FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > People against vaccines

People against vaccines

By (user no longer on site) OP over a year ago

As I’m sure you all heard today a company by the name of pfizer (I think that’s how it is spelt) have developed a trial vaccine that has a supposed 90% success rate

Clearly we are still a long way off and stringent testing and clinical trials must be done before this is made widely available to the public but my question is to those who are against this vaccine or vaccines in general why ?

I am genuinely curious as to why you feel you would not take one or what your thoughts are on it but please leave all the conspiracy theory rubbish out of it. So don’t go telling me it’s a mind control drug developed by big pharma to make us buy more products from Amazon!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 09/11/20 20:48:13]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case).

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I’m not sure people who don’t what this are anti-vaccines per se, I have a hunch these people are just anti this particular vaccine... especially those people for who this virus isn’t anything to particularly worry about.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

The scientific rigour with which this vaccine has been developed is not being compromised. The reasons they have been developed so quickly are state of the art technological advances, good understanding of the DNA of the SARS-Cov2 virus, innovative use of RNA to develop a safe vaccine, huge investment and global collaboration on scale never previously seen. I’d trust the scientific rigour if the process and beware anti-vax conspiracy theories and debunked claims.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Very much not an ANTI vaxer but very much PRO safe, effective, ethical and necessary medication. The short timeframe of production and the indemnification of drug companies will put a lot of people off jumping straight in to get it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I ve just read something on it and word is the elderly dont seem to benefit much from it as it doesn t appear to have much of an effect. The other statement was that it fights the disease but does not stop the spread of the virus..which confuse me as disease and virus are 2 different things.

On a personal front vaccine wise Im uncomfortable with not just the speed of development but also there is the possibility that the pharmaceutical companies will not be liable if there is an adverse reaction. Like any other product, there should be some legal cover for the users, everyone should be accountable. I expect I ll get a hammering on here but thats the world of today...sad as it is.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *addyBabygirl2020Couple over a year ago

norwich

Same as this. As we are not at risk groups we will wait until sure they are safe.

Reality is that producing the vaccine and then administering it will be a huge task for the government to organise, highly unlikely anyone but the most at risk will be offered it for quite some time.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Very much not an ANTI vaxer but very much PRO safe, effective, ethical and necessary medication. The short timeframe of production and the indemnification of drug companies will put a lot of people off jumping straight in to get it.

Then read about how it has been developed from reputable sources and play your part in promoting its safety and debunking anti-vaccine claims.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ensualtouch15Man over a year ago

ashby de la zouch

I'd place myself in this camp

Cautious

As noted above the vaccine is using AN "Innovative" approach

As an engineer I'm aware of very few inventions despite theoretical understanding that are not improved evolved and modified over time due to unforeseen glitches or technological improvements

I'd suggest the I phone was indeed innovative

The tech very well understood and yet it had understandable teething glitches and crashes

Science is a method of verification and data collection

Indeed then the accurate data can be used for targeted innovation yet the prototypes are almost never the final product

6 months is not enough time for any credible verification process

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *oncupiscence73Woman over a year ago

South

I think the ‘rushed through’ mentality is flawed .. the actual stages a vaccine goes through don’t take years they’re just usually completed years apart due to funding or different priorities. This has had the whole worlds finest working round the clock since March ...... throwing millions at it. That’s why it’s happened quickly. Side affects sure we won’t know but being honest weighed up with the affects of COVID I’m sire the CEV will have it and it’ll be a year or so after than that the vernal population are offered it anyway.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 09/11/20 21:19:03]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I'd place myself in this camp

Cautious

As noted above the vaccine is using AN "Innovative" approach

As an engineer I'm aware of very few inventions despite theoretical understanding that are not improved evolved and modified over time due to unforeseen glitches or technological improvements

I'd suggest the I phone was indeed innovative

The tech very well understood and yet it had understandable teething glitches and crashes

Science is a method of verification and data collection

Indeed then the accurate data can be used for targeted innovation yet the prototypes are almost never the final product

6 months is not enough time for any credible verification process

DNA vaccine development started in the 1990s so the methods have been honed developed over the last three decades. So while still considered innovative it is not new and the advances in that time have been considerable.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think the ‘rushed through’ mentality is flawed .. the actual stages a vaccine goes through don’t take years they’re just usually completed years apart due to funding or different priorities. This has had the whole worlds finest working round the clock since March ...... throwing millions at it. That’s why it’s happened quickly. Side affects sure we won’t know but being honest weighed up with the affects of COVID I’m sire the CEV will have it and it’ll be a year or so after than that the vernal population are offered it anyway. "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *alandNitaCouple over a year ago

Scunthorpe

"As I’m sure you all heard today a company by the name of pfizer (I think that’s how it is spelt) have developed a trial vaccine that has a supposed 90% success rate

To be fair, it's already gone through the clinical trials, the clinical trials proved the vaccine to be around 90% effective. The next stage I believe is peer review and approval by government bodies. There are also several other vaccines not far behind.

Cal

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *xycpl699Couple over a year ago

kilmarnock

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ophieslutTV/TS over a year ago

Central

"I ve just read something on it and word is the elderly dont seem to benefit much from it as it doesn t appear to have much of an effect. The other statement was that it fights the disease but does not stop the spread of the virus..which confuse me as disease and virus are 2 different things.

The Stage 3 - Final - trial is almost finished, covering high population level safety and efficacy. Today's announcement is in advance of this finishing, when all results will be fully analysed, peer reviewed and published, with submission to approval authorities around the world. The outline statement is c. 90% effectiveness, covering all age groups. The final trial results will cover this in the finer details needed. It will include the full details of how participants responded - the potential viral shedding, infection potential and all of the physiological impacts that it has. It's still too early as today was just an advance notice from Pfizer.

It's great positive early news.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It's great positive early news. "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"As I’m sure you all heard today a company by the name of pfizer (I think that’s how it is spelt) have developed a trial vaccine that has a supposed 90% success rate

Cal"

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eddy and legsCouple over a year ago

the wetlands

It's great positive early news. "

yet some people claim they know all about the trial thats not even been fully reported

the wonders of fab .. eh ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

For those saying that it has been rushed, phase 3 clinical trials usually take 2 years. Any of you in this category have any idea why it takes that long?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

i agree with most of this but what technology can never advance is time so we wont know any potential long term side effects because the passage of time has not happened

however in a risk vs reward trade off ill still take the vaccine

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ophieslutTV/TS over a year ago

Central

It's great positive early news.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

i agree with most of this but what technology can never advance is time so we wont know any potential long term side effects because the passage of time has not happened

however in a risk vs reward trade off ill still take the vaccine

Which vaccines have been developed that have gone on to result in long term side effects?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"For those saying that it has been rushed, phase 3 clinical trials usually take 2 years. Any of you in this category have any idea why it takes that long?"

Phase 3 trials look at longer term effects of a drug and is generally 1 to 4 years depending on the drug and what the drug is meant to be fighting.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Not against vaccinations at all, Am certainly not an anti-vaccer (I have kids and both are up to date) but this particular vaccine has been rushed and any long term issues are completely unknown. I will be doing alot of research once more details are known.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eavenscentitCouple over a year ago

barnstaple

I am concerned about the flu vaccine and, will be concerned about a covid vaccine. I'd like to know more about it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ary_ArgyllMan over a year ago

Argyll

So we are in a bind - either mass use of a vaccine which may not be 100% safe (once mass use bound to be a few adverse reactions) or continual lockdowns for another 2-3 years and economic collapse - take your pick.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ethnmelvCouple over a year ago

Cardiff

In simple terms, the purpose of a vaccine is to reducethe population that are susceptible to the disease/virus. In effect it leaves a “bigger gap” between those that haven’t had the virus, bringing the infection rate down rapidly and enabling us all to live our lives again. It needs a large proportion of the country to take the vaccine, which enable a “herd” immunity. Herd immunity is not feasible without vaccines.

So we would take it, after all if the virus is so week for most people, why would you not do this to save Grandparents, Parents, Uncles & Aunties?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ethnmelvCouple over a year ago

Cardiff

"In simple terms, the purpose of a vaccine is to reducethe population that are susceptible to the disease/virus. In effect it leaves a “bigger gap” between those that haven’t had the virus, bringing the infection rate down rapidly and enabling us all to live our lives again. It needs a large proportion of the country to take the vaccine, which enable a “herd” immunity. Herd immunity is not feasible without vaccines.

So we would take it, after all if the virus is so week for most people, why would you not do this to save Grandparents, Parents, Uncles & Aunties?

“Weak”!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

"For those saying that it has been rushed, phase 3 clinical trials usually take 2 years. Any of you in this category have any idea why it takes that long?

Phase 3 trials look at longer term effects of a drug and is generally 1 to 4 years depending on the drug and what the drug is meant to be fighting. "

Yes, it will help identify any rare side effects that wouldn't be picked up in phase 2. Also the duration depends on uptake of the trials. For covid vaccine, this hasn't been a problem.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

"I am concerned about the flu vaccine and, will be concerned about a covid vaccine. I'd like to know more about it."

What type of information will convince you?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eavenscentitCouple over a year ago

barnstaple

"I am concerned about the flu vaccine and, will be concerned about a covid vaccine. I'd like to know more about it.

What type of information will convince you?"

Firstly, how the drug companies will benefit. Flu vaccines are bought each year, does it eradicate all flu ? No...they have alot to gain

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

"So we are in a bind - either mass use of a vaccine which may not be 100% safe (once mass use bound to be a few adverse reactions) or continual lockdowns for another 2-3 years and economic collapse - take your pick."

43k I'm trials with no major issues. Sounds as close to 100% as you will ever get...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eavenscentitCouple over a year ago

barnstaple

"I am concerned about the flu vaccine and, will be concerned about a covid vaccine. I'd like to know more about it.

What type of information will convince you?"

Drugs are usually tested on young ish fit people, not sure if this is the case

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

"I am concerned about the flu vaccine and, will be concerned about a covid vaccine. I'd like to know more about it.

What type of information will convince you?

Firstly, how the drug companies will benefit. Flu vaccines are bought each year, does it eradicate all flu ? No...they have alot to gain "

Flu mutates constantly. It's not possible to develop a vaccine in advance of a mutation. What the flu vaccine does is protects against common strains from previous year because they are the ones most likely to make a return.

Drug companies will benefit by making money. That's kind of how businesses work.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

i agree with most of this but what technology can never advance is time so we wont know any potential long term side effects because the passage of time has not happened

however in a risk vs reward trade off ill still take the vaccine

Which vaccines have been developed that have gone on to result in long term side effects?"

which other vaccines were released so early ? absence of a positive doesn't always equal a negative

plenty of other medical treatments or items that we thought were safe turned out not be years down the line ... vaginal mesh, breast implants, some epilepsy medication

ive already said risk vs reward i will take the vaccine but its naive to say the risk of the as yet unknown doesn’t exist

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

"I am concerned about the flu vaccine and, will be concerned about a covid vaccine. I'd like to know more about it.

What type of information will convince you?

Drugs are usually tested on young ish fit people, not sure if this is the case"

From a press release mid sept based on sample. Plenty of older people. Ironically, they had less side effects.

"Pfizer reported safety data for 5,664 people ages 18 to 64 and 1,816 people ages 65 to 85 who received one dose. In the younger group, 38% reported fatigue afterward, while 35% reported headache and 16% had chills. Eleven percent or fewer suffered joint pain, diarrhea or chills. The side effects percentages were lower among the older age group.

After the second dose, 36% of trial participants aged 18 to 64 reported fatigue, while 28% reported a headache and 18% reported muscle pain. Again, the data were blinded between placebo and the vaccine candidate. "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I am concerned about the flu vaccine and, will be concerned about a covid vaccine. I'd like to know more about it.

What type of information will convince you?

Firstly, how the drug companies will benefit. Flu vaccines are bought each year, does it eradicate all flu ? No...they have alot to gain

Drug companies will benefit by making money. That's kind of how businesses work."

I read somewhere we watch Australia flu strains through their winter (when it's our summer it's Australias winter) so we know what flu strains to expect thus the flu jab is adjusted accordingly pre seasonal roll out.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

i agree with most of this but what technology can never advance is time so we wont know any potential long term side effects because the passage of time has not happened

however in a risk vs reward trade off ill still take the vaccine

Which vaccines have been developed that have gone on to result in long term side effects?

which other vaccines were released so early ? absence of a positive doesn't always equal a negative

plenty of other medical treatments or items that we thought were safe turned out not be years down the line ... vaginal mesh, breast implants, some epilepsy medication

ive already said risk vs reward i will take the vaccine but its naive to say the risk of the as yet unknown doesn’t exist

Of course , but even if this vaccine was tested for 4 years it might not be long enough for any long term issues.

Not saying there are no risks but reducing the length of phase 3 trials doesn't necessarily increase the risk.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eefyBangerMan over a year ago

edinburgh

A vaccine for a virus that has a 99.99% recovery rate which has been rushed through in a few months. Pardon me for not wanting any side effects which may not may not develop in years to come with devastating results.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

"I am concerned about the flu vaccine and, will be concerned about a covid vaccine. I'd like to know more about it.

What type of information will convince you?

Firstly, how the drug companies will benefit. Flu vaccines are bought each year, does it eradicate all flu ? No...they have alot to gain

Drug companies will benefit by making money. That's kind of how businesses work.

Yes, all asia but some of these we had the year before. Either way, we have answered the point.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *elshsunsWoman over a year ago

Flintshire

"A vaccine for a virus that has a 99.99% recovery rate which has been rushed through in a few months. Pardon me for not wanting any side effects which may not may not develop in years to come with devastating results."

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

which other vaccines were released so early ?

Swine Flu vaccine

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ensualtouch15Man over a year ago

ashby de la zouch

"I am concerned about the flu vaccine and, will be concerned about a covid vaccine. I'd like to know more about it.

What type of information will convince you?

Firstly, how the drug companies will benefit. Flu vaccines are bought each year, does it eradicate all flu ? No...they have alot to gain

Drug companies will benefit by making money. That's kind of how businesses work.

Yes, all asia but some of these we had the year before. Either way, we have answered the point."

And of course the flu strains are going to be so predictable as humanity has not interfered with their normal transmission conduits one bit ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

https://fullfact.org/health/covid-ifr-more-01/

What about the known side effects of covid? Plenty of evidence that it can cause long term damage to organs.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ethnmelvCouple over a year ago

Cardiff

Have a look on Full Fact, the real death rate is closer to 1%. Get your facts right as opposed to hoping it is harnless.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ylonSlutTV/TS over a year ago

Durham

99.99 % isn't the recovery rate. That is about the % of people who haven't died of covid yet. The recovery rate in the uk is 95.5% of people who have tested positive, there are an unknown amount of people with no symptoms. The real survival rate is estimated to be between 98 and 99%, getting closer to 99% as treatments get better.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"The scientific rigour with which this vaccine has been developed is not being compromised. The reasons they have been developed so quickly are state of the art technological advances, good understanding of the DNA of the SARS-Cov2 virus, innovative use of RNA to develop a safe vaccine, huge investment and global collaboration on scale never previously seen. I’d trust the scientific rigour if the process and beware anti-vax conspiracy theories and debunked claims."

Agree but think the logistics of distributing a vaccine that has to be kept at -80C might mean a small uptake

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Then read about how it has been developed from reputable sources and play your part in promoting its safety and debunking anti-vaccine claims."

You seemed obsessed with anti-vaccine claims, but the point being made by many on here is not anti-vaccine but genuine concern about the speed to market of this partiular vaccine. Genuine concerns which hopefully will be addressed by peer review and independent scientific evidence. This hasn't even begun yet because Pfizer hasn't released all the data, so try to stay off your high horse for a little while longer

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eddy and legsCouple over a year ago

the wetlands

Agree but think the logistics of distributing a vaccine that has to be kept at -80C might mean a small uptake "

Millions of products are transported at -80 every year already. It's not new

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eddy and legsCouple over a year ago

the wetlands

Hopefully if you end up in hospital with Covid Karen from facebook will visit and read you some more interesting facts.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eavenscentitCouple over a year ago

barnstaple

"I am concerned about the flu vaccine and, will be concerned about a covid vaccine. I'd like to know more about it.

What type of information will convince you?

Firstly, how the drug companies will benefit. Flu vaccines are bought each year, does it eradicate all flu ? No...they have alot to gain

Drug companies will benefit by making money. That's kind of how businesses work.

Yes, all asia but some of these we had the year before. Either way, we have answered the point."

Not answered enough for me, covid will mutate. I wont be having the vaccine, I'm an NHS nurse - I don't have the flu vaccine either. My choice

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *5onlyMan over a year ago

GLASGOW

Yeah so 2 days after trump gets voted out they find a cure ??

Waken up

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ouple in LancashireCouple over a year ago

in Lancashire

"Yeah so 2 days after trump gets voted out they find a cure ??

Waken up"

Is that where he's been then?

When not playing golf..

It's not a cure, like there is no cure for the common cold or flu..

And they are not saying it's ready now..

But don't let those things deflect from what your saying..

Actually what is it your saying?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *heshbifellaMan over a year ago

Nantwich

Most people understand that rapid progress through unprecedented collaborative worldwide funding and research will hopefully bring this vaccine to fruition in a shorter than usual timeframe.

But just as Concorde shortened transatlantic flights to 3 hours or so in the 70s, a few would not board it 'because it usually takes 3 times longer to fly to the US, so it can't be safe'

Fair enough, don't board Concorde then.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Agree but think the logistics of distributing a vaccine that has to be kept at -80C might mean a small uptake

Millions of products are transported at -80 every year already. It's not new"

Not many GPs have freezers to store a that temperature...so I agree it with need the logistics stepping up now for GPs surgeries pretty quick.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *5onlyMan over a year ago

GLASGOW

It's a man made flu and the people that made it now want to sell it to the gullible

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ouple in LancashireCouple over a year ago

in Lancashire

"It's a man made flu and the people that made it now want to sell it to the gullible "

It is not flu..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ensualtouch15Man over a year ago

ashby de la zouch

Dont suppose anyone knows the methodology of how they effectively and accurately tested for efficacy against contracting covid whilst the entire world is either in a lockdown has social restrictions and are practicing distancing mask wearing and hand washing ??

Also

Surely?????

90 percent effective?????

Rough maths may suggest

Currently without a vaccine only 10 percent of the UK has been infected or that current measures are also hovering around 1 in 10 also

Oh ?????????

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ensualtouch15Man over a year ago

ashby de la zouch

"It's a man made flu and the people that made it now want to sell it to the gullible "

It looks like a Corona and has a low mutations rate

It's as close to flu as herpes?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ee And MikeCouple over a year ago

Cannock

On the basis that we’ve only ordered 40 million doses and you need two doses per person, that’s 20 million actual person doses.

We have a population of around 65 million, so that’s over 2/3rd’s of the population won’t get a vaccination anyway.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *5onlyMan over a year ago

GLASGOW

You probably think wearing a mask will save you from this China flu to ??

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *5onlyMan over a year ago

GLASGOW

You'd think anyone with common sense wouldn't get the "vaccine" anyway. Leave it to the paper mask wearers

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Dont suppose anyone knows the methodology of how they effectively and accurately tested for efficacy against contracting covid whilst the entire world is either in a lockdown has social restrictions and are practicing distancing mask wearing and hand washing ??

Also

Surely?????

90 percent effective?????

Rough maths may suggest

Currently without a vaccine only 10 percent of the UK has been infected or that current measures are also hovering around 1 in 10 also

Oh ?????????

They did it by comparing against a control group who weren't given the vaccine.

Just over 20,000 given the vaccine, and just over 20,000 who took part and weren't given the vaccine.

So they have a rough idea of how many people they could expect to catch the virus (based on those who weren't given the vaccine). And compare that to the number of people who got the virus and who had been given the vaccine.

The 90% thing is a guess. But is probably a conservative estimate.

There is plenty more to do before this is ready for mass consumption.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"On the basis that we’ve only ordered 40 million doses and you need two doses per person, that’s 20 million actual person doses.

We have a population of around 65 million, so that’s over 2/3rd’s of the population won’t get a vaccination anyway."

It's one of several vaccines. More of the others have been ordered.

If it covers the NHS and vulnerable people. That's a good start.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ouple in LancashireCouple over a year ago

in Lancashire

"You'd think anyone with common sense wouldn't get the "vaccine" anyway. Leave it to the paper mask wearers "

I think it ironic that someone whom after the length of time this virus has been with us doesn't understand it is not flu and then uses the phrase 'common sense'..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *5onlyMan over a year ago

GLASGOW

Yeah you probably believe in fairies to ??

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Agree but think the logistics of distributing a vaccine that has to be kept at -80C might mean a small uptake

Millions of products are transported at -80 every year already. It's not new"

Not vaccines, though. Think distribution of doses to doctors and small clinics. The vaccine has to go to the people so that means small numbers

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *moothman2000Man over a year ago

Leicestershire

"Yeah you probably believe in fairies to ??"

Well if it was a toss up between you and the fairies....

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ophieslutTV/TS over a year ago

Central

You're fortunate as it's optional. It sounds like you would not be in any way open to this vaccine for another year or more? That's entirely your perogative.

The virus doesn't just cause death in some of those infected. Many acquire severe complications that are long-term or permanent. For others who don't have your mindset of being 100% against any covid-19 vaccine this year or for quite some time, they will also want to avoid lasting illness and disability (death too), for themselves or others who may get infected because too few people have received it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *jfrenchMan over a year ago

Stockport

ts a valid question and its one I recently saw for myself. Ok, yes, there will always be the tin foil hatters spouting about nanobots changing DNA and all that but the actual 'fear' at the end of the day is side effects.

We are talking about asking perfectly healthy people to take a vaccine to combat something that is 99.95% survivable where the side effects could be catastrophic. Even down the years as a time bomb type event.

Now I admit once upon a time I'd be, sure, get everyone vaxxed and surely they're safe? And its for everyone's good. But I watch the little boy who lives across the road from me and he was the happiest, chattiest little man ever and always loved me to kick the footie for him in the garden. Until he went for his shots one morning and came home. He hasn't since that day spoken one single word nor kicked one football. His parents are still fighting to get compensation but they've closed ranks to protect. And that's that. That is your main reason why people are wary. Cos since my neighbours' situation I've become aware of 1000's of others in the same situation. 1000's and 1000's.

Where's their voice I hear you ask? Why no mention on TV or the papers? Well, the BBC for one has a policy of not reporting this and will not have 'anti-vaxxers' or anyone with 'alleged' side effects on air. You tell me why not.

But no the little lad I played kick around with once upon a time. He's not a conspiracy theory. He's purposely ignored.

Hope that answers your question.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

..Small pox uk.gone.. vaccination

Tetanus uk.. rarely any cases.. vaccination (only known 1 in 25yrs of nursing)

Polio... gone in uk..vaccination

Diptheria..gone in uk..vaccination.

.. ebola.. nearly erradicated..congo was last case in april.. .

So give this vaccination chance

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ockosaurusMan over a year ago

Warwick

They are also running it through 3 stages of testing at once, which is something they usually don't do because testing is expensive and they don't want to waste money if it fails the first test.

Some good info explaining how it is being done so quick here :

https://wellcome.org/news/how-can-we-develop-covid-19-vaccine-quickly

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ockosaurusMan over a year ago

Warwick

"ts a valid question and its one I recently saw for myself. Ok, yes, there will always be the tin foil hatters spouting about nanobots changing DNA and all that but the actual 'fear' at the end of the day is side effects.

But no the little lad I played kick around with once upon a time. He's not a conspiracy theory. He's purposely ignored.

Hope that answers your question. "

It is survivable, but recent studies are showing it could cause long term, potentially catastrophic health issues for those who have caught it.

I'd much prefer to risk the side effects of a heavily tested vaccine than that of a virus that we are still learning about.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I've read all the comments but I feel one very important point is missing.... In Denmark they have a mutated version of the virus that has crossed from mink to humans. Drastic measures have been taken both by UK Government and Danish authorities to prevent it spreading. This mutated version deems the new vaccine useless already. It looks more and more like this Virus is starting to show its true colours and was designed to mutate and be untreatable and that isn't a conspiracy theory thats just facts staring us in the face.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *jfrenchMan over a year ago

Stockport

[Removed by poster at 10/11/20 00:38:19]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *jfrenchMan over a year ago

Stockport

But no the little lad I played kick around with once upon a time. He's not a conspiracy theory. He's purposely ignored.

Hope that answers your question.

It is survivable, but recent studies are showing it could cause long term, potentially catastrophic health issues for those who have caught it.

I'd much prefer to risk the side effects of a heavily tested vaccine than that of a virus that we are still learning about. "

Fully agree. Its a difficult one and, as its unchartered waters, they are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

I guess all I ask for is total transparency. My friends were not warned of any risk to their son. Nor have they had any help since the docs said yes it must be the jabs as there was nothing else wrong.

But I do take your point. Which is the better? The longer we leave it then long term effects could be catastrophic. But an untested (or even tested) vaccine could be that too. Hopefully not.

But why can't we have a frank and open discussion on this on say TV? Why is it silenced?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ethnmelvCouple over a year ago

Cardiff

"You probably think wearing a mask will save you from this China flu to ??"

You wear masks to avoid giving it to others. It isn’t hard to understand really

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

which other vaccines were released so early ?

Swine Flu vaccine"

Yes people conveniently forget about this one.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *arkus1812Man over a year ago

Lifes departure lounge NN9 Northamptonshire East not West MidlandsMidlands

If it is as successful as Pfizer,s other well known product , Viagra, then I will be at the head of the queue, as an 80 year old I have nothing to lose.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ark Knight 2017Man over a year ago

Ware

I'd place myself in this camp

Cautious

As noted above the vaccine is using AN "Innovative" approach

As an engineer I'm aware of very few inventions despite theoretical understanding that are not improved evolved and modified over time due to unforeseen glitches or technological improvements

I'd suggest the I phone was indeed innovative

The tech very well understood and yet it had understandable teething glitches and crashes

Science is a method of verification and data collection

Indeed then the accurate data can be used for targeted innovation yet the prototypes are almost never the final product

6 months is not enough time for any credible verification process

Happy we have one but cautious.

Everyone has the right to decide if they will have it as is the case with flu.

But it's great news

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 10/11/20 05:32:56]

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

which other vaccines were released so early ?

Swine Flu vaccine

Yes people conveniently forget about this one. "

well i certainly didnt have a swine flu vaccine so it clearly wasn’t expected to be as widely distributed

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

It's also by a company called BIONTECH and if you listen to conspiracy theories over the last couple of months about a certain mr gates and his evil plan to inject us with chips and the same mr gates who has billions of dollars of investment in said company then maybe the tin foil hat brigade has some validity. What do I know though you can always Google yourself

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *incsladyandscotsmanCouple over a year ago

North fife

I'm not anti vac, however the average time for a vaccine to be introduced to the world is 10 years.

What I object to strongly is being told that I must accept something alien into my body regardless of the risk to my long term health.

I am deeply concerned regarding this vaccine. Who do I sue if it makes me ill? Who is responsible for the effects of this drug on people's health?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *allySlinkyWoman over a year ago

Leeds

What I object to strongly is being told that I must accept something alien into my body "

No body has said the vaccine will be compulsory

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *om girlCouple (FF) over a year ago

South Yorkshire

I think its been rushed

Coz when russia and china said they had one the scientists was saying they couldn't coz was far to soon coz all the testing that was needed

So why this one so different

Id like to know who invested in company

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *incsladyandscotsmanCouple over a year ago

North fife

What I object to strongly is being told that I must accept something alien into my body

No body has said the vaccine will be compulsory "

Not yet. However reading press reports it would suggest that this may well be the route taken.

Given how people who choose not to vaccinate are viewed in this country I would suggest that people who choose not to take the vaccine for this deadly pandemic would be viewed very dimmly indeed.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *allySlinkyWoman over a year ago

Leeds

How would anyone know someone had chosen not to have the vaccine except their GP ?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

which other vaccines were released so early ?

Swine Flu vaccine

Yes people conveniently forget about this one. "

Side effects of the swine flu vaccine (Pandemrix made by GlaxoSmithKline) , narcolepsy among children and teenagers.

These people have not forgotten about this vaccine.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

"I'm not anti vac, however the average time for a vaccine to be introduced to the world is 10 years.

What I object to strongly is being told that I must accept something alien into my body regardless of the risk to my long term health.

I am deeply concerned regarding this vaccine. Who do I sue if it makes me ill? Who is responsible for the effects of this drug on people's health? "

Who do you sue if you catch covid and suffer long term effects?

There has been plenty of info in this thread, other thread and posted links explaining why a vaccine doesn't need to take 10 years or any thing like it.

What you seem to fail to understand is that whilst vaccines can take up to 10 years a lot of this time is spent on bureaucracy. Also, drug manufacturers are very conscious about costs. So, for example, they won't proceed to phase 3 of clinical trials (recruitment) until all results are in for previous phases. They need to determine if it's financially worth proceeding to the next phase. With covid vaccine, money is being thrown at the vaccines - some of which are being built on research for other vaccines including MMR.

Also, manufacturing has already begun which doesn't usually happen. If phase 3 is unsuccessful then millions of does will be destroyed. That a risk but decreases the overall timeframe.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *incsladyandscotsmanCouple over a year ago

North fife

"How would anyone know someone had chosen not to have the vaccine except their GP ?"

Look up the options...... Including a section in your passport, if you are on benefits you must be up to date with vaccines. Australia have something like this. Google it, its there to be read.

Our civil liberties are being eroded

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *est Wales WifeCouple over a year ago

Near Carmarthen

I am genuinely curious as to why you feel you would not take one or what your thoughts are on it but please leave all the conspiracy theory rubbish out of it. "

Because the vaccine has not gone through long term trials, the companies have no corporate liability (think about that for a minute if it is entirely safe why are they not accepting liability?). A vaccine is unnecessary for a disease that 99.8% of people survive.

Think this is an exaggeration? In which case I suggest you check out the NHS workers who had to fight to get compensation after developing narcolepsy from a swine flu vaccine that was rushed into service without the usual testing when the disease spread across the globe in 2009.

Here is a BMJ article about it (pdf)

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/doshi-2018-Pandemrix-vaccine-why-was-the-public-not-told-of.pdf

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

which other vaccines were released so early ?

Swine Flu vaccine

Yes people conveniently forget about this one.

Side effects of the swine flu vaccine (Pandemrix made by GlaxoSmithKline) , narcolepsy among children and teenagers.

These people have not forgotten about this vaccine. "

1 in 55,000

So if all of the UK had been vaccinated then up to 1200 people could have developed narcolepsy.

Swine flu mortality rate is over 1%. That's 700,000+ deaths.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hagTonightMan over a year ago

From the land of haribos.

"I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case)."
Yes, spot on. I wouldnt take it as a vaccine normally takes 10 years to develop and that is if there arent any hiccups along the way, also with those rush vaccines there arent either long enough time for the side effects of using it

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *incsladyandscotsmanCouple over a year ago

North fife

"I'm not anti vac, however the average time for a vaccine to be introduced to the world is 10 years.

What I object to strongly is being told that I must accept something alien into my body regardless of the risk to my long term health.

I am deeply concerned regarding this vaccine. Who do I sue if it makes me ill? Who is responsible for the effects of this drug on people's health?

Who do you sue if you catch covid and suffer long term effects?

There has been plenty of info in this thread, other thread and posted links explaining why a vaccine doesn't need to take 10 years or any thing like it.

Also, manufacturing has already begun which doesn't usually happen. If phase 3 is unsuccessful then millions of does will be destroyed. That a risk but decreases the overall timeframe."

Superior knowledge here! I bow Down to it.

We now look forward to a fully thought out, trialled and tested vaccine that has been brought out in record time, so that we can avoid covid and that nobody can be sued.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

I am genuinely curious as to why you feel you would not take one or what your thoughts are on it but please leave all the conspiracy theory rubbish out of it.

Here is a BMJ article about it (pdf)

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/doshi-2018-Pandemrix-vaccine-why-was-the-public-not-told-of.pdf"

So, what's the alternative?

Resume to normal life. NHS is overwhelmed for years preventing normal treatments from taking place. NHS doesn't not have the beds or staff to deal with both.

Live in constant lockdowns. Economy left in tatters resulting in long term unemployment and increases mental health issues and suicides.

The long term health risks from a covid vaccine will be rare.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

"I think its been rushed

Coz when russia and china said they had one the scientists was saying they couldn't coz was far to soon coz all the testing that was needed

So why this one so different

Id like to know who invested in company "

The Russian vaccine was approved after being tested in 80 people. This one has been tested in 43k people. 43k is a big enough sample to detect very rare side effects (very rare being greater that 1 in 10,000).

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

"I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case).Yes, spot on. I wouldnt take it as a vaccine normally takes 10 years to develop and that is if there arent any hiccups along the way, also with those rush vaccines there arent either long enough time for the side effects of using it

So how long is long enough?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I am genuinely curious as to why you feel you would not take one or what your thoughts are on it but please leave all the conspiracy theory rubbish out of it.

Here is a BMJ article about it (pdf)

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/doshi-2018-Pandemrix-vaccine-why-was-the-public-not-told-of.pdf

So, what's the alternative?

Resume to normal life. NHS is overwhelmed for years preventing normal treatments from taking place. NHS doesn't not have the beds or staff to deal with both.

Live in constant lockdowns. Economy left in tatters resulting in long term unemployment and increases mental health issues and suicides.

The long term health risks from a covid vaccine will be rare."

I'd ignore them if I were you, they continuously quote the same (and incorrect) mortality rate that started from an opinion article on Russia Today. More sensible estimates are between 5 and 10 times higher, which whilst a small percentage, is a horrifying number of actual lives. They also always gloss over the fact that not dead doesn't equal perfectly healthy. They are also wrong about vaccine manufacturers being exempt from prosecution, they do have added protection but they are not immune if they have flouted safety procedures.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hagTonightMan over a year ago

From the land of haribos.

"I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case).Yes, spot on. I wouldnt take it as a vaccine normally takes 10 years to develop and that is if there arent any hiccups along the way, also with those rush vaccines there arent either long enough time for the side effects of using it

So how long is long enough?"
About 10 years, not until then I would think about it if I would take it

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

I am genuinely curious as to why you feel you would not take one or what your thoughts are on it but please leave all the conspiracy theory rubbish out of it.

Here is a BMJ article about it (pdf)

https://childrenshealthdefense.org/wp-content/uploads/doshi-2018-Pandemrix-vaccine-why-was-the-public-not-told-of.pdf

So, what's the alternative?

Resume to normal life. NHS is overwhelmed for years preventing normal treatments from taking place. NHS doesn't not have the beds or staff to deal with both.

Live in constant lockdowns. Economy left in tatters resulting in long term unemployment and increases mental health issues and suicides.

The long term health risks from a covid vaccine will be rare.

They don't understand the timelines either. I think that some of them think they conduct trial and then wait for 10 years before giving a thumbs up.

Typically after phase 3, results are gathered and then it takes 5 years to review these results and start manufacturing. Throw 10x the resources at reviewing and start manufacturing pre phase 3 and this 5 years can be cut to a matter of weeks!

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

"I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case).Yes, spot on. I wouldnt take it as a vaccine normally takes 10 years to develop and that is if there arent any hiccups along the way, also with those rush vaccines there arent either long enough time for the side effects of using it

So how long is long enough?About 10 years, not until then I would think about it if I would take it

Why 10 years?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hagTonightMan over a year ago

From the land of haribos.

"I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case).Yes, spot on. I wouldnt take it as a vaccine normally takes 10 years to develop and that is if there arent any hiccups along the way, also with those rush vaccines there arent either long enough time for the side effects of using it

So how long is long enough?About 10 years, not until then I would think about it if I would take it

Why 10 years? "
I explained it above that a vaccine takes about that amount of time to develop too.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

"I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case).Yes, spot on. I wouldnt take it as a vaccine normally takes 10 years to develop and that is if there arent any hiccups along the way, also with those rush vaccines there arent either long enough time for the side effects of using it

So how long is long enough?About 10 years, not until then I would think about it if I would take it

Why 10 years? I explained it above that a vaccine takes about that amount of time to develop too."

So what do those 10 years consist of?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

I think those so vocal in anti vaccination need to step back and take a good look at themselves in all honesty.

This country is divided currently, there are those actively working to find a resolve to the worldwide problem and then those who are ‘fed up’ and who feel their best course of action is to vent that upset, rebel, spread misinformation and attack those working hard to find a solution.

Thousands in this country have volunteered for vaccine trials, they do this for a variety of reasons but the central theme is they care. They aren’t dumb, stupid or any of the suggestions that have been made, they are brave and incredibly selfless in their outlook, they also have trust in the people best positioned to find a solution to this awful period of our lives.

If for whatever reason you don’t want to be vaccinated, fine don’t get it done. The U.K. has never forced adults to receive one, you can use your personal choice to not have it. It falls under the same laws that allow you to leave hospital at anytime regardless of illness providing you are in a sane state of mind.

To sit and spout such utter shit about the risks, the inevitable side effects etc is just spreading total misinformation. Actually research these subjects fully, the UKs vaccination programmes have provided huge health improvements to this nation. Combined with improved healthcare they are the reason we live such extended lifespans instead of popping our clogs in our late 40’s.

To be blunt, if you’re that shortsighted regarding a vaccine, go sit in a corner somewhere with your “no to masks” placard and just preach amongst yourselves.... the rest of us, we’ll just crack on working towards happier times and look after one another, we don’t need the noise, negativity and ridiculous bollox you keep pedalling.

Mwah

Charli

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *agle76Man over a year ago

Birstall

"I am concerned about the flu vaccine and, will be concerned about a covid vaccine. I'd like to know more about it.

What type of information will convince you?

Firstly, how the drug companies will benefit. Flu vaccines are bought each year, does it eradicate all flu ? No...they have alot to gain

Drug companies will benefit by making money. That's kind of how businesses work.

Yes, all asia but some of these we had the year before. Either way, we have answered the point.

Not answered enough for me, covid will mutate. I wont be having the vaccine, I'm an NHS nurse - I don't have the flu vaccine either. My choice"

Very wise. I know of a scientist that works for Pfizer on the vaccine and has said he won't be taking it and his kids have never had vaccinations.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *incsladyandscotsmanCouple over a year ago

North fife

"I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case).Yes, spot on. I wouldnt take it as a vaccine normally takes 10 years to develop and that is if there arent any hiccups along the way, also with those rush vaccines there arent either long enough time for the side effects of using it

So how long is long enough?About 10 years, not until then I would think about it if I would take it

Why 10 years? I explained it above that a vaccine takes about that amount of time to develop too.

So what do those 10 years consist of?"

120 months

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

"I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case).Yes, spot on. I wouldnt take it as a vaccine normally takes 10 years to develop and that is if there arent any hiccups along the way, also with those rush vaccines there arent either long enough time for the side effects of using it

So how long is long enough?About 10 years, not until then I would think about it if I would take it

Why 10 years? I explained it above that a vaccine takes about that amount of time to develop too.

So what do those 10 years consist of?

120 months"

So nothing useful to add?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Very wise. I know of a scientist that works for Pfizer on the vaccine and has said he won't be taking it and his kids have never had vaccinations. "

Of course you do, because a guy who’s dedicated his life to studying and then working within the field of vaccination would really be sitting there collecting a large salary and doing work towards developing a drug which he knows will ruin the lives of 1,000,000’s of people worldwide if that was the case...

What kind of a genocidal money grabber is your mate if there’s the slightest bit of truth in this ridiculous claim?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *mmmMaybeCouple over a year ago

West Wales

99.99% recovery rate.

So you’ve not heard of those “Recovering” or we should say not dying now that have suffered longer term kidney & lung damage then?

I’d not call that recovered more survived for now.

I guess much like a rushed vaccine.

A rock & a hard place indeed.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *incsladyandscotsmanCouple over a year ago

North fife

"I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case).Yes, spot on. I wouldnt take it as a vaccine normally takes 10 years to develop and that is if there arent any hiccups along the way, also with those rush vaccines there arent either long enough time for the side effects of using it

So how long is long enough?About 10 years, not until then I would think about it if I would take it

Why 10 years? I explained it above that a vaccine takes about that amount of time to develop too.

So what do those 10 years consist of?

120 months

So nothing useful to add?"

I answered your question.

This new drug was manufactured in July. It has been tested since. However what cannot be assessed properly in this time period is the side affects. There is absolutely no chance this can be properly advised on. Unless you know differently ofcourse

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ionelhutzMan over a year ago

liverpool

"Very wise. I know of a scientist that works for Pfizer on the vaccine and has said he won't be taking it and his kids have never had vaccinations.

What kind of a genocidal money grabber is your mate if there’s the slightest bit of truth in this ridiculous claim? "

He was down the pub The other day.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

"I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case).Yes, spot on. I wouldnt take it as a vaccine normally takes 10 years to develop and that is if there arent any hiccups along the way, also with those rush vaccines there arent either long enough time for the side effects of using it

So how long is long enough?About 10 years, not until then I would think about it if I would take it

Why 10 years? I explained it above that a vaccine takes about that amount of time to develop too.

So what do those 10 years consist of?

120 months

So nothing useful to add?

I answered your question.

You answered a question.

The short term side effects can be assessed.

So 10 years is long enough to assess the longer term side effects?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *incsladyandscotsmanCouple over a year ago

North fife

"I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case).Yes, spot on. I wouldnt take it as a vaccine normally takes 10 years to develop and that is if there arent any hiccups along the way, also with those rush vaccines there arent either long enough time for the side effects of using it

So how long is long enough?About 10 years, not until then I would think about it if I would take it

Why 10 years? I explained it above that a vaccine takes about that amount of time to develop too.

So what do those 10 years consist of?

120 months

So nothing useful to add?

I answered your question.

You answered a question.

The short term side effects can be assessed.

So 10 years is long enough to assess the longer term side effects?"

Without going round in circles, the average vaccine takes 10 years. I'm no medical expert. However logic would suggest that if the medical world tells the world that the average time for a safe introduction of a vaccine is 10 years it is.

What do you suggest? If you rush a vaccine through without limited side affect information gathering how can that be deemed safe? Can you advise please.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Why be so judgemental Charlie? I'm only passing on information. Believe what you like.

You missed the Mis- off hunni x

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *mmmMaybeCouple over a year ago

West Wales

My only cynicism of drug companies is along the lines of any other business.

They rarely find one stop cures but they’ll always find a pill or medicine to alleviate the affects.

If you built a car that never broke down, never wore out & never rusted away you’d sell millions & millions.

Then you’d go broke..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ungblackbullMan over a year ago

scotland

"I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case).Yes, spot on. I wouldnt take it as a vaccine normally takes 10 years to develop and that is if there arent any hiccups along the way, also with those rush vaccines there arent either long enough time for the side effects of using it

So how long is long enough?About 10 years, not until then I would think about it if I would take it

Why 10 years? I explained it above that a vaccine takes about that amount of time to develop too.

So what do those 10 years consist of?

120 months

So nothing useful to add?

I answered your question.

You answered a question.

The short term side effects can be assessed.

So 10 years is long enough to assess the longer term side effects?

What do you suggest? If you rush a vaccine through without limited side affect information gathering how can that be deemed safe? Can you advise please. "

I think that you are making the assumption that the time taken to develop a vaccine is focused on long term safety. Phase 3 clinical trials are usually done within 5 years. 3 years are then spent analysing the results and approval. Then a couple of years manufacturing once approved.

A covid vaccine is priority so throwing resource at the analysis would reduce time frames considerably. The vaccine has already been manufactured in enough quantity to start rollout.

In terms of the first 5 years if development, clinical trial phases are done sequentially. Phase 3 will only commence once phase 2 completed and evaluated. Then recruitment starts. With covid, they jumped quickly into phase 3 with people already recruited. This has saved a considerable amount of time without actually cutting corners. The risk was injecting 43k people with a vaccine before phase 2 was complete but that's not a concern to the population.

Whilst 1 year may seem rushed, it's nothing like what the "10 years to develop a vaccine" make out..

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

which other vaccines were released so early ?

Swine Flu vaccine

Yes people conveniently forget about this one.

well i certainly didnt have a swine flu vaccine so it clearly wasn’t expected to be as widely distributed"

It's part of the flu vaccine it's not a separate one.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

which other vaccines were released so early ?

Swine Flu vaccine

Yes people conveniently forget about this one.

Side effects of the swine flu vaccine (Pandemrix made by GlaxoSmithKline) , narcolepsy among children and teenagers.

These people have not forgotten about this vaccine. "

What are you talking about it's not a separate vaccine, its part of the flu jab.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ophieslutTV/TS over a year ago

Central

"I've read all the comments but I feel one very important point is missing.... In Denmark they have a mutated version of the virus that has crossed from mink to humans. Drastic measures have been taken both by UK Government and Danish authorities to prevent it spreading. This mutated version deems the new vaccine useless already. It looks more and more like this Virus is starting to show its true colours and was designed to mutate and be untreatable and that isn't a conspiracy theory thats just facts staring us in the face. "

You say that the mutations acquired in Danish minks leave this vaccine unable to work now. You don't have any evidence.

The mutation may have already died out in people. The brief advance notification of the vaccines success didn't include details of the mink mutation because it's not in the scope of the Trial. The UK has requested mutation information but hasn't got it yet.

You rubbished the ability of the vaccine to be able to work based on conjecture. This virus is very limited in the scope of any mutation, which is why it's a good candidate for vaccines to beat it.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Have a look on Full Fact, the real death rate is closer to 1%. Get your facts right as opposed to hoping it is harnless.

Still a miniscule amount really...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *moothman2000Man over a year ago

Leicestershire

Very wise. I know of a scientist that works for Pfizer on the vaccine and has said he won't be taking it and his kids have never had vaccinations. "

I know of a scientist who says he will be taking it and his kids are fully vaccinated.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"As I’m sure you all heard today a company by the name of pfizer (I think that’s how it is spelt) have developed a trial vaccine that has a supposed 90% success rate

Few genuinely concerned ones won't reply in here as they'll just get shot down by pro Vax people. Few listen to others concerns but rather quickly give their counter argument, often the argument doesn't really touch the concern raised but it a pat answer.

It's not just this question, but it'll be the same format for Brexit, elections, economy, mask wearing etc etc.

Generally people don't listen and respect another's pov without trying to counter argue.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Then read about how it has been developed from reputable sources and play your part in promoting its safety and debunking anti-vaccine claims.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case).Yes, spot on. I wouldnt take it as a vaccine normally takes 10 years to develop and that is if there arent any hiccups along the way, also with those rush vaccines there arent either long enough time for the side effects of using it

So how long is long enough?About 10 years, not until then I would think about it if I would take it

Why 10 years? I explained it above that a vaccine takes about that amount of time to develop too.

So what do those 10 years consist of?

120 months

So nothing useful to add?

I answered your question.

You answered a question.

The short term side effects can be assessed.

So 10 years is long enough to assess the longer term side effects?

What do you suggest? If you rush a vaccine through without limited side affect information gathering how can that be deemed safe? Can you advise please. "

as much as i have similar thoughts on side effects, average by definition is somewhere in the middle, it can be less than this and many people above have explained that those 10 years aren't all phase 3 waiting for side effects usually

but in this case it hasn’t even been long enough for any of the volunteers to carry a baby to term as an example

also when people say 43k have been tested, but then someone else says thats a group of 20k vs a control group of 20k that didnt get it the number of people actually tested just halved

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ames_LondonMan over a year ago

Southgate

If the vaccine does have a 90% success rate herd immunity is irrelevant. If you are scared of Covid, you can have it, if you are scared of vaccines you don’t and it doesn’t compromise anyone else.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Do people ever read the full leaflet in packs of Paracetamol and the list of possible side effects?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Do people ever read the full leaflet in packs of Paracetamol and the list of possible side effects?"

Exactly this everything has possible side effects. Some a mild some are serious.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

But no the little lad I played kick around with once upon a time. He's not a conspiracy theory. He's purposely ignored.

Hope that answers your question. "

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"You probably think wearing a mask will save you from this China flu to ??

You wear masks to avoid giving it to others. It isn’t hard to understand really

Absolute tosh

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Do people ever read the full leaflet in packs of Paracetamol and the list of possible side effects?"

probably not on paracetamol but i do when i get a new prescription and have on a few occasions then chosen not to take that medication ... for example being prescribed beta blockers for headaches then reading it will make my psoriasis worse made them a no thanks for me

its literally the point of this information so i don't understand why people are being criticised for wanting to wait til a little more of it is available

if the vaccine will be optional and phased anyway it makes no difference to let them wait to the back of the queue

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ockosaurusMan over a year ago

Warwick

Please read the following explanation about how this vaccine can be developed so quickly:

https://wellcome.org/news/how-can-we-develop-covid-19-vaccine-quickly

It's better to have the facts rather than worry about something due to lack of knowledge.

Hopefully it will settle a few concerns.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Do people ever read the full leaflet in packs of Paracetamol and the list of possible side effects?

its literally the point of this information so i don't understand why people are being criticised for wanting to wait til a little more of it is available

if the vaccine will be optional and phased anyway it makes no difference to let them wait to the back of the queue "

It will be optional bot it seems ridiculous to me that people will complain about locked down and say that the vulnerable should shield but then refuse a vaccine. How would people who don't have the vaccine feel is they were told to shut themselves away? You have said on other threads that you think that people that are vulnerable should be protected yet your not prepared to do anything about it?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

You say that the mutations acquired in Danish minks leave this vaccine unable to work now. You don't have any evidence.

You rubbished the ability of the vaccine to be able to work based on conjecture. This virus is very limited in the scope of any mutation, which is why it's a good candidate for vaccines to beat it. "

It was all over the news the past two days about the Mutated virus crossing from minx to human.

It has mutated at least 4 times if not 5 since detected in Wouhan, again on the news and medical periodicals.

Lancet had an article suggesting that it was most likely around 9 months or more in out lying villages in China before it entered the city of Wouhan, which would account for its advanced stage of development as a virus, and may have already mutated once or twice during that time. The earlier mutations may have died out by the time the main one reached Wouhan.

There is so much scientists still do not know about it as has been very evident with very differing of scientific opinions even this last month, that anyone who says, science says or I'd believe in science as an argument needs to think carefully what they really mean by it as its meaningless as an argument for something. Science is there, but the understanding of it is changing every day.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uietlykinkymeWoman over a year ago

kinky land

Back to the op please.

Play nice

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ockosaurusMan over a year ago

Warwick

"You probably think wearing a mask will save you from this China flu to ??

You wear masks to avoid giving it to others. It isn’t hard to understand really

Absolute tosh "

Tosh? No.

Have you never considered why surgeon's wear masks whilst doing operations? It's not too stop them getting infected by something, but to stop them passing an infection to the patient who is in a vulnerable state.

Here are some simple to understand facts.

* When we sneeze, cough, talk and when breath, we expel water droplets.

* The virus is not airborne, but leaves our bodies on these water droplets.

* The droplets are too heavy to remain in the air, so land on nearby surfaces.

* The virus can survive on many surfaces for up to 48 hours.

* By touching the infected surfaces we pick up the virus and spread it further, potentially passing it to our mouth / eyes.

Masks catch the expelled water droplets, so stops any of this from occurring, and as such stops us spreading the virus.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"How would anyone know someone had chosen not to have the vaccine except their GP ?

Look up the options...... Including a section in your passport, if you are on benefits you must be up to date with vaccines. Australia have something like this. Google it, its there to be read.

Our civil liberties are being eroded"

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

What I object to strongly is being told that I must accept something alien into my body

No body has said the vaccine will be compulsory

Not yet. However reading press reports it would suggest that this may well be the route taken.

Given how people who choose not to vaccinate are viewed in this country I would suggest that people who choose not to take the vaccine for this deadly pandemic would be viewed very dimmly indeed.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *incsladyandscotsmanCouple over a year ago

North fife

"I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case).Yes, spot on. I wouldnt take it as a vaccine normally takes 10 years to develop and that is if there arent any hiccups along the way, also with those rush vaccines there arent either long enough time for the side effects of using it

So how long is long enough?About 10 years, not until then I would think about it if I would take it

Why 10 years? I explained it above that a vaccine takes about that amount of time to develop too.

So what do those 10 years consist of?

120 months

So nothing useful to add?

I answered your question.

You answered a question.

The short term side effects can be assessed.

So 10 years is long enough to assess the longer term side effects?

What do you suggest? If you rush a vaccine through without limited side affect information gathering how can that be deemed safe? Can you advise please.

A covid vaccine is priority so throwing resource at the analysis would reduce time frames considerably. The vaccine has already been manufactured in enough quantity to start rollout.

Whilst 1 year may seem rushed, it's nothing like what the "10 years to develop a vaccine" make out.."

You have not answered my question on side affects. There is no way the medical profession can crystal ball medium to long term effects.

You clearly have knowledge. Please advise how a focused on vaccine that can be produced in months can be properly assessed for side affects? From my research even the experts admit this.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"I think a lot of reasonably minded people will be worried that a drug which would normally would take years to test is made available so quickly. I can understand the concern and personally I'd want to know a lot more about it before accepting a jab (or two in this case).Yes, spot on. I wouldnt take it as a vaccine normally takes 10 years to develop and that is if there arent any hiccups along the way, also with those rush vaccines there arent either long enough time for the side effects of using it

So how long is long enough?About 10 years, not until then I would think about it if I would take it

Why 10 years? I explained it above that a vaccine takes about that amount of time to develop too.

So what do those 10 years consist of?

120 months

So nothing useful to add?

I answered your question.

You answered a question.

The short term side effects can be assessed.

So 10 years is long enough to assess the longer term side effects?

What do you suggest? If you rush a vaccine through without limited side affect information gathering how can that be deemed safe? Can you advise please.

A covid vaccine is priority so throwing resource at the analysis would reduce time frames considerably. The vaccine has already been manufactured in enough quantity to start rollout.

Whilst 1 year may seem rushed, it's nothing like what the "10 years to develop a vaccine" make out..

You have not answered my question on side affects. There is no way the medical profession can crystal ball medium to long term effects.

You clearly have knowledge. Please advise how a focused on vaccine that can be produced in months can be properly assessed for side affects? From my research even the experts admit this.

Simply because they can't. To admit that though greatly weakens their argument that those who are cautious or don't want to take it if it's suddenly rushed out are being selfish or in their minds ignorant.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *andyfloss2000Woman over a year ago

ashford

Just a gut feeling nothing more! I have the flu jab every year and had the pneumonia one as I'm in vulnerable being asthmatic/diabetic and 63,but no way will I have this one! X

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *eddy and legsCouple over a year ago

the wetlands

It's definitely time our education system was reviewed it appears to be failing badly.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"It's definitely time our education system was reviewed it appears to be failing badly."

In what particular area?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uliaChrisCouple over a year ago

westerham

Couldn’t agree more. I totally understand that very clever people and powerful computers have been working on this since at least March.

Doing an “emergency approval” can’t be optimal, otherwise every drug would be emergency approved.

That’s not to say it’s not worth introducing for high risk groups, it almost certainly is.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *DGF20Man over a year ago

Dublin

It's simple..everyone's choice take it or leave it

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *irldnCouple over a year ago

Brighton

There is something deliciously surreal to be reading posts about the pros and cons of a vaccine for a worldwide pandemic that has killed over a million people so far - and then spotting the mini profile pics showing a plethora of tits, asses and cocks!

Not an anti vaxxer but certainly cautious and uncomfortable with the speed of development and therefore lack of ability to study long term side effects. Big pharma have form and there is MASSIVE money at stake here.

I would like to see mandatory vaccination of all senior management of Pfizer and their families as well as all government ministers and their families (independently monitored). I might then have more confidence.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uliaChrisCouple over a year ago

westerham

"There is something deliciously surreal to be reading posts about the pros and cons of a vaccine for a worldwide pandemic that has killed over a million people so far - and then spotting the mini profile pics showing a plethora of tits, asses and cocks!

Bit like that scene out of Erin Brockovich

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

"It's definitely time our education system was reviewed it appears to be failing badly.

In what particular area?"

Science, source analysis, critical thinking

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

Elvis famously took the polio vaccine live on TV and caused uptake to soar.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Elvis famously took the polio vaccine live on TV and caused uptake to soar."

Trump could take the covid one.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *moothman2000Man over a year ago

Leicestershire

Doing an “emergency approval” can’t be optimal, otherwise every drug would be emergency approved.

That would depend on what the "approval" process involves - I don't think we know that.

The wheels of government never moved quickly and if they have simply cut out a load of pointless bureaucracy that adds no real value, then that might be a good thing...

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Most people understand that rapid progress through unprecedented collaborative worldwide funding and research will hopefully bring this vaccine to fruition in a shorter than usual timeframe.

But just as Concorde shortened transatlantic flights to 3 hours or so in the 70s, a few would not board it 'because it usually takes 3 times longer to fly to the US, so it can't be safe'

Fair enough, don't board Concorde then.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

Doing an “emergency approval” can’t be optimal, otherwise every drug would be emergency approved.

That would depend on what the "approval" process involves - I don't think we know that.

The wheels of government never moved quickly and if they have simply cut out a load of pointless bureaucracy that adds no real value, then that might be a good thing..."

In the event of an emergency approval I'll do two things to ascertain my personal position. One, find out what appropriate virologists/immunologists/infectious disease doctors think about the approval (science outreach information on blogs etc). Two, ask my doctor about any contraindications for me.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ylonSlutTV/TS over a year ago

Durham

Doing an “emergency approval” can’t be optimal, otherwise every drug would be emergency approved.

That would depend on what the "approval" process involves - I don't think we know that.

The wheels of government never moved quickly and if they have simply cut out a load of pointless bureaucracy that adds no real value, then that might be a good thing...

Surely you will consult experts on here and facebook too. Also whatabout experts sat in their vests on youtube?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *naswingdressWoman over a year ago

Manchester (she/her)

Doing an “emergency approval” can’t be optimal, otherwise every drug would be emergency approved.

That would depend on what the "approval" process involves - I don't think we know that.

The wheels of government never moved quickly and if they have simply cut out a load of pointless bureaucracy that adds no real value, then that might be a good thing...

Surely you will consult experts on here and facebook too. Also whatabout experts sat in their vests on youtube?

The experts I view on YouTube tend to be verifiably academics. And dressed

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *mmmMaybeCouple over a year ago

West Wales

Elvis famously took the polio vaccine live on TV and caused uptake to soar."

But you also had "The Cutter incident" where families were given $500 for their dead kids, nice..

I would imagine not many of the families were going "huh, huh huh" with a hip swager at the time.

Large scale speedy (I won't say rushed) rollouts often lead to failures somewhere along the line.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ionelhutzMan over a year ago

liverpool

Will it be compulsory?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *mmmMaybeCouple over a year ago

West Wales

"Will it be compulsory?"

No.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *agle76Man over a year ago

Birstall

"Why be so judgemental Charlie? I'm only passing on information. Believe what you like.

You missed the Mis- off hunni x"

Like I said. Judgemental

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ionelhutzMan over a year ago

liverpool

"Will it be compulsory?

No."

So all this..they are going to vaccinate us so they can chip us..is a little far fetched.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Do people ever read the full leaflet in packs of Paracetamol and the list of possible side effects?

its literally the point of this information so i don't understand why people are being criticised for wanting to wait til a little more of it is available

if the vaccine will be optional and phased anyway it makes no difference to let them wait to the back of the queue

i think you are perhaps confusing me with someone else ... i have never at any point said lets just lock up the vulnerable ... i think everyone needs to do their bit, i wear my mask, i will get vaccinated , i think the tin foil hat brigade are mental ... but i dont think you have to be tin foil hat to have some genuine worries about a quick vaccine

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *moothman2000Man over a year ago

Leicestershire

But you also had "The Cutter incident" where families were given $500 for their dead kids, nice..

That was about 60 years ago and happened because the batch of vaccine involved contained active virus as opposed to inactivated.

Every batch of vaccine produced is tested nowdays.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *andyfloss2000Woman over a year ago

ashford

"Will it be compulsory?"

No of course not!! X

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

Politicians first

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *andyfloss2000Woman over a year ago

ashford

"Do people ever read the full leaflet in packs of Paracetamol and the list of possible side effects?

its literally the point of this information so i don't understand why people are being criticised for wanting to wait til a little more of it is available

if the vaccine will be optional and phased anyway it makes no difference to let them wait to the back of the queue

Y call people tin hat brigade be cause they have a different opinion?? Rude!! X

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Politicians first"

i think comments like this are unhelpful ... if its optional everyone should have the option even politicians

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *moothman2000Man over a year ago

Leicestershire

Y call people tin hat brigade be cause they have a different opinion?? Rude!! X"

Worse than calling people 'sheepie'?

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *ionelhutzMan over a year ago

liverpool

"Do people ever read the full leaflet in packs of Paracetamol and the list of possible side effects?

its literally the point of this information so i don't understand why people are being criticised for wanting to wait til a little more of it is available

if the vaccine will be optional and phased anyway it makes no difference to let them wait to the back of the queue

I think there is a difference between being worried about the long term possible side effects and thinking it's being used to alter our DNA.

If you dont want it.Dont have it.

Simple.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Politicians first

i think comments like this are unhelpful ... if its optional everyone should have the option even politicians "

It should be compulsory for tory politicians

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *irldnCouple over a year ago

Brighton

Anti-vaxxers get a lot if grief. A lot of that grief IS justified because of the completely barmy claims and linkages sometimes made.

However, within that broad group there are also people who have a healthy skepticism about the motivation and morality of big pharma and politicians and scientists with shareholdings in those pharma companies.

Here’s one word for why people have a right to be nervous and untrusting...

Thalidomide

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *moothman2000Man over a year ago

Leicestershire

If you dont want it.Dont have it.

Simple."

That's it in a nutshell.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *andyfloss2000Woman over a year ago

ashford

Y call people tin hat brigade be cause they have a different opinion?? Rude!! X

Worse than calling people 'sheepie'?

Nope x

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *uliaChrisCouple over a year ago

westerham

It’s only like expecting politicians to send their children to state school. The benefits for the population would be enormous.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By (user no longer on site) over a year ago

"Anti-vaxxers get a lot if grief. A lot of that grief IS justified because of the completely barmy claims and linkages sometimes made.

Here’s one word for why people have a right to be nervous and untrusting...

Thalidomide

That wasn't a vaccine and it was 50 years ago.

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)

By *hatawasteMan over a year ago

stafford

I suppose the truth is we need something to help us all at least believe this thing isn't going to stop us all from living our lives, don't we? So introducing the relative ' good news' of a vaccine is a good idea I think. I will absolutely be getting mine if offered.

Should it be mandatory? difficult to answer .. possibly not at first. However, once the trials are completed/ success rate from early programmes of vaccinations etc are at least stable then I would think we should really try and get everyone to be responsible for their own health and make it necessary for everyone to have one . Either that or for those not wanting to do it then they could have to start paying charges towards NHS bills etc should they become ill maybe?

Yes.. absolutely all politicians should be involved in the first wave of vaccinations. For once they need to step up and set an example and not ask us to do anything they won't do themselves.

Final thoughts.. to anyone who says they will 'refuse' to take a vaccination. How many of you have swallowed an untested pill or experimented with a 'legal' High or snorted a line of some kind of powder on a night out from sources completely unknown?

This is very much the same thing .. it might do you good.. it probably will do you good .. but there is always the risk isn't there! Personally I think people need to just take the risk for the good of us all .

Reply privately (closed, thread got too big)