I'm interested in looking at the statistics, that is if they're even really being reported, to see how they compare in terms of ill-aftereffects.

Globally, I'm only aware of the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines being the only mRNA ones. The rest are either considered viral vector or subunit.

My best friend got the Janssen vaccine when they started rolling it out. As far as I know, he hasn't had any ill-aftereffects. That vax is considered a viral vector type. Compare this to my father and grandmother who both received a Moderna shot, and both have been having heart issues.

Are the mRNA vaccines (Pfizer, Moderna) the only ones causing significant instances of ill-aftereffects? Whenever I hear of these instances, it always seems to be related to these two. While the mRNA vaccines essentially program your body to make the spike protein, are the other types more like traditional vaccines?

In recent times it seems countries like Japan are starting to wake up? I've seen articles where people are coming out and talking to councils, boards, etc. regarding the vaccines. Japan has somewhere around an 80% vaccination rate, and the brands approved there were Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca and Novavax, with the latter two being viral vector and subunit.

I'm also curious on what we can consider "tainted" blood. Those who have received doses of Pfizer and Moderna for sure can be considered to be tainted. But should we consider those who received non-mRNA doses tainted as well? This would depend on how common the ill-aftereffects are, I think. My greatest concern is what happens if you need a blood transfusion, or how the child of someone who is vaccinated for Covid and someone who is not turns out (a study of this would be interesting to read).