For those concerned by past or possible future side effects, the Novavax product may be a good choice. It is a well known design: "The Novavax vaccine is protein-based, which is a type of vaccine that has been widely used for decades."
The report below is consistent with other reports. Similarly in my other disease forum, unpleasantries are common with the mRNA vaxes (Moderna, Pfizer) while they are finding the Novavax easier on the body.
"Compared with mRNA vaccines, the Novavax booster seems to have a lower risk of causing myocarditis or pericarditis—heart conditions that occasionally occur, especially in young men—although it does not have zero risk. It also has fewer side effects, including muscle fatigue and nausea, in the first 48 hours after vaccination. “If people have had a side effect with an mRNA vaccine, I’d say try a protein subunit [vaccine]"
While Novavax is touted as being somehow with less side effects, this might just be double bias.
And the AMA article is clear that Novavax is just another option, with the obvious target to attract people who are too scared to accept a vaccine using a new technology, such as mRNA vaccines. If anything, they point out the studies on Novavax efficacy are from before Delta variant was the dominant one.
In all objectivity, mRNA vaccines are far better researched, they have independent studies that were performed by research groups that had no affiliation with the companies that produced the vaccines.
mRNA vaccines safety and efficacy were assesed internationally, in millions of people, from 6 months old to very old people. (See yalemedicine.org/news/covid...
Novavax has very few studies of the sort, the samples are small and start from age 12. Novavax is a bit of a hip vaccine, without having the necessary data to support the claims that its fans make about it having less side-effects.
Now addressing the biases:
1. The first bias stems from the fear generated by the novelty of the mRNA vaccine technology. As you describe it yourself, people might feel more comfortable and less anxious to get a vaccine using older technology than to get a vaccine using a new technology, irrespective of how well researched is that vaccine. Although Astra-Zeneca and Janssen (J&J) Covid-19 vaccines both used older technology and that did not guarantee they had less side-effects. They had more side-effects than any of the mRNA vaccines and were ultimately phased out. Just as a note, even those side-effects of AZ and J&J were rare, but the safety profile of mRNA was much better so the mRNA vaccines were broadly recommended.
2. The second bias stems from the fact that Novavax was administered to far fewer people than mRNA vaccines, so we do have smaller data on it, mostly coming from Novavax producers. We know about the potential side effects of mRNA such as the very small risk of myocarditis in youth because it was administered broadly. With very large samples, even the smallest effect that will not show in a smaller sample will become significant and will get reported. And people confuse a result not being due to chance (that is what significance means) with a result showing a size effect large enough to matter. Very small size effects, even if significant, are still very small effects.
To this day, the mRNA vaccines have the best safety profile. They are recommended, following studies on safety, to be given starting from 6 months of age. For Novavax, the vaccine is recommended from age 12.
Novavax can also have myocarditis and pericarditis as side-effects, and given how small their samples usually are, on bigger samples their side-effects might be comparable, if not even slightly above the mRNA vaccines.
"There were rare cases of myocarditis and pericarditis (six cases in 40,000 participants) in the clinical trial, and rare severe allergic reactions."
3. People fear prevention more than the disease when unfounded doubts about a vaccine (based on the novelty of the technology) make people keep away from vaccinating. The cardiovascular risks stemming from a SARS-COV2 infection are far, far greater than the potential side-effect of a well-researched vaccine.
I cannot understand why this fear of vaccines that reduce illness and save lives is so pervasive in communities that are vulnerable. Because it verges on antivaccine sentiments being amplified in a vulnerable community that is at higher risk of morbidity and mortality if infected with SARS-COV2. Vaccines reduce this risk.
Given my training as a researcher, looking at the data on safety of mRNA versus Novavax vaccines, there is so much rigorous safety data on mRNA vaccines, including on MPN patients and patients with autoimmune diseases, showing the mRNA vaccines are safe in these populations (with the regular disclaimers for autoimmune diseases patients), while there is so little comparable data on Novavax, that removes the doubts that at this point, with the data we have, mRNA is the safer choice.
If someone has an autoimmune disease or has had severe allergies, individual exceptions are normal. But one cannot generalise these exceptions on the broader population, even within the autoimmune diseases community, because studies showed that the safety profile of Covid-19 mRNA vaccines in people with autoimmune diseases is relatively similar to the safety profile of this type of vaccines in the broader population.
To assure, I am a broadly a "provaxxer" and this post was directed to increasing vax use among those hesitant to continue with mRNA's for rational or even irrational reasons. So no worries on the broad message.
There are anecdotal reports of increased flu like reactions to the recent mRNAs, Hunter's below is one example. The Sjogren's forum regularly has these and more also. Over there is an increasing preference for the Novavax with a trend seeing Nova is better tolerated for those with previous unpleasant sides on the mRNAs. So I looked into it, and thus the post here and supporting quote from the 2nd reference. In addition it is sometimes recommended to get different type vaxes for potential broader protection although deep studies here are lacking.
Flu like reactions are not in the Serious Adverse Event category, being rather a temporary unpleasantness. But if an alternative lowers this discomfort it is worth a look. I suffered a devastating SAE off a flu vax as regulars know, but remain a strong advocate of the broad benefit of Vaxes even as I cannot get any for now. I'm personally no longer keen on the flu vax with current tech with my particular history. But I might take the risk for these:
--
We do need 2nd generation vaxes that better address infection risk. These are nasal and/or oral to inoculate the area at which the respiratory infection enters. These are starting up in early trials. A good discussion of what's coming-
"the new vaccines activate a branch of the immune system that has evolved for robust, rapid responses against airborne germs. 'It may be more likely to really prevent infection from getting established,'...Intramuscular injection vaccines are good at preventing a disease from spreading, but they do not stop the initial infection."
Thank you for sharing. Another learning opportunity. In prior years we had Pfizer only vaccines but this year novavax alone was available in our area. Hematologist advised OK to take vs wait and see if/when Pfizer would show up. Three local pharmacies said they did not expect Pfizer to be available at all, only novavax. We got the novavax and had same reaction as previous Pfizer—red spot, sore upper arm and headache treated by Tylenol. How effective or not novavax is in comparison remains to be seen. Feels like 2020 redo—Covid is out there, vaccine is new and it’s the only option besides not getting a vaccine at all. We have not had Covid and are careful to avoid exposure to it. Vaccines are presumed added prevention but not the only one. Please stay safe.
You had no reason to seek the Nova but have well tolerated both types. It's good to have more easy going options as you do. Note the Moderna mRNA you didn't seek is a signif larger dose, (50 vs 30) so may have higher odds of temporary unpleasantries.
I would also prefer to try the Novavax vaccine due to its purported lower side effect profile. I tried to access Novavax but everyone in my area is out of it due to the release and return cycle for this vaccine.
I am currently suffering with post-Pfizer side effects from the COVID vaccine yesterday. Fatigue, 101 fever, muscle aches and general malaise. It turns out that while not common, the mRNA vaccines can also cause insomnia, which was really bad last night.
I have found that I am constantly feeling like I have the flu after every mRNA vaccine. Sometimes it is worse than other times. That is why I would like to try the protein-based vaccine instead. Note that I will not refuse a mRNA vaccine if that is all I can get. It is better than contracting an unprotected COVID. I do prefer the Pfizer to the Moderna. We are all different though.
I am on my way aout to be caregiver for my brother who is immunocompromised due to treatment for a grade 4 lymphoma. I also did the Flublok vaccine, spacing them out over 14 days apart. It is worth the risks of the vaccines both for myself and to protect my brother.
Uncommon is what we all don't want and I know too well. Understand why you'd want to try the Nova option. Also on the mRNA preference, the lower dose of Pf should be easier on the effects.
Wishing you and your brother well. Agree for you the flu vax is a no brainer.
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
Covid vaccines
Besremi and vaccines 
Views on Efficacy of Covid Vaccine with New and Emerging Variants 
Pegasys side effects
Phizer Vaccine - has anyone had any side effects with any medications that MPN patients take such as HU, blood thinners?
