Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
Collymore

Covid Vaccine

Covid Vaccine  

224 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you have the vaccine if it was made available?

    • Yes
      161
    • No
      41
    • Undecided
      22


Recommended Posts

We have had people in this country infected with all sorts of nasty diseases, by importing infected plasma for haemophiliacs within living memory.

We have had the scandal with Thalidomide babies.

We have had MRSA and Legionnaires rife in our hospitals. It’s not madcap or tin foil hat wearing to be a bit cautious and standoffish, with a vaccine that has so much riding on it and especially when getting the virus is unlikely to cause yourself any harm.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Strokes said:

We have had people in this country infected with all sorts of nasty diseases, by importing infected plasma for haemophiliacs within living memory.

We have had the scandal with Thalidomide babies.

We have had MRSA and Legionnaires rife in our hospitals. It’s not madcap or tin foil hat wearing to be a bit cautious and standoffish, with a vaccine that has so much riding on it and especially when getting the virus is unlikely to cause yourself any harm.

You're fully right to be sceptical and have concerns. I'd implore you to read some literature released by the companies making the vaccines of the side effects etc noticed and detected. Especially after these latest phases are completed.

 

Personally, I don't believe any of the institutions will release a vaccine they aren't fully confident in. If there is any doubt or any slight issues, then the drug won't be released. Simple as.

 

Oxford/Cambridge to name 2 are hugely built on reputation. Any issue has potential to undermine centuries of work. 

We've had scandals before as you listed, but each of those has tightened regulations even further and increased monitoring of all things. 

 

I think there is a line however, when it comes to having genuine concern around safety and then just having an issue due to the Government. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

You're fully right to be sceptical and have concerns. I'd implore you to read some literature released by the companies making the vaccines of the side effects etc noticed and detected. Especially after these latest phases are completed.

 

Personally, I don't believe any of the institutions will release a vaccine they aren't fully confident in. If there is any doubt or any slight issues, then the drug won't be released. Simple as.

 

Oxford/Cambridge to name 2 are hugely built on reputation. Any issue has potential to undermine centuries of work. 

We've had scandals before as you listed, but each of those has tightened regulations even further and increased monitoring of all things. 

 

I think there is a line however, when it comes to having genuine concern around safety and then just having an issue due to the Government. 


from what I have read here  there needs to be a well thought out messaging program to explain the  manufacturing process for each vaccine and how they have been trialled.

 

as I understand it the Oxford vaccine is based on an original virus which affects chimps, but it has been grown in culture for years - it doesn’t start these days with taking anything from an animal or human.  That virus has then been genetically altered to produce fragments of Covid 19 spike protein.  Again this is all laboratory stuff.

 

AstraZeneca will then manufacture this in bulk, same risks of contamination as any other drug or vaccine?

 

The main risks that the trials on 10,000s of people that have been run to rule out are that either the manufactured spike proteins cause some unexpected adverse reaction or that the antibodies produced don’t protect against covid19 but instead cause some form of  immune system overreaction

 

 

Edited by Stivo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

You're fully right to be sceptical and have concerns. I'd implore you to read some literature released by the companies making the vaccines of the side effects etc noticed and detected. Especially after these latest phases are completed.

 

Personally, I don't believe any of the institutions will release a vaccine they aren't fully confident in. If there is any doubt or any slight issues, then the drug won't be released. Simple as.

Unfortunately I do struggle to understand these things, I’ve read a bit and I’m not saying they’re will be a problem by any stretch. It’s just a tiny bit of doubt, and it seems like an unnecessary risk, for a man/family that is not high risk to jump in feet first.

11 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

Oxford/Cambridge to name 2 are hugely built on reputation. Any issue has potential to undermine centuries of work. 

We've had scandals before as you listed, but each of those has tightened regulations even further and increased monitoring of all things. 

Let’s hope this doesn’t lead to a tightening up of the regulations in the future.

11 minutes ago, UniFox21 said:

I think there is a line however, when it comes to having genuine concern around safety and then just having an issue due to the Government. 

I genuinely don’t have the concerns that most do over the government, I’m just not going to put something in my body unless it’s likely to have a good reward, with little to no risk. I’d rather wait and see what happens with everyone else first, as most seem happy to jump forward.

Thanks for a respectful response though :thumbup:

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Strokes said:

Unfortunately I do struggle to understand these things, I’ve read a bit and I’m not saying they’re will be a problem by any stretch. It’s just a tiny bit of doubt, and it seems like an unnecessary risk, for a man/family that is not high risk to jump in feet first.

Let’s hope this doesn’t lead to a tightening up of the regulations in the future.

I genuinely don’t have the concerns that most do over the government, I’m just not going to put something in my body unless it’s likely to have a good reward, with little to no risk. I’d rather wait and see what happens with everyone else first, as most seem happy to jump forward.

Thanks for a respectful response though :thumbup:

One thing to look out for is when we have a new development or a big release you'll have the usual paper released with a tonne of science jargon. However, in Nature especially, someone will then take that paper and rewrite it to remove that jargon, making it accessible to those with an interest but without the plethora of background knowledge sometimes needed to read a paper. 

 

For what It's worth, your decision isn't an unwise one, especially if you're not at risk and are sensible. Allowing the roll out of the vaccine will pick up any major side-effects not picked up in trials. I think it'll be a while before it gets down to us anyhow. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Strokes said:

What?

Sorry if it was a bit abrupt as a response.  See my later post.  Most of your concerns seem to relate to contaminations in blood products or poor hygiene as in MRSA infections  which don’t seem relevant to the Oxford vaccine  to me but as unifox said are not unreasonable concerns to have.  
 

Anyway match thread to follow!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Stivo said:

Sorry if it was a bit abrupt as a response.  See my later post.  Most of your concerns seem to relate to contaminations in blood products or poor hygiene as in MRSA infections  which don’t seem relevant to the Oxford vaccine  to me but as unifox said are not unreasonable concerns to have.  
 

Anyway match thread to follow!

No worries.

I was just making a point that people in charge of our health can make errors and scepticism doesn’t make you a conspiracy theorist. I wasn’t saying the incidents were identical to a vaccine going wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll have it because I am totally sick of all this lockdown.  Specifically I can see the effect it's having on my mother whose normal social activities are all gone and her activities basically all involve me.

 

Incidentally she was one of the pregnant women offered thalidomide for severe morning sickness with her first baby (not me).  She refused it because she is, for some reason, opposed to drugs except for emergencies.  And our Pgilip is very grateful.  And I wonder to what extent her anti-drug policy is responsible for her being 87 years old and still not on any sort of regular medication.  No drugs = no side effects, for example, and no drugs - your body has to look after itself and not rely on outside influences?  Who knows.  

Edited by dsr-burnley
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Strokes said:

Well that’s a reason why it might be different to any other vaccine. lol

 

It really shouldn’t be

 

whilst understanding concerns that this has been quick, they’re not doing anything less in relation to ensuring it’s safe…. The rules relating to releasing vaccines are the rules and they’re skipping steps…. I’d be confident enough to stand in line (2m apart of course) to get mine done…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would take it of course but I will be one of the last in line to receive it, I imagine. The government has a hell of a job on its hands to manage expectations about what a vaccine will actually achieve, and how it will not mean Covid is suddenly eradicated and not an issue anymore, from what I’ve read/listened to.

 

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02706-6
 

Vaccine goals and efficacy

Even if regulators do approve the three front-runner vaccines, researchers warn that the jabs might not do what the public expect.

The AstraZeneca, Pfizer and Moderna protocols revealed that the trials are designed to test whether the vaccines reduce cases of symptomatic COVID-19, not cases of severe disease, such as those that require hospitalization and can end in death.

MacIntyre and other researchers say it would have been better to test whether the vaccines reduced severe disease and death. If a jab can successfully reduce the risk of serious complications, then the virus might have a similar effect on vaccinated people as the common cold, she says.

The current phase III trials are each enrolling several tens of thousands of participants. But a trial that tried to establish whether a vaccine reduces incidence of severe COVID-19 would need more — and so would take more time, says Thomas Lumley, a biostatistician at the University of Auckland in New Zealand. The current trials chose a middle path between establishing whether vaccines prevent any infection with the virus and testing whether they prevent severe infection, he says.

The companies are aiming for the vaccines to stop at least 50% of vaccinated people getting symptomatic COVID-19, the definition of success in the FDA guideline, but they are hoping for an efficacy of 60% or greater.

But even 60% would not be enough to reach herd immunity, in which enough of the population has vaccine-derived immunity to stop the disease spreading, says Lumley. To achieve that goal, a vaccine would have to be at least 80% effective to account for the fact that not everyone in the population will receive it, says MacIntyre.

Still, vaccinating a large portion of the population with one of these jabs would go a long way to controlling the spread of the virus if used with other interventions, such as wearing masks and contact tracing, says Lumley. “A modestly effective vaccine would be a really big help,” he says.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Harrydc
1 hour ago, whoareyaaa said:

there going to combine nanotechnology with the vaccine https://www.varsity.co.uk/science/19812 so they can track and trace any new outbreaks in real time pretty clever!

 

basically a bio sensor in the body to detect future pandemics (and to trace everyone that has it) 

 

 

 

 

So they're microchipping us? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Harrydc said:

So they're microchipping us? 

I didn't say that, that would then require some kind of mobile device located near each person that is able to connect to an antenna and then probably some kind of satellite orbiting the earth which then feeds back to a database of some kind ?SAY WHAT>!"

 

I'll get me hat !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 25/10/2020 at 18:36, Strokes said:

We have had people in this country infected with all sorts of nasty diseases, by importing infected plasma for haemophiliacs within living memory.

We have had the scandal with Thalidomide babies.

We have had MRSA and Legionnaires rife in our hospitals. It’s not madcap or tin foil hat wearing to be a bit cautious and standoffish, with a vaccine that has so much riding on it and especially when getting the virus is unlikely to cause yourself any harm.

 

Indeed it was a scandal and a tragedy. I would have to say that it was also the catalyst to the transformation of clinical trials and the reporting and study of such trials which are now far more rigid.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...