Coronavirus Thread

[yorkie1999]

3 hours ago, m4DD0gg said:

Anyone willing to blindly take a 'vaccine' needs their head seeing to.

Why?

[Jimothy]

3 hours ago, m4DD0gg said:

Anyone willing to blindly take a 'vaccine' needs their head seeing to.

Who's blindly taking it? 

[Nalis]

3 hours ago, m4DD0gg said:

Anyone willing to blindly take a 'vaccine' needs their head seeing to.

You stick to not taking the vaccine while sticking to a tier 3 style lockdown for the next year and I'll take the vaccine while I return to pre lockdown life thank you very much.

Edited 21 November 2020 by Nalis

[st albans fox]

3 hours ago, m4DD0gg said:

Anyone willing to blindly take a 'vaccine' needs their head seeing to.

I’ll tell my wife who got all my kids vaccinated and they’ve never had measles, mumps or German measles as a consequence that she acted irresponsibly.......

 

if people aren’t prepared to follow official guidance on taking a vaccine then they should be doing proper research (and that isnt via random  YouTube and fb accounts) - then they can present their concerns in reasonable forums like this where a grown up discussion  can take place and they can be convinced/or not 

[st albans fox]

6 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Who's blindly taking it? 

About a quarter of a million volunteers across the globe so far ! 

[Jimothy]

22 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

About a quarter of a million volunteers across the globe so far ! 

Well isn't that the final part of the testing before its actually released? So yes these people are taking a risk, but this'll happen in all vaccine trials. When it gets to all of us we won't be blindly taking it, and that's, maybe wronglu how I understood the comment.

[st albans fox]

14 minutes ago, Facecloth said:

Well isn't that the final part of the testing before its actually released? So yes these people are taking a risk, but this'll happen in all vaccine trials. When it gets to all of us we won't be blindly taking it, and that's, maybe wronglu how I understood the comment.

I don’t really see what the risk is - the Pfizer and moderna contain no live virus at all and the Oxford one contains a much weakened covid gene. 

 

I believe that all the standard safety stuff has been adhered to and the speed is due to the massive financial investments into the program and the huge numerical availability of volunteers to conduct the trials. 

 

The only question that seems viable from those who are concerned is that of time to see side effects - you may be protected from covid 19 but are there any other long lasting affects on your body ??  In normal vaccine testing that takes years because of the time it takes to get enough people signed up to study etc etc, you would expect to see any anomolys show up due to any slow reactions/side effects  ......

 

I would like to see that question posed to the knowledgable - and that isn’t the random on YT or FB !

[Guest Harrydc]

Do people believe that if you don't take the vaccine, you should have your liberties taken away if you do? For example, going in to the supermarket, pubs etc. I've seen quite a few calling for this this on social media, and it baffles me that people would want to live in a world where you're being dictated to like that. 

 

Or do people believe you should be free to put whatever you want in to your body? 

 

 

[whoareyaaa]

14 hours ago, Super_horns said:

Saw this on another forum regarding potential plans to roll out the vaccine.

 

No idea how much truth there is though.

 

"The draft plans, seen by Health Service Journal, say that the “bulk” of vaccines of the last group are likely to occur in March, meaning that almost the whole population should have been offered jabs by Easter.

 

The dates pencilled in for beginning each group are:

 

Care home residents and staff, healthcare workers - from beginning of December

 

Ages 80 plus - from mid-December

 

Everyone aged 70-80 - from late December

 

Everyone aged 65-70 - from early January

 

All high and moderate risk under 65s - from early January

 

Everyone aged 50-65 - from mid January

 

Everyone aged 18-50 - from late January, but with the bulk of this group vaccinated during March

 

The plan would see 88.5 million vaccination doses delivered across England, with two doses per person over the age of 18, by the end of April."

end of April 2023 ? 

[leicsmac]

24 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

Do people believe that if you don't take the vaccine, you should have your liberties taken away if you do? For example, going in to the supermarket, pubs etc. I've seen quite a few calling for this this on social media, and it baffles me that people would want to live in a world where you're being dictated to like that. 

 

Or do people believe you should be free to put whatever you want in to your body? 

 

 

There are a multitude of circumstances where a person who is a direct or indirect threat to other people in society is removed from part or most of that society.

 

This would just be one more.

[Guest Harrydc]

3 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

There are a multitude of circumstances where a person who is a direct or indirect threat to other people in society is removed from part or most of that society.

 

This would just be one more.

How would they be a threat? If the vulnerable and old have the vaccine, we've almost eradicated the problem. 

[I am Rod Hull]

5 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

There are a multitude of circumstances where a person who is a direct or indirect threat to other people in society is removed from part or most of that society.

 

This would just be one more.

 

How would this be done?. Do we make them wear an armband, paint a symbol on their door and eventually put them in to camps?

[Guest Fktf]

1 minute ago, I am Rod Hull said:

 

How would this be done?. Do we make them wear an armband, paint a symbol on their door and eventually put them in to camps?

We'll just end up no where near herd immunity, cases will rise (albeit slower than we've seen this year because a portion of society is immune) and back to lockdown we all go when the NHS beds starts to fill up.

[SpacedX]

14 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

Do people believe that if you don't take the vaccine, you should have your liberties taken away if you do? For example, going in to the supermarket, pubs etc. I've seen quite a few calling for this this on social media, and it baffles me that people would want to live in a world where you're being dictated to like that. 

 

Or do people believe you should be free to put whatever you want in to your body? 

 

 

As has been explained, in the absence of extenuating circumstances, vaccine refusal is itself an infringement upon the liberties of others. That doesn't mean one shouldn't be concerned about the safety of a novel vaccine, but the issue you want to think about is size, because it tells you how rare of an event you can detect, The vaccine candidates in late stage trials undertaken by Pfizer and Moderna are considered very large because they incorporated in excess of 30,000 volunteers each I think Pfizer involved some 43,500 volunteers. Both organisations also recruited a diverse group of participants and included people of different ages and medical backgrounds. Moderna’s trial, for instance, enrolled 5,000 people with high-risk chronic diseases.

 

Given that this is a brand-new type of vaccine, it is not impossible that someone could be allergic to a component of it, however, this would almost invariably show up shortly after administration of the vaccine. In the US. The FDA requires that vaccine developers submit two months of follow-up safety data as part of the application for emergency use. This is a crucial measure to ensure that drugmakers can monitor trial participants for any serious safety issues after vaccination. For trials in the UK, the vaccine and the trial must receive individual approval from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), who will then closely monitor the data and results. If you go beyond 10 million people, you can never rule out that there won’t be someone out there who might respond in a abnormal way - this, together with confusion surrounding correlation and causality is the basis of the anti-vax movement (alongside batshit crazy junk online conspiracy theory). 

 

We are going to have to accept that there are going to be risks, but then nothing we do in this world is entirely risk-free. Typically, most side effects from vaccines appear within 60 days of receiving the shot. So, we could wait six months, a year or two years to have sufficient data, but should we withhold the vaccine from the  population for two years because we want flawless data?  Of course, we want the latter, but given where we are in the midst of a pandemic right now, we have to find that balance.

 

I find it borderline comical that so many that are prepared to flout restrictions, downplay the effects of Covid-19 and vocalising the most concern about returning to some semblance of 'normality' are frequently those that are now shitting themselves over the prospect of liberation through imminent vaccination. 

[I am Rod Hull]

5 minutes ago, Fktf said:

We'll just end up no where near herd immunity, cases will rise (albeit slower than we've seen this year because a portion of society is immune) and back to lockdown we all go when the NHS beds starts to fill up.

How do you remove them from society?

 

There`s also the problem of vaccinating the hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants in the country, how do we get them to come forward without the threat of deportation?

Edited 21 November 2020 by I am Rod Hull

[SpacedX]

Just now, I am Rod Hull said:

How do you remove them from society?

 

There`s also the problem of vaccinating the hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants in the country, how do we get them to come forward without the treat of deportation?

Jelly

[leicsmac]

8 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

How would they be a threat? If the vulnerable and old have the vaccine, we've almost eradicated the problem. 

Not everyone who needs it can take a vaccine for various reasons, such as the immunocompromised - that is the reason why such emphasis is placed on vaccines for other diseases (like the MMR vaccine) being administered to even those who might not be at high risk if they get it - so as to effect herd immunity. There isn't a single disease for which we have achieved herd immunity without a vaccine.

 

So yes, those who didn't vaccine would still be a threat in the same way any other antivaxxer would be.

 

5 minutes ago, I am Rod Hull said:

 

How would this be done?. Do we make them wear an armband, paint a symbol on their door and eventually put them in to camps?

I do love a bit of (implied) Godwins Law in the evening.

 

The answer would be to treat them in the same way as any other person who refuses other vaccines that are given as a matter of course in the UK.

[I am Rod Hull]

Just now, Line-X said:

Jelly

Typo, you were to quick for me 

[yorkie1999]

17 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

How would they be a threat? If the vulnerable and old have the vaccine, we've almost eradicated the problem. 

Well we've not have we, mainly because due to the conveyor belt of life, everyone will get old, so with a life threatening virus always present in the population, we'll suffer the problem forever.

[Guest Harrydc]

The day they stop us from leaving the house without being injected is the day freedom is dead. Increadbly sad times.

[Benguin]

11 hours ago, Md9 said:

What sort of symptoms do you have/had? 

Fever and cough. Actually died off today at the same time as getting a negative test result through (phew) part of me thinks my body was reacting based on my head rather than actual illness 😂

[SpacedX]

6 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

The day they stop us from leaving the house without being injected is the day freedom is dead. Increadbly sad times.

Damn that mandatory smallpox vaccine. 

[Guest Fktf]

15 minutes ago, I am Rod Hull said:

How do you remove them from society?

 

There`s also the problem of vaccinating the hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants in the country, how do we get them to come forward without the threat of deportation?

We won't manage either of these things, like you say. 

 

There's also a problem that some people won't be able to take the vaccine because of medical reasons.

 

And when you add to that people exercising their right not to take the vaccine, we could be in a position where the vaccine isn't going to prevent further lockdowns because not enough people have had it.

[CosbehFox]

There was me thinking we didn’t have approx 10 to 15 vaccines until the age of 16. Throw in a vaccine if you want to visit certain countries. 
 

It’s been a part of modern life and modern travelling for a considerable period now. 

[Lionator]

1 hour ago, Harrydc said:

Do people believe that if you don't take the vaccine, you should have your liberties taken away if you do? For example, going in to the supermarket, pubs etc. I've seen quite a few calling for this this on social media, and it baffles me that people would want to live in a world where you're being dictated to like that. 

 

Or do people believe you should be free to put whatever you want in to your body? 

 

 

No, that would be a failure of government. However, don't complain when the rest of society is judging you.

 

A vaccine isn't 'whatever', it's a highly specified, highly tested agent which keeps you and others around you safe from infectious disease that could kill you.