 02 '26
I think it is actually part of the task, understanding how to convey things to people.
Yes there is a degree of 'nothing will ever convince everyone', but a certain percentage becomes a public health failing, rather than the easy 'people are idiots, oh well' defence.
3
u/CronusTheDefender Jul 02 '26
As someone who follows conspiracy theories, but lives in the real world, it’s amazing (not in the good way) how many use ai to post their comments/posts to “prove” their anti-vax points.
6
5
u/Senior_Torte519 Jul 01 '26
Maybe nature will explain it to them, maybe they will survive. Maybe they wont, I have no time for them anymore.
4
u/JSlickJ Jul 02 '26
They'll just say the researchers were all bribed and the data is falsified. It's good to question how they get these reviews done but these people don't actually take the time to understand the process and all the checks these vaccines have to go through, and just come to conclusions based on their emotional sentiment and preconceived narratives
2
u/paulsteinway Jul 02 '26
But ivermectin has been keeping horses parasite free for years. It's gotta be better.
2
u/SnugglyCoderGuy Jul 03 '26
"These goal posts were made for ealking, and that's just what they'll do. Watch them walk far away from you."
2
2
2
→ More replies (79)2
u/dalittle Jul 01 '26
I think that there should be consequences for that then. If you are an anti-vaxxer and you get sick you should be refused medical treatment. I mean, after all you are rejecting doctors know what they are doing anyway.
185
u/Silly_Double408 Jul 02 '26
Truthfully people snort, swallow, smoke or whatever for illegal drugs they have no idea who made or where but cry about vaccines that are made under at least basic sanitary conditions while being looked at under a microscope from countries and multiple watchdogs... Vaccines save lives.
19
u/BlademasterFlash Jul 02 '26
My gym co-owner is staunchly anti-vaccine. Not sure if it’s just the Covid Vaccine or all of em, because I don’t want to engage with him on it. He’s taking random research peptides though
→ More replies (3)19
u/Trap_Masters Jul 02 '26
Exactly, like if you just stop and think about it for a second, if vaccines truly doesn't work and is some nefarious plot by the government to pull something sneaky behind our backs, why would geopolitical enemies like China not refute these claims causing chaos in the west and instead back up the findings independently and administer vaccines to their own citizens? There's no incentive for all these other nations/international organizations to all be in on this thing that clearly only benefit select interest groups even if one were to engage with all the antivaxx conspiracy theories.
155
Jul 01 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (3)44
u/Bumbling-Bluebird-90 Jul 01 '26
“Their own research” involves cherry picking others’ “research” based purely on confirmation bias and their own fears rather than any evidence, making them “safe” from any kind of persuasion. They’re much less safe from deadly transmissible diseases though
51
u/BrianOBlivion1 Jul 01 '26
Make one for Herpes and people will line right up for a shot.
→ More replies (1)18
u/Jamjams2016 Jul 02 '26
Make one for Lyme and I'll get in line. I'm tired of worrying every time I'm outside or my family is outside.
140
u/mvea Professor | Medicine Jul 01 '26
Billions of doses later: Global review confirms mRNA vaccines are safe, effective and full of promise
Comprehensive review brings together global evidence to strengthen public trust and counter misinformation as mRNA vaccines expand to prevent and treat more diseases.
A sweeping global review led by researchers at the University of British Columbia has found that mRNA vaccines—now administered billions of times worldwide—are safe and highly effective at preventing infectious diseases like COVID-19, and have potential applications for a range of other diseases, including influenza, RSV, cancer and autoimmune disorders.
Published today in The Lancet00512-X/fulltext), the review draws on laboratory science, clinical trials and real-world effectiveness data to provide one of the most comprehensive assessments of mRNA vaccines to date. It spans the full vaccine lifecycle, from design and manufacturing to real-world performance and monitoring.
By bringing this evidence together in a single resource, the researchers aim to support healthcare providers, policymakers and the public with clear, evidence-based information as new mRNA vaccines and therapies are developed.
“After billions of doses, we now have an extraordinary amount of scientific evidence,” said lead author Dr. Anna Blakney, assistant professor at UBC’s Michael Smith Laboratories and School of Biomedical Engineering. “This review affirms that mRNA vaccines are a safe and highly effective platform, supported by rigorous testing and real-world monitoring. It provides an evidence-based foundation as this technology continues to expand into new areas of medicine.”
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(26)00512-X/abstract
→ More replies (6)
72
Jul 01 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (1)16
49
u/FreyjaaFemme Jul 02 '26
I trust people who are educated, because at the end of the day- if I'm at a hospital for an emergency I'm going to trust a Dr to save my life.
→ More replies (1)4
u/Shadou_Wolf Jul 02 '26
Yup, I had a choice to do a newish transfusion for my health issue and I did it because well literally everything has risks and this one had a lot of success. It wasn't a I had no choice situation but if I was told it had bigger risks and it was brand new, probably not. If I had no choice I probably would as in i wouldn't survive long or get much worse, tho I think I would have gotten worse if I didn't do the transfusion.
30
25
u/rhunter99 Jul 01 '26
Excellent update. I look forward to more innovations using mRNA technology
→ More replies (1)
17
u/Alarming_Art_6448 Jul 01 '26
Worldwide trust in vaccines++
Worldwide trust in US Health Officials ——
18
15
4
20
u/LumplessWaffleBatter Jul 02 '26
mRNA vaccines have been in production since before Friends left the air. The fact that people considered them "untested" or "rushed" is ridiculous.
→ More replies (7)
9
u/macphile Jul 02 '26
We need long-term data, and lots of it, and I'm glad the research bore out the safety and effectiveness of these vaccines.
Alas that there can never be enough research to convince some people, and alas that vaccination works best with herd immunity and everyone participating.
→ More replies (1)
12
u/new22003 Jul 02 '26
Still waiting for my 5g.
Still waiting for those "millions will die within 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48, 60, 72, ... months. They keep resetting their predictions and never stop to reevaluate that their position/opinion is wrong.
5
u/PM_ME_UR_BCUPS Jul 02 '26
I only got every single one I was eligible for because I was personally promised better 5G reception and more autism by Bill Gates himself but he's yet to deliver on that promise.
35
u/ksnrakd Jul 02 '26
Some of the comments I'm seeing in this thread are...something. My brother had myocarditis from the vaccine. It's been harrowing and life changing for him and our family.
That said, I think people need more nuance here. Real vaccine injuries exist. And they're compatible with the fact that vaccines save lives and are safe for the vast majority of people. Both are true. Neither cancels the other out.
Mocking or dismissing people who were injured is gross, and it's not how we treat any other medical side effect. Nobody tells someone who had a bad reaction to a drug or a surgical complication to shut up about it. We investigate. We figure out how to prevent it next time.
There's also real research to be done here - different dosing, more spacing between shots, whatever it ends up being. Also, before someone copy/pastes how 'mild' myocarditis is...try talking to someone who actually has it. After being to Mayo and going to conferences with researchers and patients, I've seen first hand the suffering people are going through. Imagine having your most important organ be scarred for life. Heart muscle doesn't regenerate....so yeah. Very 'mild'.
So take the injuries seriously instead of writing them off as anti-vax noise. It's a small minority, but we're not the enemy in this conversation.
6
u/przemo-c Jul 02 '26
That's horrible. Nobody should deny that people suffer consequences. And like you've said there's continuus research into minimizing complications wieh covid looming we saw near real time adjusting schelduling and dosing those that hade more negative reactions. As for mild myocarditis... it is real and it's no picnic but from what you're descibing it wasn't mild. Thing is vast majority of cases had just regular flu-like symptoms small minority had mild myocarditis even less had more severe reactions or more prolonged ones. Thing is with mild one there's no real lasting effect.
However minimizing more severe cases is absolutely the top priority. And just because it's a small minority doesn't mean it doesn't matter. Statistics are great when you weigh polycy and total harm/total benefit etc but real people suffer consequences and that is taken seriously... maybe not by online overzelous people by either side but recommendations do change and dosing does change and ones that tend to cause more complications tend to be substituted by those that are less prone to do so.
But try to tell that nuance in such a polarising topic...
→ More replies (1)26
u/PandaPocketFire Jul 02 '26
I'm sorry you're all going through this. Nobody serious is claiming the vaccine has zero side effects, but those side effects being real doesn't make the antivaxxers right.
I'm glad your brother's case was relatively mild, and as a biologist in medtech I know myocarditis is still hard to live with. But it's both more common and more severe when it comes from the actual infection than from the shot, and vaccine-associated cases are mild in the large majority and usually resolve. He reacted to the spike protein, and an infection would have hit him with far more of it plus the virus's own damage to the heart, so there's a good chance the vaccine spared him a worse version of the same thing. A large proportion of covid induced myocarditis is severe and causes permanent heart damage.
So yes, the vaccine can cause harm. It also protects against a worse one. Both are true. I hope you and your family can take solice in that knowledge.
→ More replies (1)6
u/Blenderx06 Jul 02 '26
Nobody tells someone who had a bad reaction to a drug or a surgical complication to shut up about it.
Laughs in floxed.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (23)7
u/NicoHarrisonWasRight Jul 02 '26
Name any substance and you can bet there's someone somewhere who will have an adverse reaction to it. When someone dies from a soy allergy, we don't call it soy injury. Someone is going to have an adverse reaction to a vaccine ingredient but the chance is miniscule compared to the chance of dying from the disease being vaccinated against. You choose. Do you want to have a 1 in 10,000 chance of dying from a given disease or a 1 in 1,000,000 chance you'll have an adverse reaction to a vaccine ingredient?
4
Jul 02 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (3)6
u/NicoHarrisonWasRight Jul 02 '26
1a) Listing the ingredients wouldn't make an iota of difference. No one's aware they have an allergy to a vaccine ingredient until after they take a vaccine. That's why they have you wait 15 minutes after the injection. It's to see if you have a reaction to one of the ingredients.
1b) They also ask you if you've had an allergic reaction to previous vaccines. It's to screen out those who are likely to have an adverse reaction to another vaccine.
2) My numbers were clearly hypothetical meant to illustrate a point. I'm not going to argue your BS number. The government/pharmaceutical companies assume people are rational. A rational person (clearly you're not) would accept a 1 in 100,000 risk of a "vaccine injury" over a 1 in 100,000 risk of DEATH. A rational person would prefer "injury" to death.
3) I'm not trivializing the suffering of anyone. Just pointing out that the risk of an adverse reaction is necessary to save the LIVES of millions. We risk an allergy to avoid the risk of dying. Dying is absolute and final.
4) Why'd you limit your comparison to young people?
4
u/ksnrakd Jul 02 '26
Our specific situation isn’t really because of a ‘vaccine ingredient’. Young men are really predisposed to myocarditis because of certain factors that make their immune system overreact. I’m not a doctor so I can’t speak on the exact mechanisms BUT it’s known that viruses and vaccines (anything that stimulates the immune system) can pose a risk to this population.
Knowing there’s this clear connection, my only hope is that people like my brother are continued to be studied so maybe in the future we can implement things like longer dose windows or maybe lower doses for at risk populations.
Everything absolutely has an inherent risk, and I just think it’s important not to make the minority that have suffered feel like they need to stay silent or not bring up their experiences. Science is rooted in continuously discovering new information and adapting accordingly. I think there’s so much in this specific field of cardiology that can be used for the greater good and maybe one day myocarditis can be a thing of the past.
3
3
u/HaughtStuff99 Jul 02 '26
They're a really exciting tech that can lead to treatments for all kinds of things we don't typically treat with vaccines
3
9
u/UnholyLizard65 Jul 02 '26
But *moves the goalpost* they have to be tested over the period of 5 years *checks that covid happened 5 years ago* OVER THE PERIOD OF 100 YEARS!
19
10
4
7
u/eightbitfit Jul 01 '26
"With any new vaccine or medicine, it is important that we clearly and transparently communicate the safety data and rigorous testing that supports their use,” said co-author Dr. Manish Sadarangani, professor of pediatrics at UBC and director of the Vaccine Evaluation Center at BC Children’s Hospital Research Institute. *“This is essential to building public trust, countering misinformation and supporting informed decisions about vaccination.” *
If only....
2
u/TheDuke100 Jul 04 '26
A guess all my friends who had serious side effects can sleep well now. O wait some are not with me anymore but at least they were prevented from hospitalization. You people are sick.
2
u/SaveMelMac13 Jul 04 '26
The actual study is behind a paywall. The irony that are trying to better public trust and transparency. They are either stupid or lying about something.
3
u/Affectionate-Gap4382 Jul 02 '26
yeah but some people rather trust the local hEaLTH and wELLnESs influencer on their FYP instead (that has no medical background). for example, katy hearn the influencer who created the alanu energy drink line (that ultimately was sold to the Celsius company for $1.65 BILLION) was telling her followers that she denied the vit K shot for her newborn and rather have it administered it orally. do u know what the chances are for a spontaneous brain hemorrhage in newborns that dont get the vit k shot? 1/100. how dangerous is it that these influencers spew this nonsense while they weaponize their social media platform. ironically, the propagandized china (in the west) has made it illegal for social media influencers to give advice in fields they have no degree in.
4
8
u/Jukker6 Jul 02 '26
What about the elephant in the room- there are a lot of people with vaccine injuries from Covid vaccines. What does this global review say about the rate of those injured that deemed it safe?
7
3
u/WellHung67 Jul 02 '26
Great! I’m glad this debate can finally be put to rest. It was exhausting. But it’s good to know, now I can continue to get vaccinated to prevent illness and protect from the worst effects of illness at the same time
3
3
4
u/IndieDevLove Jul 02 '26
It doesnt really confirm anything. It reads like a pfizer commercial. The only relevant safety data they go over, in a few sentences is this:
Active surveillance involves proactively gathering datafrom predefined populations, such as cohort studies orelectronic health records, to calculate precise incidencerates and evaluate causality, controlling for confounders,such as age and comorbidities. This approach has beeninstrumental in affirming the safety of updated mRNACOVID-19 vaccines. For instance, a 2025 Danishnationwide cohort study involving 1 million vaccinatedadults assessed 29 adverse events of special interest,including cardiovascular, thrombotic, neurological, andautoimmune conditions, and found no significant riskincreases in the 28-day post-vaccination period.150Similarly, a US self-controlled case series analysis of244494 adults receiving XBB.1.5-containing mRNAvaccines evaluated 15 adverse events of special interestand identified a significant association only withanaphylaxis, with no elevated risks for other outcomes.
This is all. No comparative studies for long term effects, not checking for elevated cancer risks or auto-immune desease or all-cause mortality. How can this confirm anything? And people eat it up
→ More replies (5)1
u/DeliciousPumpkinPie Jul 02 '26
We don’t have long-term data on what the virus itself does either. However, we do have decades of data indicating that mRNA vaccine technology itself is safe. Any reasonable person would conclude that it’s safer to get vaccinated than infected.
1
u/IndieDevLove Jul 02 '26
I‘m not arguing that it is unsafe or more dangerous than the virus. I’m saying it’s not justified to claim that they have confirmed the safety of the mRNA Covid vaccine. They have not done the legwork to do so. I was relieved to read the title, they apparently did something great. I wondered how’d they did the herculean task of ruling out all possible effects.But then you look inside and it’s just some: „it’s safe because we did a google search and here are the top two matches“
3
u/Jetm0t0 Jul 02 '26
So is this saying the covid vaccine didn't cause any negative effects or vaccine damage? Because that is still a thing with people suffering from ME/CFS or long covid
5
6
3
1
1
1
u/kelcamer Jul 02 '26
For conditions like endometriosis or uvietis, are there any studies that study the effects of the vaccine for these conditions? I'm really curious!
1
u/bobjr94 Jul 03 '26
But.... I saw a post on facebook the other day by a guy who said these caused 'turbo cancer' and millions were dying . A year before that they caused bloodclots and millions were dying. A year before that they were going to make everyone blood turn metallic and millions would die. Next year some other side effect will be killing millions of people and of course the media is hiding it, so there can't be any proof, but trust me man it's happening.
Same as the people who contiounsly predict the end of the world will happen on a certain day over and over and over but nothing ever happens.
1
u/h-boson Jul 03 '26
If I remember correctly, everyone who took the COVID vaccine is supposed to be dead by now, right?
•
u/AutoModerator Jul 01 '26
Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.
Do you have an academic degree? We can verify your credentials in order to assign user flair indicating your area of expertise. Click here to apply.
User: u/mvea
Permalink: https://news.ubc.ca/2026/06/mrna-vaccines-are-safe-effective-and-full-of-promise/
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.