FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Oxford vaccine
Oxford vaccine
Jump to: Newest in thread
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Not only can a 90% protection be achieved, but nobody who did contract covid, ended up in hospital. And that surely is the main goal. " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's announced the Oxford vaccine is 70% effective. Though not as high as the previous announcements it's cheaper, and easier to store. Plus, a 70% protection in in population will bring about herd immunity that much quicker I'd imagine? " 70% for 1 dose..... and 90% for the double dose...... Bearing in mind that the UK have secured 100 million doses of this vaccine as a priority customer, this is the one most of us would likely get... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"From the statement today, this must be a single shot vaccine (achieving 70% immunity), this will be a godsend for the 3rd world countries where the logistics of administering a 2 shot vaccine to a population that may live in extremely remote locations or where government records of the population may not be particularly good, would be almost impossible. " Refill that glass | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"From the statement today, this must be a single shot vaccine (achieving 70% immunity), this will be a godsend for the 3rd world countries where the logistics of administering a 2 shot vaccine to a population that may live in extremely remote locations or where government records of the population may not be particularly good, would be almost impossible. " My understanding (not an expert) is that it's two jabs a month or so apart. 90% efficacy was achieved with first jab half dose and a full dose a month later. 70% was achieved with two full doses. AZ press release is here: https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-centre/press-releases/2020/azd1222hlr.html | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"*Correction: 62% was achieved with two full doses. 70% is what they are quoting as the average of the two." so it was LESS effective with more vaccine? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"*Correction: 62% was achieved with two full doses. 70% is what they are quoting as the average of the two. so it was LESS effective with more vaccine?" Yes https://www.astrazeneca.com/media-centre/press-releases/2020/azd1222hlr.html | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The 90 plus claims are off the scale of what might have been expected efficacy wise according to some in that field and even at 70% it's good.. Also the cost and the resources needed will be far more beneficial in some parts of the globe.." Yes. The American funding for vaccine development was aimed at 50%+. This is incredible and wonderful. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" A tale of two news channels: Sky News: 90% successful if administered correctly. Cheap, easy to transport AND it stops asymptomatic transmission. This is the vaccine that could very well end the pandemic. CNN: Only 70% successful and nowhere near as advanced as the Pfizer vaccine. And... worryingly, the Astra Zeneca vaccine has been tested on far fewer people and therefore a much higher risk going forwards. Who is right???" Both have true and false aspects, plus spin. They tried two regimens. One was 63% effective, one was 90%+ effective. The Oxford vaccine has the potential to reach more people in the third world. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines use a newer technology. They're all good vaccines. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" A tale of two news channels: Sky News: 90% successful if administered correctly. Cheap, easy to transport AND it stops asymptomatic transmission. This is the vaccine that could very well end the pandemic. CNN: Only 70% successful and nowhere near as advanced as the Pfizer vaccine. And... worryingly, the Astra Zeneca vaccine has been tested on far fewer people and therefore a much higher risk going forwards. Who is right??? Both have true and false aspects, plus spin. They tried two regimens. One was 63% effective, one was 90%+ effective. The Oxford vaccine has the potential to reach more people in the third world. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines use a newer technology. They're all good vaccines." Lets hope all the vaccines are good the world needs them | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" A tale of two news channels: Sky News: 90% successful if administered correctly. Cheap, easy to transport AND it stops asymptomatic transmission. This is the vaccine that could very well end the pandemic. CNN: Only 70% successful and nowhere near as advanced as the Pfizer vaccine. And... worryingly, the Astra Zeneca vaccine has been tested on far fewer people and therefore a much higher risk going forwards. Who is right??? Both have true and false aspects, plus spin. They tried two regimens. One was 63% effective, one was 90%+ effective. The Oxford vaccine has the potential to reach more people in the third world. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines use a newer technology. They're all good vaccines.Lets hope all the vaccines are good the world needs them" Definitely. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I'm rolling up my sleeve right now." I've signed up for trials and they can give it to me baby (uh huh, uh huh) | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Brilliant news. I'm afraid of needles too, but bring it on "If only we were in a bubble, you'd be used to a little prick.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" A tale of two news channels: Sky News: 90% successful if administered correctly. Cheap, easy to transport AND it stops asymptomatic transmission. This is the vaccine that could very well end the pandemic. CNN: Only 70% successful and nowhere near as advanced as the Pfizer vaccine. And... worryingly, the Astra Zeneca vaccine has been tested on far fewer people and therefore a much higher risk going forwards. Who is right??? Both have true and false aspects, plus spin. They tried two regimens. One was 63% effective, one was 90%+ effective. The Oxford vaccine has the potential to reach more people in the third world. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines use a newer technology. They're all good vaccines.Lets hope all the vaccines are good the world needs them Definitely." Stay with me on this, but during the cold war the Royal Air Force had three V-bombers, the Victor, the Vulcan and the Valiant. All three, a product of the 1950s where they had the same job: to take out the enemy targets, using nuclear weapons. So using this lesson from no too long ago, there are times where having three options is the only way to contain the situation. In short, three heads are better than one. CNN is a drama and marketing channel. "Why let the facts get in the way of a good story for our sponsors?" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" A tale of two news channels: Sky News: 90% successful if administered correctly. Cheap, easy to transport AND it stops asymptomatic transmission. This is the vaccine that could very well end the pandemic. CNN: Only 70% successful and nowhere near as advanced as the Pfizer vaccine. And... worryingly, the Astra Zeneca vaccine has been tested on far fewer people and therefore a much higher risk going forwards. Who is right???" Stops asymptomatic transmission is a very big claim, I'd be surprised if that has been proven but even that aside good news | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Got to be the best news since the start of this pandemic, not one single negative comment here. Great day for science and for all of us., well done Oxford!" Science is indeed a wonderful thing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Got to be the best news since the start of this pandemic, not one single negative comment here. Great day for science and for all of us., well done Oxford! Science is indeed a wonderful thing." Oh yes! History is too, especially when people learn from it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Got to be the best news since the start of this pandemic, not one single negative comment here. Great day for science and for all of us., well done Oxford! Science is indeed a wonderful thing. Oh yes! History is too, especially when people learn from it." Studying history means sitting with your heads in your hands while people repeat it  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Got to be the best news since the start of this pandemic, not one single negative comment here. Great day for science and for all of us., well done Oxford!" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Got to be the best news since the start of this pandemic, not one single negative comment here. Great day for science and for all of us., well done Oxford! Science is indeed a wonderful thing. Oh yes! History is too, especially when people learn from it. Studying history means sitting with your heads in your hands while people repeat it "Studying Science means sitting with your head in your hands, wondering why the actual fuck it's not working/why the bugs won't grow/where your protein went
Then you repeat it | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Got to be the best news since the start of this pandemic, not one single negative comment here. Great day for science and for all of us., well done Oxford! Science is indeed a wonderful thing. Oh yes! History is too, especially when people learn from it. Studying history means sitting with your heads in your hands while people repeat it
Studying Science means sitting with your head in your hands, wondering why the actual fuck it's not working/why the bugs won't grow/where your protein went
Then you repeat it " | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon " If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. " No figures have been released on how many were in the trial, what percentage of that number were given a placebo (if any), were the people in the trail exposed to the virus or was their blood just checked for anti bodies, what was the age range of the people in the trial, did anyone in the trial have an underlying medical condition, had anyone in the trial been tested positive or already been diagnosed with covid,........ This was just a press release. If only 10 were in the trial, all young and fit, 9 could produce anti bodies and there is your 90%! Don’t trust the government or drug companies figures without pulling them apart and delving deeper. Find out exactly what they want to put into your body, once in, you can’t take it out. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. No figures have been released on how many were in the trial, what percentage of that number were given a placebo (if any), were the people in the trail exposed to the virus or was their blood just checked for anti bodies, what was the age range of the people in the trial, did anyone in the trial have an underlying medical condition, had anyone in the trial been tested positive or already been diagnosed with covid,........ This was just a press release. If only 10 were in the trial, all young and fit, 9 could produce anti bodies and there is your 90%! Don’t trust the government or drug companies figures without pulling them apart and delving deeper. Find out exactly what they want to put into your body, once in, you can’t take it out. " There are figures out there for some of the testing. Placebos were used and it has been reported as such. There were thousands involved in the trials. They were definitely exposed to the virus as people in both the placebo and vaccine groups contracted Covid. However those in the vaccine group had significantly less infections and those who did get it had a much lower rate of hospitalisation. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. " There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. No figures have been released on how many were in the trial, what percentage of that number were given a placebo (if any), were the people in the trail exposed to the virus or was their blood just checked for anti bodies, what was the age range of the people in the trial, did anyone in the trial have an underlying medical condition, had anyone in the trial been tested positive or already been diagnosed with covid,........ This was just a press release. If only 10 were in the trial, all young and fit, 9 could produce anti bodies and there is your 90%! Don’t trust the government or drug companies figures without pulling them apart and delving deeper. Find out exactly what they want to put into your body, once in, you can’t take it out. There are figures out there for some of the testing. Placebos were used and it has been reported as such. There were thousands involved in the trials. They were definitely exposed to the virus as people in both the placebo and vaccine groups contracted Covid. However those in the vaccine group had significantly less infections and those who did get it had a much lower rate of hospitalisation." There have been many trials on different vaccine runs. You need to match the figures with the run. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ " I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. No figures have been released on how many were in the trial, what percentage of that number were given a placebo (if any), were the people in the trail exposed to the virus or was their blood just checked for anti bodies, what was the age range of the people in the trial, did anyone in the trial have an underlying medical condition, had anyone in the trial been tested positive or already been diagnosed with covid,........ This was just a press release. If only 10 were in the trial, all young and fit, 9 could produce anti bodies and there is your 90%! Don’t trust the government or drug companies figures without pulling them apart and delving deeper. Find out exactly what they want to put into your body, once in, you can’t take it out. There are figures out there for some of the testing. Placebos were used and it has been reported as such. There were thousands involved in the trials. They were definitely exposed to the virus as people in both the placebo and vaccine groups contracted Covid. However those in the vaccine group had significantly less infections and those who did get it had a much lower rate of hospitalisation. There have been many trials on different vaccine runs. You need to match the figures with the run. " Yes, I am aware of that, I am trying to summarise for the sake of brevity. I don't have the time, inclination or phone battery to type all the testing documents in here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I listened to am interview with a man taki g part in the trial. They might be asking people to take paracetamol before the jab because he suffered high temperature after. Also. Giving a smaller first jab then a larger second jab seems to indicate better success than protection that two large jab. They don't know the reason which worries me. Too many unknowns. Very worrying" What other unknowns are there? The two you've provided aren't that worrying. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon " My comment to anyone with that opinion would be What if you get really sick, you'll be an unnecessary burden on the NHS and possibly a long term burden on you family if you have lasting complications. Hopefully you won't of course. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And the thalidomide aspect .. Too many dismissing that as itrelevant" Very different from Thalidomide as the basic technology in this drug has been used before and the methodology of this particular vaccine is well proven. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And the thalidomide aspect .. Too many dismissing that as itrelevant" Do you think medical technology hasn't moved on in 50 years? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And the thalidomide aspect .. Too many dismissing that as itrelevant" It was not a vaccine  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" A tale of two news channels: Sky News: 90% successful if administered correctly. Cheap, easy to transport AND it stops asymptomatic transmission. This is the vaccine that could very well end the pandemic. CNN: Only 70% successful and nowhere near as advanced as the Pfizer vaccine. And... worryingly, the Astra Zeneca vaccine has been tested on far fewer people and therefore a much higher risk going forwards. Who is right??? Stops asymptomatic transmission is a very big claim, I'd be surprised if that has been proven but even that aside good news"
I think it's more publicity optimism something to boost public concern more than any element of truth.
This seems to be an example of one of those things that is thrown with some kernels of truth to be widely accepted then by the general public. Much like how some vaccines work by tricking the body into thinking one thing to get the desired effect. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" A tale of two news channels: Sky News: 90% successful if administered correctly. Cheap, easy to transport AND it stops asymptomatic transmission. This is the vaccine that could very well end the pandemic. CNN: Only 70% successful and nowhere near as advanced as the Pfizer vaccine. And... worryingly, the Astra Zeneca vaccine has been tested on far fewer people and therefore a much higher risk going forwards. Who is right??? Both have true and false aspects, plus spin. They tried two regimens. One was 63% effective, one was 90%+ effective. The Oxford vaccine has the potential to reach more people in the third world. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines use a newer technology. They're all good vaccines.Lets hope all the vaccines are good the world needs them" Working my way through this thread. Some good stuff... Does anyone know where either vaccine is re testing and what steps need to be completed for it to be approved and made available to our health service? And then what needs to happen to have it administered to our population... And if serco are involved or not. Not trying to dampen the enthusiasm for good news but I just wonder how realistic it is to think we will be jabbing people with a magic potion any time soon. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon " Distrust. We're right, far more trustworthy and of course far better, not to mention it's made in China .
Most of those saying it probably have been complaining about how our government have handle the pandemic compared to other countries too...
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" A tale of two news channels: Sky News: 90% successful if administered correctly. Cheap, easy to transport AND it stops asymptomatic transmission. This is the vaccine that could very well end the pandemic. CNN: Only 70% successful and nowhere near as advanced as the Pfizer vaccine. And... worryingly, the Astra Zeneca vaccine has been tested on far fewer people and therefore a much higher risk going forwards. Who is right??? Both have true and false aspects, plus spin. They tried two regimens. One was 63% effective, one was 90%+ effective. The Oxford vaccine has the potential to reach more people in the third world. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines use a newer technology. They're all good vaccines.Lets hope all the vaccines are good the world needs them Working my way through this thread. Some good stuff... Does anyone know where either vaccine is re testing and what steps need to be completed for it to be approved and made available to our health service? And then what needs to happen to have it administered to our population... And if serco are involved or not. Not trying to dampen the enthusiasm for good news but I just wonder how realistic it is to think we will be jabbing people with a magic potion any time soon. " Brazil was one place, the primary reason given if I'm not mistaken was to see if it had any adverse effects with HIV, but probably more to do with lack of red tape. That's not to imply the tests and results were substandard but more to do with speed of implementation. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's the insistence that people who worry about the vaccine should justify their decisions. It's a free country the last time I checked. Some of the pro vaccine lobby border on vaccine shaming.." I've not seen that at all. The debate has evolved a little bit. All I've seen recently is both sides saying... Make your decision based on facts rather than rumour or poorly evidenced pseudo science. Nobody should be bullied into having it and nobody should be bullied into not having it. Well constructed, peer reviewed, unambiguous facts by credible people is what is needed... When it's ready (if its ready) we need a public information blitz presenting the facts and medical recommendations via our well trusted GP network. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
I know which one I would pick | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's the insistence that people who worry about the vaccine should justify their decisions. It's a free country the last time I checked. Some of the pro vaccine lobby border on vaccine shaming.." Why should someone offering their opinion in a forum be immune from justifying it? You're free to make your opinion known, should I not be free to question it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. " So you put your faith and health in the hands of the clowns in Westminster? Good luck with that one. The comparison with thalidomide was to show how things can go very wrong. Don't say they there are never issues anymore. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And the thalidomide aspect .. Too many dismissing that as itrelevant Very different from Thalidomide as the basic technology in this drug has been used before and the methodology of this particular vaccine is well proven." I was not comparing the drugs, just what can happen when it goes on. It was a big money earner to the drug companies until the wheels came off. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And the thalidomide aspect .. Too many dismissing that as itrelevant Do you think medical technology hasn't moved on in 50 years?" And do you think that they get it right 100% of the time? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. So you put your faith and health in the hands of the clowns in Westminster? Good luck with that one. The comparison with thalidomide was to show how things can go very wrong. Don't say they there are never issues anymore." I put more faith in what the science says. The politicians aren't the ones researching this vaccine... And as well as thalidomide being a totally different thing to a vaccine, it also happened over 50 years ago. Regulation has moved on a lot, in no small part due to horrible situations like that. Is it an infallible system? No, nothing is... but I have more faith in it than I do a growing list of ludicrous conspiracies from people who have read a few nonsense social media posts, watched some nonsense YouTube videos, and shit the bed. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's the insistence that people who worry about the vaccine should justify their decisions. It's a free country the last time I checked. Some of the pro vaccine lobby border on vaccine shaming.. Why should someone offering their opinion in a forum be immune from justifying it? You're free to make your opinion known, should I not be free to question it?" If I said I was no would you ask me to justify it? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And the thalidomide aspect .. Too many dismissing that as itrelevant Do you think medical technology hasn't moved on in 50 years? And do you think that they get it right 100% of the time?" Nope, but risks are minimised to such a degree that I'm willing to trust the drug development process. Now can you answer my question? Before you do maybe do some research. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's the insistence that people who worry about the vaccine should justify their decisions. It's a free country the last time I checked. Some of the pro vaccine lobby border on vaccine shaming.." There has been a long history of this even before pandemic (a forum Search and some time is all that's needed), nothing new and was very prevalent early on when a sniff of a vaccine was mentioned. A gentle turn has since happened as many continue to challenge those who assumed it was everything everyone wanted or needed, for a few it was because they didn't like nor adhered to restrictions...too hard to restrict ones movements and entitled activities for the best of others and community. Yes a subtle and seemingly acceptable form of bullying on here and it's usually guised in a challenge without giving substantiated to the contrary, nor taking the others pov with any serious thought and forcing the other to make evidence without providing substantiated evidence to the contrary. Easy to spot in their response. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's the insistence that people who worry about the vaccine should justify their decisions. It's a free country the last time I checked. Some of the pro vaccine lobby border on vaccine shaming.. Why should someone offering their opinion in a forum be immune from justifying it? You're free to make your opinion known, should I not be free to question it? If I said I was no would you ask me to justify it?" I would accept the evidence that you're a hypocrite. Very worrying attitude to have. Double standards. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. So you put your faith and health in the hands of the clowns in Westminster? Good luck with that one. The comparison with thalidomide was to show how things can go very wrong. Don't say they there are never issues anymore. I put more faith in what the science says. The politicians aren't the ones researching this vaccine... And as well as thalidomide being a totally different thing to a vaccine, it also happened over 50 years ago. Regulation has moved on a lot, in no small part due to horrible situations like that. Is it an infallible system? No, nothing is... but I have more faith in it than I do a growing list of ludicrous conspiracies from people who have read a few nonsense social media posts, watched some nonsense YouTube videos, and shit the bed. " Shit the bed! I don't run scared, not even from the scamavirus. I am not trying to tell anyone what to do, just make sure you are 100% certain first. If you want to put your trust in those two wankers that prop Boris up, crack on as they have got fuck all right yet. Check out the national statistics for flu this year. Have a look at the figures produced by the NHS and other govenment agencies. Thats what I look at. Not the crap produced by SAGE, with their links to the drug companies and please don't tell me they have not. Look at the background of the members of SAGE before you reply. Anyway, I am off to iron my tinfoil hat and wait for my space ship to land  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. So you put your faith and health in the hands of the clowns in Westminster? Good luck with that one. The comparison with thalidomide was to show how things can go very wrong. Don't say they there are never issues anymore. I put more faith in what the science says. The politicians aren't the ones researching this vaccine... And as well as thalidomide being a totally different thing to a vaccine, it also happened over 50 years ago. Regulation has moved on a lot, in no small part due to horrible situations like that. Is it an infallible system? No, nothing is... but I have more faith in it than I do a growing list of ludicrous conspiracies from people who have read a few nonsense social media posts, watched some nonsense YouTube videos, and shit the bed. Shit the bed! I don't run scared, not even from the scamavirus. I am not trying to tell anyone what to do, just make sure you are 100% certain first. If you want to put your trust in those two wankers that prop Boris up, crack on as they have got fuck all right yet. Check out the national statistics for flu this year. Have a look at the figures produced by the NHS and other govenment agencies. Thats what I look at. Not the crap produced by SAGE, with their links to the drug companies and please don't tell me they have not. Look at the background of the members of SAGE before you reply. Anyway, I am off to iron my tinfoil hat and wait for my space ship to land "Haha scamvirus! I'm trusting the wider scientific community. Boris and his cabal of clowns has nothing to do with it. Enjoy that tinfoil. Even if it doesn't protect you from 5G it might keep your head warm now the mercury is dropping! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. So you put your faith and health in the hands of the clowns in Westminster? Good luck with that one. The comparison with thalidomide was to show how things can go very wrong. Don't say they there are never issues anymore." There seems to be a growing misunderstanding with how things happen in this or any other country. All too easily pointing fingers at "them" or "govt" or "Westminster" or "Boris"... The drug companies research and manufacture and sell their own products. Their share owners invest in them for risk or reward. Their customers are free to use their products or not use their products. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. So you put your faith and health in the hands of the clowns in Westminster? Good luck with that one. The comparison with thalidomide was to show how things can go very wrong. Don't say they there are never issues anymore. There seems to be a growing misunderstanding with how things happen in this or any other country. All too easily pointing fingers at "them" or "govt" or "Westminster" or "Boris"... The drug companies research and manufacture and sell their own products. Their share owners invest in them for risk or reward. Their customers are free to use their products or not use their products. " So Sandra's brother kens mate on Facebook is wrong then | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And the thalidomide aspect .. Too many dismissing that as itrelevant" Before many of us were born, weakened drug protections didn't pick up the dangers of this drug. But in one place, they did. So we learned from that and we do better. I worry about the lead petrol aspect and think we should discourage car use. Lead in petrol emissions correlates with neurological disorders and even criminality: it's one of the strongest criminological correlations that exist. What's that? Unleaded petrol is basically the norm now, we've learned from the past and we do better. I don't believe it. I don't trust Big Auto, they don't care about us, I don't trust their numbers. And we have much better ways to move around, nature doesn't want to poison our children with lead, we have feet! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. So you put your faith and health in the hands of the clowns in Westminster? Good luck with that one. The comparison with thalidomide was to show how things can go very wrong. Don't say they there are never issues anymore. I put more faith in what the science says. The politicians aren't the ones researching this vaccine... And as well as thalidomide being a totally different thing to a vaccine, it also happened over 50 years ago. Regulation has moved on a lot, in no small part due to horrible situations like that. Is it an infallible system? No, nothing is... but I have more faith in it than I do a growing list of ludicrous conspiracies from people who have read a few nonsense social media posts, watched some nonsense YouTube videos, and shit the bed. Shit the bed! I don't run scared, not even from the scamavirus. I am not trying to tell anyone what to do, just make sure you are 100% certain first. If you want to put your trust in those two wankers that prop Boris up, crack on as they have got fuck all right yet. Check out the national statistics for flu this year. Have a look at the figures produced by the NHS and other govenment agencies. Thats what I look at. Not the crap produced by SAGE, with their links to the drug companies and please don't tell me they have not. Look at the background of the members of SAGE before you reply. Anyway, I am off to iron my tinfoil hat and wait for my space ship to land
Haha scamvirus! I'm trusting the wider scientific community. Boris and his cabal of clowns has nothing to do with it.
Enjoy that tinfoil. Even if it doesn't protect you from 5G it might keep your head warm now the mercury is dropping! "If a year after you have the jab you can still remember who you are and your second head has stopped growing, drop me a line to say hello | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. So you put your faith and health in the hands of the clowns in Westminster? Good luck with that one. The comparison with thalidomide was to show how things can go very wrong. Don't say they there are never issues anymore. I put more faith in what the science says. The politicians aren't the ones researching this vaccine... And as well as thalidomide being a totally different thing to a vaccine, it also happened over 50 years ago. Regulation has moved on a lot, in no small part due to horrible situations like that. Is it an infallible system? No, nothing is... but I have more faith in it than I do a growing list of ludicrous conspiracies from people who have read a few nonsense social media posts, watched some nonsense YouTube videos, and shit the bed. Shit the bed! I don't run scared, not even from the scamavirus. I am not trying to tell anyone what to do, just make sure you are 100% certain first. If you want to put your trust in those two wankers that prop Boris up, crack on as they have got fuck all right yet. Check out the national statistics for flu this year. Have a look at the figures produced by the NHS and other govenment agencies. Thats what I look at. Not the crap produced by SAGE, with their links to the drug companies and please don't tell me they have not. Look at the background of the members of SAGE before you reply. Anyway, I am off to iron my tinfoil hat and wait for my space ship to land
Haha scamvirus! I'm trusting the wider scientific community. Boris and his cabal of clowns has nothing to do with it.
Enjoy that tinfoil. Even if it doesn't protect you from 5G it might keep your head warm now the mercury is dropping!
If a year after you have the jab you can still remember who you are and your second head has stopped growing, drop me a line to say hello "I daresay I'll say hello if my new master Bill Gates allows me to do so | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. So you put your faith and health in the hands of the clowns in Westminster? Good luck with that one. The comparison with thalidomide was to show how things can go very wrong. Don't say they there are never issues anymore. I put more faith in what the science says. The politicians aren't the ones researching this vaccine... And as well as thalidomide being a totally different thing to a vaccine, it also happened over 50 years ago. Regulation has moved on a lot, in no small part due to horrible situations like that. Is it an infallible system? No, nothing is... but I have more faith in it than I do a growing list of ludicrous conspiracies from people who have read a few nonsense social media posts, watched some nonsense YouTube videos, and shit the bed. Shit the bed! I don't run scared, not even from the scamavirus. I am not trying to tell anyone what to do, just make sure you are 100% certain first. If you want to put your trust in those two wankers that prop Boris up, crack on as they have got fuck all right yet. Check out the national statistics for flu this year. Have a look at the figures produced by the NHS and other govenment agencies. Thats what I look at. Not the crap produced by SAGE, with their links to the drug companies and please don't tell me they have not. Look at the background of the members of SAGE before you reply. Anyway, I am off to iron my tinfoil hat and wait for my space ship to land
Haha scamvirus! I'm trusting the wider scientific community. Boris and his cabal of clowns has nothing to do with it.
Enjoy that tinfoil. Even if it doesn't protect you from 5G it might keep your head warm now the mercury is dropping!
If a year after you have the jab you can still remember who you are and your second head has stopped growing, drop me a line to say hello "If a year from now all of us who've helped bring society back to normal... Do feel free to say you were wrong, yeah? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And the thalidomide aspect .. Too many dismissing that as itrelevant Before many of us were born, weakened drug protections didn't pick up the dangers of this drug. But in one place, they did. So we learned from that and we do better. I worry about the lead petrol aspect and think we should discourage car use. Lead in petrol emissions correlates with neurological disorders and even criminality: it's one of the strongest criminological correlations that exist. What's that? Unleaded petrol is basically the norm now, we've learned from the past and we do better. I don't believe it. I don't trust Big Auto, they don't care about us, I don't trust their numbers. And we have much better ways to move around, nature doesn't want to poison our children with lead, we have feet!" I was going to give a logical reply, but I really can't be arsed! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. So you put your faith and health in the hands of the clowns in Westminster? Good luck with that one. The comparison with thalidomide was to show how things can go very wrong. Don't say they there are never issues anymore. I put more faith in what the science says. The politicians aren't the ones researching this vaccine... And as well as thalidomide being a totally different thing to a vaccine, it also happened over 50 years ago. Regulation has moved on a lot, in no small part due to horrible situations like that. Is it an infallible system? No, nothing is... but I have more faith in it than I do a growing list of ludicrous conspiracies from people who have read a few nonsense social media posts, watched some nonsense YouTube videos, and shit the bed. Shit the bed! I don't run scared, not even from the scamavirus. I am not trying to tell anyone what to do, just make sure you are 100% certain first. If you want to put your trust in those two wankers that prop Boris up, crack on as they have got fuck all right yet. Check out the national statistics for flu this year. Have a look at the figures produced by the NHS and other govenment agencies. Thats what I look at. Not the crap produced by SAGE, with their links to the drug companies and please don't tell me they have not. Look at the background of the members of SAGE before you reply. Anyway, I am off to iron my tinfoil hat and wait for my space ship to land
Haha scamvirus! I'm trusting the wider scientific community. Boris and his cabal of clowns has nothing to do with it.
Enjoy that tinfoil. Even if it doesn't protect you from 5G it might keep your head warm now the mercury is dropping!
If a year after you have the jab you can still remember who you are and your second head has stopped growing, drop me a line to say hello
If a year from now all of us who've helped bring society back to normal... Do feel free to say you were wrong, yeah?"Have a look on ebay for a second halo for the other head. If you think they will let it get back to what we had before, you must have already had the jab. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. So you put your faith and health in the hands of the clowns in Westminster? Good luck with that one. The comparison with thalidomide was to show how things can go very wrong. Don't say they there are never issues anymore. I put more faith in what the science says. The politicians aren't the ones researching this vaccine... And as well as thalidomide being a totally different thing to a vaccine, it also happened over 50 years ago. Regulation has moved on a lot, in no small part due to horrible situations like that. Is it an infallible system? No, nothing is... but I have more faith in it than I do a growing list of ludicrous conspiracies from people who have read a few nonsense social media posts, watched some nonsense YouTube videos, and shit the bed. Shit the bed! I don't run scared, not even from the scamavirus. I am not trying to tell anyone what to do, just make sure you are 100% certain first. If you want to put your trust in those two wankers that prop Boris up, crack on as they have got fuck all right yet. Check out the national statistics for flu this year. Have a look at the figures produced by the NHS and other govenment agencies. Thats what I look at. Not the crap produced by SAGE, with their links to the drug companies and please don't tell me they have not. Look at the background of the members of SAGE before you reply. Anyway, I am off to iron my tinfoil hat and wait for my space ship to land
Haha scamvirus! I'm trusting the wider scientific community. Boris and his cabal of clowns has nothing to do with it.
Enjoy that tinfoil. Even if it doesn't protect you from 5G it might keep your head warm now the mercury is dropping!
If a year after you have the jab you can still remember who you are and your second head has stopped growing, drop me a line to say hello
If a year from now all of us who've helped bring society back to normal... Do feel free to say you were wrong, yeah?
Have a look on ebay for a second halo for the other head.
If you think they will let it get back to what we had before, you must have already had the jab."Who's they and what's your evidence? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And the thalidomide aspect .. Too many dismissing that as itrelevant Before many of us were born, weakened drug protections didn't pick up the dangers of this drug. But in one place, they did. So we learned from that and we do better. I worry about the lead petrol aspect and think we should discourage car use. Lead in petrol emissions correlates with neurological disorders and even criminality: it's one of the strongest criminological correlations that exist. What's that? Unleaded petrol is basically the norm now, we've learned from the past and we do better. I don't believe it. I don't trust Big Auto, they don't care about us, I don't trust their numbers. And we have much better ways to move around, nature doesn't want to poison our children with lead, we have feet!" While on the subject, the cement industry is one of the worst atmospheric polluters, carbon footprints and it wasn't until recently the wet manufacturing process was challenged as it washes away heavy metals such as lead into out water ways. (You know what lead does to you if consumed) Only 5 states in America have banned this process of manufacture since it was brought to light in 2001. It's one of the primary reasons most cement is manufactured in the developing world now. What about the pharma companies, possibly a more powerful lobby than oil companies. That's another debate though and not to be discussed on here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And the thalidomide aspect .. Too many dismissing that as itrelevant Before many of us were born, weakened drug protections didn't pick up the dangers of this drug. But in one place, they did. So we learned from that and we do better. I worry about the lead petrol aspect and think we should discourage car use. Lead in petrol emissions correlates with neurological disorders and even criminality: it's one of the strongest criminological correlations that exist. What's that? Unleaded petrol is basically the norm now, we've learned from the past and we do better. I don't believe it. I don't trust Big Auto, they don't care about us, I don't trust their numbers. And we have much better ways to move around, nature doesn't want to poison our children with lead, we have feet! While on the subject, the cement industry is one of the worst atmospheric polluters, carbon footprints and it wasn't until recently the wet manufacturing process was challenged as it washes away heavy metals such as lead into out water ways. (You know what lead does to you if consumed) Only 5 states in America have banned this process of manufacture since it was brought to light in 2001. It's one of the primary reasons most cement is manufactured in the developing world now. What about the pharma companies, possibly a more powerful lobby than oil companies. That's another debate though and not to be discussed on here." I think if we're worried about thalidomide in 2020 vaccines, we should be worried about childhood lead exposure in cars. My childhood and anyone older than me but... It's more recent than thalidomide. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And the thalidomide aspect .. Too many dismissing that as itrelevant Before many of us were born, weakened drug protections didn't pick up the dangers of this drug. But in one place, they did. So we learned from that and we do better. I worry about the lead petrol aspect and think we should discourage car use. Lead in petrol emissions correlates with neurological disorders and even criminality: it's one of the strongest criminological correlations that exist. What's that? Unleaded petrol is basically the norm now, we've learned from the past and we do better. I don't believe it. I don't trust Big Auto, they don't care about us, I don't trust their numbers. And we have much better ways to move around, nature doesn't want to poison our children with lead, we have feet! While on the subject, the cement industry is one of the worst atmospheric polluters, carbon footprints and it wasn't until recently the wet manufacturing process was challenged as it washes away heavy metals such as lead into out water ways. (You know what lead does to you if consumed) Only 5 states in America have banned this process of manufacture since it was brought to light in 2001. It's one of the primary reasons most cement is manufactured in the developing world now. What about the pharma companies, possibly a more powerful lobby than oil companies. That's another debate though and not to be discussed on here. I think if we're worried about thalidomide in 2020 vaccines, we should be worried about childhood lead exposure in cars. My childhood and anyone older than me but... It's more recent than thalidomide." Most only worry about what we think we know about. Ironically though most worry comes from the lack of really knowing something which gives rise to concerns from uncertainty as were unsure how to respond in the best way. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And the thalidomide aspect .. Too many dismissing that as itrelevant Before many of us were born, weakened drug protections didn't pick up the dangers of this drug. But in one place, they did. So we learned from that and we do better. I worry about the lead petrol aspect and think we should discourage car use. Lead in petrol emissions correlates with neurological disorders and even criminality: it's one of the strongest criminological correlations that exist. What's that? Unleaded petrol is basically the norm now, we've learned from the past and we do better. I don't believe it. I don't trust Big Auto, they don't care about us, I don't trust their numbers. And we have much better ways to move around, nature doesn't want to poison our children with lead, we have feet! While on the subject, the cement industry is one of the worst atmospheric polluters, carbon footprints and it wasn't until recently the wet manufacturing process was challenged as it washes away heavy metals such as lead into out water ways. (You know what lead does to you if consumed) Only 5 states in America have banned this process of manufacture since it was brought to light in 2001. It's one of the primary reasons most cement is manufactured in the developing world now. What about the pharma companies, possibly a more powerful lobby than oil companies. That's another debate though and not to be discussed on here. I think if we're worried about thalidomide in 2020 vaccines, we should be worried about childhood lead exposure in cars. My childhood and anyone older than me but... It's more recent than thalidomide. Most only worry about what we think we know about. Ironically though most worry comes from the lack of really knowing something which gives rise to concerns from uncertainty as were unsure how to respond in the best way." I agree | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Vaccines eh. What are they like? They’re like London buses. A month ago there was none now all of a sudden 3 have turned up within days of each other. "
In this case, unlike buses, I'm not complaining | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting attitudes towards petrol.. I remember Buffoon Brown and Tony Bliar telling us how polluting petrol cars where and much better diesel was... All change, all change, now it's dirty diesel and clean petrol... The hypocrisy of driving around in you so called clean electric cars built on cobalt slavery in the DRC. The cleanest electric cars reckoned to polute the globe ten times more than official figures... I remember the Thalidomide, perfectly safe they said, I remember the MP eating the beef, perfectly safe they said, I remember the science then, I remember what happened at Easter Island, perfectly safe they said.... Chernobyl too, perfectly safe they said, And yet some believe that lead in petrol changed law abiding citizens into criminals.. " Staggering lack of self-awareness | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting attitudes towards petrol.. I remember Buffoon Brown and Tony Bliar telling us how polluting petrol cars where and much better diesel was... All change, all change, now it's dirty diesel and clean petrol... The hypocrisy of driving around in you so called clean electric cars built on cobalt slavery in the DRC. The cleanest electric cars reckoned to polute the globe ten times more than official figures... I remember the Thalidomide, perfectly safe they said, I remember the MP eating the beef, perfectly safe they said, I remember the science then, I remember what happened at Easter Island, perfectly safe they said.... Chernobyl too, perfectly safe they said, And yet some believe that lead in petrol changed law abiding citizens into criminals.. Staggering lack of self-awareness "Totally agree... The lead turning us into criminal zombies is pure fantasy... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting attitudes towards petrol.. I remember Buffoon Brown and Tony Bliar telling us how polluting petrol cars where and much better diesel was... All change, all change, now it's dirty diesel and clean petrol... The hypocrisy of driving around in you so called clean electric cars built on cobalt slavery in the DRC. The cleanest electric cars reckoned to polute the globe ten times more than official figures... I remember the Thalidomide, perfectly safe they said, I remember the MP eating the beef, perfectly safe they said, I remember the science then, I remember what happened at Easter Island, perfectly safe they said.... Chernobyl too, perfectly safe they said, And yet some believe that lead in petrol changed law abiding citizens into criminals.. Staggering lack of self-awareness
Totally agree... The lead turning us into criminal zombies is pure fantasy..."Staggering lack of comprehension skills | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting attitudes towards petrol.. I remember Buffoon Brown and Tony Bliar telling us how polluting petrol cars where and much better diesel was... All change, all change, now it's dirty diesel and clean petrol... The hypocrisy of driving around in you so called clean electric cars built on cobalt slavery in the DRC. The cleanest electric cars reckoned to polute the globe ten times more than official figures... I remember the Thalidomide, perfectly safe they said, I remember the MP eating the beef, perfectly safe they said, I remember the science then, I remember what happened at Easter Island, perfectly safe they said.... Chernobyl too, perfectly safe they said, And yet some believe that lead in petrol changed law abiding citizens into criminals.. Staggering lack of self-awareness
Totally agree... The lead turning us into criminal zombies is pure fantasy...
Staggering lack of comprehension skills "Staggering.... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting attitudes towards petrol.. I remember Buffoon Brown and Tony Bliar telling us how polluting petrol cars where and much better diesel was... All change, all change, now it's dirty diesel and clean petrol... The hypocrisy of driving around in you so called clean electric cars built on cobalt slavery in the DRC. The cleanest electric cars reckoned to polute the globe ten times more than official figures... I remember the Thalidomide, perfectly safe they said, I remember the MP eating the beef, perfectly safe they said, I remember the science then, I remember what happened at Easter Island, perfectly safe they said.... Chernobyl too, perfectly safe they said, And yet some believe that lead in petrol changed law abiding citizens into criminals.. Staggering lack of self-awareness
Totally agree... The lead turning us into criminal zombies is pure fantasy...
Staggering lack of comprehension skills
Staggering...." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's announced the Oxford vaccine is 70% effective. Though not as high as the previous announcements it's cheaper, and easier to store. Plus, a 70% protection in in population will bring about herd immunity that much quicker I'd imagine? 70% for 1 dose..... and 90% for the double dose...... Bearing in mind that the UK have secured 100 million doses of this vaccine as a priority customer, this is the one most of us would likely get... " From what I've read a single full dose treatment gave 70 % effectiveness. Whereas a two part treatment of 1 half dose followed by a full dose some days later yielded 90 % effectiveness. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's announced the Oxford vaccine is 70% effective. Though not as high as the previous announcements it's cheaper, and easier to store. Plus, a 70% protection in in population will bring about herd immunity that much quicker I'd imagine? 70% for 1 dose..... and 90% for the double dose...... Bearing in mind that the UK have secured 100 million doses of this vaccine as a priority customer, this is the one most of us would likely get... From what I've read a single full dose treatment gave 70 % effectiveness. Whereas a two part treatment of 1 half dose followed by a full dose some days later yielded 90 % effectiveness. " As I understand it. Two full does gave 70% protection and a half dose followed by a full dose gave 90% protection. And they don't why. There are too many unanswered questions here. More to this than meets the eye... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's announced the Oxford vaccine is 70% effective. Though not as high as the previous announcements it's cheaper, and easier to store. Plus, a 70% protection in in population will bring about herd immunity that much quicker I'd imagine? 70% for 1 dose..... and 90% for the double dose...... Bearing in mind that the UK have secured 100 million doses of this vaccine as a priority customer, this is the one most of us would likely get... From what I've read a single full dose treatment gave 70 % effectiveness. Whereas a two part treatment of 1 half dose followed by a full dose some days later yielded 90 % effectiveness. As I understand it. Two full does gave 70% protection and a half dose followed by a full dose gave 90% protection. And they don't why. There are too many unanswered questions here. More to this than meets the eye..." Yes, and there's a thing called scientific investigation which will uncover what's going on | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's announced the Oxford vaccine is 70% effective. Though not as high as the previous announcements it's cheaper, and easier to store. Plus, a 70% protection in in population will bring about herd immunity that much quicker I'd imagine? 70% for 1 dose..... and 90% for the double dose...... Bearing in mind that the UK have secured 100 million doses of this vaccine as a priority customer, this is the one most of us would likely get... From what I've read a single full dose treatment gave 70 % effectiveness. Whereas a two part treatment of 1 half dose followed by a full dose some days later yielded 90 % effectiveness. As I understand it. Two full does gave 70% protection and a half dose followed by a full dose gave 90% protection. And they don't why. There are too many unanswered questions here. More to this than meets the eye... Yes, and there's a thing called scientific investigation which will uncover what's going on "Before Easter 2021 or Easter 2031? Many will sit back, watch the guinea pigs and wait for the Great Experiment to unfold... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's announced the Oxford vaccine is 70% effective. Though not as high as the previous announcements it's cheaper, and easier to store. Plus, a 70% protection in in population will bring about herd immunity that much quicker I'd imagine? 70% for 1 dose..... and 90% for the double dose...... Bearing in mind that the UK have secured 100 million doses of this vaccine as a priority customer, this is the one most of us would likely get... From what I've read a single full dose treatment gave 70 % effectiveness. Whereas a two part treatment of 1 half dose followed by a full dose some days later yielded 90 % effectiveness. As I understand it. Two full does gave 70% protection and a half dose followed by a full dose gave 90% protection. And they don't why. There are too many unanswered questions here. More to this than meets the eye... Yes, and there's a thing called scientific investigation which will uncover what's going on
Before Easter 2021 or Easter 2031?
Many will sit back, watch the guinea pigs and wait for the Great Experiment to unfold..." I shall get the popcorn out | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's announced the Oxford vaccine is 70% effective. Though not as high as the previous announcements it's cheaper, and easier to store. Plus, a 70% protection in in population will bring about herd immunity that much quicker I'd imagine? 70% for 1 dose..... and 90% for the double dose...... Bearing in mind that the UK have secured 100 million doses of this vaccine as a priority customer, this is the one most of us would likely get... From what I've read a single full dose treatment gave 70 % effectiveness. Whereas a two part treatment of 1 half dose followed by a full dose some days later yielded 90 % effectiveness. As I understand it. Two full does gave 70% protection and a half dose followed by a full dose gave 90% protection. And they don't why. There are too many unanswered questions here. More to this than meets the eye... Yes, and there's a thing called scientific investigation which will uncover what's going on
Before Easter 2021 or Easter 2031?
Many will sit back, watch the guinea pigs and wait for the Great Experiment to unfold..."Many will sit back and let the rest of society take responsibility for returning the world to some level of normalcy? Worryingly selfish. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's announced the Oxford vaccine is 70% effective. Though not as high as the previous announcements it's cheaper, and easier to store. Plus, a 70% protection in in population will bring about herd immunity that much quicker I'd imagine? 70% for 1 dose..... and 90% for the double dose...... Bearing in mind that the UK have secured 100 million doses of this vaccine as a priority customer, this is the one most of us would likely get... From what I've read a single full dose treatment gave 70 % effectiveness. Whereas a two part treatment of 1 half dose followed by a full dose some days later yielded 90 % effectiveness. As I understand it. Two full does gave 70% protection and a half dose followed by a full dose gave 90% protection. And they don't why. There are too many unanswered questions here. More to this than meets the eye..." They injected about 2500 with the low first dose and given that about 1 in 1000 in the trials go on to catch the virus, that would suggest that 2 or three people in that cohort caught the virus. This sample size doesn't produce meaningful data. I think it is a face saving exercise after their results were lower than the other vaccines. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's announced the Oxford vaccine is 70% effective. Though not as high as the previous announcements it's cheaper, and easier to store. Plus, a 70% protection in in population will bring about herd immunity that much quicker I'd imagine? 70% for 1 dose..... and 90% for the double dose...... Bearing in mind that the UK have secured 100 million doses of this vaccine as a priority customer, this is the one most of us would likely get... From what I've read a single full dose treatment gave 70 % effectiveness. Whereas a two part treatment of 1 half dose followed by a full dose some days later yielded 90 % effectiveness. As I understand it. Two full does gave 70% protection and a half dose followed by a full dose gave 90% protection. And they don't why. There are too many unanswered questions here. More to this than meets the eye... Yes, and there's a thing called scientific investigation which will uncover what's going on
Before Easter 2021 or Easter 2031?
Many will sit back, watch the guinea pigs and wait for the Great Experiment to unfold...
Many will sit back and let the rest of society take responsibility for returning the world to some level of normalcy? Worryingly selfish."Not staggeringly selfish ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No date the data will be manipulated by some. " Good to see you are already looking how you can fit a good conspiracy theory in there. Given that this vaccine will hopefully be sold across the globe, do you not possibly think that with all those countries, all checking the data and the efficacy of the product, that any lies or manipulation would be exposed in pretty short order? Or is that just what "they" would want you to think. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"No date the data will be manipulated by some. " Could you be clearer on what you mean - eg. which data? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's announced the Oxford vaccine is 70% effective. Though not as high as the previous announcements it's cheaper, and easier to store. Plus, a 70% protection in in population will bring about herd immunity that much quicker I'd imagine? 70% for 1 dose..... and 90% for the double dose...... Bearing in mind that the UK have secured 100 million doses of this vaccine as a priority customer, this is the one most of us would likely get... From what I've read a single full dose treatment gave 70 % effectiveness. Whereas a two part treatment of 1 half dose followed by a full dose some days later yielded 90 % effectiveness. As I understand it. Two full does gave 70% protection and a half dose followed by a full dose gave 90% protection. And they don't why. There are too many unanswered questions here. More to this than meets the eye... Yes, and there's a thing called scientific investigation which will uncover what's going on
Before Easter 2021 or Easter 2031?
Many will sit back, watch the guinea pigs and wait for the Great Experiment to unfold...
Many will sit back and let the rest of society take responsibility for returning the world to some level of normalcy? Worryingly selfish.
Not staggeringly selfish ?"When you encounter enough stupidity the impact of it lessens. It becomes inane... such is life | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's announced the Oxford vaccine is 70% effective. Though not as high as the previous announcements it's cheaper, and easier to store. Plus, a 70% protection in in population will bring about herd immunity that much quicker I'd imagine? 70% for 1 dose..... and 90% for the double dose...... Bearing in mind that the UK have secured 100 million doses of this vaccine as a priority customer, this is the one most of us would likely get... From what I've read a single full dose treatment gave 70 % effectiveness. Whereas a two part treatment of 1 half dose followed by a full dose some days later yielded 90 % effectiveness. As I understand it. Two full does gave 70% protection and a half dose followed by a full dose gave 90% protection. And they don't why. There are too many unanswered questions here. More to this than meets the eye... Yes, and there's a thing called scientific investigation which will uncover what's going on
Before Easter 2021 or Easter 2031?
Many will sit back, watch the guinea pigs and wait for the Great Experiment to unfold..."At least the trials' datta from the vaccines will be public and scrutinised thoroughly by regulators around the world. It can stop much of the BS that people get manipulated with by their stupid conspiracy theories, if they have concerns for the wellbeing of the people and the country. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon Distrust. We're right, far more trustworthy and of course far better, not to mention it's made in China .
Most of those saying it probably have been complaining about how our government have handle the pandemic compared to other countries too...
"Exactly that didnt russia say they had one a few months ago and even putins daughter had it? if that was true why are they having record deaths lately. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. So you put your faith and health in the hands of the clowns in Westminster? Good luck with that one. The comparison with thalidomide was to show how things can go very wrong. Don't say they there are never issues anymore." Or faith in reputable scientists, established protocols and a need to get through an independent regulator, either that or listen to opinions on here from people who have as much knowledge as me. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's announced the Oxford vaccine is 70% effective. Though not as high as the previous announcements it's cheaper, and easier to store. Plus, a 70% protection in in population will bring about herd immunity that much quicker I'd imagine? 70% for 1 dose..... and 90% for the double dose...... Bearing in mind that the UK have secured 100 million doses of this vaccine as a priority customer, this is the one most of us would likely get... From what I've read a single full dose treatment gave 70 % effectiveness. Whereas a two part treatment of 1 half dose followed by a full dose some days later yielded 90 % effectiveness. As I understand it. Two full does gave 70% protection and a half dose followed by a full dose gave 90% protection. And they don't why. There are too many unanswered questions here. More to this than meets the eye... Yes, and there's a thing called scientific investigation which will uncover what's going on
Before Easter 2021 or Easter 2031?
Many will sit back, watch the guinea pigs and wait for the Great Experiment to unfold...
Many will sit back and let the rest of society take responsibility for returning the world to some level of normalcy? Worryingly selfish."Of course, whilst at the same time complaining about the actions of others and offering to do nothing constructive to help improve our situation. It's the way of the world beating British. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's announced the Oxford vaccine is 70% effective. Though not as high as the previous announcements it's cheaper, and easier to store. Plus, a 70% protection in in population will bring about herd immunity that much quicker I'd imagine? 70% for 1 dose..... and 90% for the double dose...... Bearing in mind that the UK have secured 100 million doses of this vaccine as a priority customer, this is the one most of us would likely get... From what I've read a single full dose treatment gave 70 % effectiveness. Whereas a two part treatment of 1 half dose followed by a full dose some days later yielded 90 % effectiveness. As I understand it. Two full does gave 70% protection and a half dose followed by a full dose gave 90% protection. And they don't why. There are too many unanswered questions here. More to this than meets the eye... Yes, and there's a thing called scientific investigation which will uncover what's going on
Before Easter 2021 or Easter 2031?
Many will sit back, watch the guinea pigs and wait for the Great Experiment to unfold...
Many will sit back and let the rest of society take responsibility for returning the world to some level of normalcy? Worryingly selfish."I think this bloke is just a wind up merchant! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It's announced the Oxford vaccine is 70% effective. Though not as high as the previous announcements it's cheaper, and easier to store. Plus, a 70% protection in in population will bring about herd immunity that much quicker I'd imagine? 70% for 1 dose..... and 90% for the double dose...... Bearing in mind that the UK have secured 100 million doses of this vaccine as a priority customer, this is the one most of us would likely get... From what I've read a single full dose treatment gave 70 % effectiveness. Whereas a two part treatment of 1 half dose followed by a full dose some days later yielded 90 % effectiveness. As I understand it. Two full does gave 70% protection and a half dose followed by a full dose gave 90% protection. And they don't why. There are too many unanswered questions here. More to this than meets the eye... Yes, and there's a thing called scientific investigation which will uncover what's going on
Before Easter 2021 or Easter 2031?
Many will sit back, watch the guinea pigs and wait for the Great Experiment to unfold...
Many will sit back and let the rest of society take responsibility for returning the world to some level of normalcy? Worryingly selfish.
Not staggeringly selfish ?
When you encounter enough stupidity the impact of it lessens. It becomes inane... such is life "I agree, and there is plenty of it on here | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. So you put your faith and health in the hands of the clowns in Westminster? Good luck with that one. The comparison with thalidomide was to show how things can go very wrong. Don't say they there are never issues anymore. Or faith in reputable scientists, established protocols and a need to get through an independent regulator, either that or listen to opinions on here from people who have as much knowledge as me. " Some have as much knowledge but more insight... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Will the best one and most expensive be offered to the ruling classes and the plebs get the poundshop version?" Absolutely. And the lowest of the low will be used as foot rests while the upper crust get their gold plated expensive jabs out of stained glass syringes  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer." Because it's cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. That makes it also cheaper to roll out quickly en mass in a humongous and rapid vaccine programme and cost effective for t'tax payer. They can optimise the dosing to achieve around 90% effectiveness apparently so that's really good for a vaccine. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer." Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Because it's cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. That makes it also cheaper to roll out quickly en mass in a humongous and rapid vaccine programme and cost effective for t'tax payer. They can optimise the dosing to achieve around 90% effectiveness apparently so that's really good for a vaccine." Up to 90% some quoting 70% | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. So you put your faith and health in the hands of the clowns in Westminster? Good luck with that one. The comparison with thalidomide was to show how things can go very wrong. Don't say they there are never issues anymore. Or faith in reputable scientists, established protocols and a need to get through an independent regulator, either that or listen to opinions on here from people who have as much knowledge as me. Some have as much knowledge but more insight... " Insight, usually followed by hindsight | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"So my question is ...what about if I didn’t want one and if everyone having it and can’t catch it again surly not everyone needs it And why can America and Germany now England boost about their vaccines but when Russia and China said had one they say couldn’t coz was to Soon If you don't want one, that's your choice. However if everyone adopted that attitude then the vaccine would be worthless and people will continue dying. The Russian and Chinese vaccines were pushed out with largely the intention of being able to gain political bragging rights to say they did it first. The Russian vaccine has only been given to a small number, I don't have the stats to hand for how effective it is, the Chinese vaccine is having increasing evidence that it doesn't really work properly. The other 3 have considerably more evidence to show they are actually effective. There are so many dying we are tripping over them in the streets! You have the nerve to speak about someone’s attitude to have a substance that has been rushed through all the usual testing and who knows what corners were cut. Are you old enough to remember the thalidomide disaster? An anti morning sickness pill that produced massive physical deformities in the babies. It is every humans right that that decide what medical procedures they have. Not only that it is under International Law, The Nuremburg Code ‘The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential’ I stated a simple fact. If everyone refuses to have a vaccine, working on the assumption that everyone else will have it so they will be fine, ultimately no one has it and it's useless. The vaccines have had unprecedented levels of expertise and money thrown at them, things have been done in parallel rather than sequentially and peoples calendars have been cleared to focus on the reviews for approval rather than waiting till they get round to it. You think it's been rushed in comparison to a "normal" vaccine, I say that the usual process is actually artificially long. Albeit I will agree this one is definitely coming out about as fast as is possible due to global need. As for thalidomide, it's not a vaccine. It shares no more similarity with the current vaccines than a skateboard does with a car, both having 4 wheels doesn't make them comparable. There has also been significant progress in medical development and safety since then. As for your last point, I have never said anywhere that people should be forced to have a vaccine if they don't want it. However I would want them to base that decision on actual fact not some of the ludicrous crap that's floating around on the internet. So you put your faith and health in the hands of the clowns in Westminster? Good luck with that one. The comparison with thalidomide was to show how things can go very wrong. Don't say they there are never issues anymore. Or faith in reputable scientists, established protocols and a need to get through an independent regulator, either that or listen to opinions on here from people who have as much knowledge as me. Some have as much knowledge but more insight... Insight, usually followed by hindsight " Yep... I only told you to blow the bloody doors off... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Because it's cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. That makes it also cheaper to roll out quickly en mass in a humongous and rapid vaccine programme and cost effective for t'tax payer. They can optimise the dosing to achieve around 90% effectiveness apparently so that's really good for a vaccine. Up to 90% some quoting 70%" The efficacy depends on the dosing...... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Because it's cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. That makes it also cheaper to roll out quickly en mass in a humongous and rapid vaccine programme and cost effective for t'tax payer. They can optimise the dosing to achieve around 90% effectiveness apparently so that's really good for a vaccine. Up to 90% some quoting 70% The efficacy depends on the dosing......" And they don't know the best dose | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Because it's cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. That makes it also cheaper to roll out quickly en mass in a humongous and rapid vaccine programme and cost effective for t'tax payer. They can optimise the dosing to achieve around 90% effectiveness apparently so that's really good for a vaccine. Up to 90% some quoting 70% The efficacy depends on the dosing...... And they don't know the best dose " They've literally just released data that shows differing efficacy with different dosing regimes. Someone somewhere has to decide if tinkering with the dosing to achieve 90% efficacy is necessary/cost effective etc. That's on thing amongst many that regulators will be considering. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Because it's cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. That makes it also cheaper to roll out quickly en mass in a humongous and rapid vaccine programme and cost effective for t'tax payer. They can optimise the dosing to achieve around 90% effectiveness apparently so that's really good for a vaccine. Up to 90% some quoting 70% The efficacy depends on the dosing...... And they don't know the best dose " They do, we don't because they haven't told us that bit yet. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Because it's cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. That makes it also cheaper to roll out quickly en mass in a humongous and rapid vaccine programme and cost effective for t'tax payer. They can optimise the dosing to achieve around 90% effectiveness apparently so that's really good for a vaccine. Up to 90% some quoting 70% The efficacy depends on the dosing...... And they don't know the best dose They've literally just released data that shows differing efficacy with different dosing regimes. Someone somewhere has to decide if tinkering with the dosing to achieve 90% efficacy is necessary/cost effective etc. That's on thing amongst many that regulators will be considering." So it's nowhere near ready | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Because it's cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. That makes it also cheaper to roll out quickly en mass in a humongous and rapid vaccine programme and cost effective for t'tax payer. They can optimise the dosing to achieve around 90% effectiveness apparently so that's really good for a vaccine. Up to 90% some quoting 70% The efficacy depends on the dosing...... And they don't know the best dose They do, we don't because they haven't told us that bit yet." They are keeping secrets ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Because it's cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. That makes it also cheaper to roll out quickly en mass in a humongous and rapid vaccine programme and cost effective for t'tax payer. They can optimise the dosing to achieve around 90% effectiveness apparently so that's really good for a vaccine. Up to 90% some quoting 70% The efficacy depends on the dosing...... And they don't know the best dose They've literally just released data that shows differing efficacy with different dosing regimes. Someone somewhere has to decide if tinkering with the dosing to achieve 90% efficacy is necessary/cost effective etc. That's on thing amongst many that regulators will be considering. So it's nowhere near ready " It's ready assuming the regulators are happy with the data presented. The vaccine is being manufactured now. It's rolling off the AstraZeneca production lines day and night right now. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Because it's cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. That makes it also cheaper to roll out quickly en mass in a humongous and rapid vaccine programme and cost effective for t'tax payer. They can optimise the dosing to achieve around 90% effectiveness apparently so that's really good for a vaccine. Up to 90% some quoting 70% The efficacy depends on the dosing...... And they don't know the best dose They've literally just released data that shows differing efficacy with different dosing regimes. Someone somewhere has to decide if tinkering with the dosing to achieve 90% efficacy is necessary/cost effective etc. That's on thing amongst many that regulators will be considering. So it's nowhere near ready It's ready assuming the regulators are happy with the data presented. The vaccine is being manufactured now. It's rolling off the AstraZeneca production lines day and night right now. " Bring on the results, the scrutiny, the approval | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit " %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths." Not as simple as that.... As not one person ended up in hospital or with had covid severely, suggesting the 10 or 30 percent get some protection too. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Still early days, but it is a really positive development. Hopefully with multiple vaccines (approved) it means that there shouldn’t be any production issues. I am slightly worried that there are so many anti-vaxxers creeping out of the woodwork though! " Images of whack a mole game... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths." As per usual, you are deliberately misquoting facts. The Oxford vaccine is 90% effective when administered as a half dose followed by a full dose. This will be the way it is administered rather than the 2 full dose method you are referring to. Not only does the first method offer better protection, it also allows more people to be vaccinated quicker as less is required. It also has the benefit of being more cost effective. This will prove invaluable to the developing world. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths. As per usual, you are deliberately misquoting facts. The Oxford vaccine is 90% effective when administered as a half dose followed by a full dose. This will be the way it is administered rather than the 2 full dose method you are referring to. Not only does the first method offer better protection, it also allows more people to be vaccinated quicker as less is required. It also has the benefit of being more cost effective. This will prove invaluable to the developing world. " They have no idea why the accidental under dosing of 2741 uk participants had a better effect but it is dangerous to draw conclusion from a sub group of a trial unless it forms part of the original trial protocol. In this sub group it is suggested that 3 people caught covid so it is based on very small number. If they redo a proper trial with the half dose, full dose and get 90% then great. Otherwise they are just winging it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths. As per usual, you are deliberately misquoting facts. The Oxford vaccine is 90% effective when administered as a half dose followed by a full dose. This will be the way it is administered rather than the 2 full dose method you are referring to. Not only does the first method offer better protection, it also allows more people to be vaccinated quicker as less is required. It also has the benefit of being more cost effective. This will prove invaluable to the developing world. They have no idea why the accidental under dosing of 2741 uk participants had a better effect but it is dangerous to draw conclusion from a sub group of a trial unless it forms part of the original trial protocol. In this sub group it is suggested that 3 people caught covid so it is based on very small number. If they redo a proper trial with the half dose, full dose and get 90% then great. Otherwise they are just winging it. " This number of people is well within the normal number of people tested in other stage 3 trials, therefore the results, albeit a little unintended, are valid. They are investigating why this seems to be more effective, however both the patients in the first group with 1\2 then 1 dose and the others with 2 full doses did not show any reactions that would lead to doubt in the safety of the drug itself. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths. As per usual, you are deliberately misquoting facts. The Oxford vaccine is 90% effective when administered as a half dose followed by a full dose. This will be the way it is administered rather than the 2 full dose method you are referring to. Not only does the first method offer better protection, it also allows more people to be vaccinated quicker as less is required. It also has the benefit of being more cost effective. This will prove invaluable to the developing world. They have no idea why the accidental under dosing of 2741 uk participants had a better effect but it is dangerous to draw conclusion from a sub group of a trial unless it forms part of the original trial protocol. In this sub group it is suggested that 3 people caught covid so it is based on very small number. If they redo a proper trial with the half dose, full dose and get 90% then great. Otherwise they are just winging it. This number of people is well within the normal number of people tested in other stage 3 trials, therefore the results, albeit a little unintended, are valid. They are investigating why this seems to be more effective, however both the patients in the first group with 1\2 then 1 dose and the others with 2 full doses did not show any reactions that would lead to doubt in the safety of the drug itself." It will be interesting to see how this plays out when they publish the results rather than just a press release. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths. As per usual, you are deliberately misquoting facts. The Oxford vaccine is 90% effective when administered as a half dose followed by a full dose. This will be the way it is administered rather than the 2 full dose method you are referring to. Not only does the first method offer better protection, it also allows more people to be vaccinated quicker as less is required. It also has the benefit of being more cost effective. This will prove invaluable to the developing world. They have no idea why the accidental under dosing of 2741 uk participants had a better effect but it is dangerous to draw conclusion from a sub group of a trial unless it forms part of the original trial protocol. In this sub group it is suggested that 3 people caught covid so it is based on very small number. If they redo a proper trial with the half dose, full dose and get 90% then great. Otherwise they are just winging it. " Lol a swinger trying to second guess people with the iq of a phone number | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths. As per usual, you are deliberately misquoting facts. The Oxford vaccine is 90% effective when administered as a half dose followed by a full dose. This will be the way it is administered rather than the 2 full dose method you are referring to. Not only does the first method offer better protection, it also allows more people to be vaccinated quicker as less is required. It also has the benefit of being more cost effective. This will prove invaluable to the developing world. They have no idea why the accidental under dosing of 2741 uk participants had a better effect but it is dangerous to draw conclusion from a sub group of a trial unless it forms part of the original trial protocol. In this sub group it is suggested that 3 people caught covid so it is based on very small number. If they redo a proper trial with the half dose, full dose and get 90% then great. Otherwise they are just winging it. Lol a swinger trying to second guess people with the iq of a phone number "Yup yup Oxford University are just making shit up that's totally how anything works  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Still early days, but it is a really positive development. Hopefully with multiple vaccines (approved) it means that there shouldn’t be any production issues. I am slightly worried that there are so many anti-vaxxers creeping out of the woodwork though! " Internet anti vaxers. Some are a bit like members of fab. What they write and what they do  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths. As per usual, you are deliberately misquoting facts. The Oxford vaccine is 90% effective when administered as a half dose followed by a full dose. This will be the way it is administered rather than the 2 full dose method you are referring to. Not only does the first method offer better protection, it also allows more people to be vaccinated quicker as less is required. It also has the benefit of being more cost effective. This will prove invaluable to the developing world. They have no idea why the accidental under dosing of 2741 uk participants had a better effect but it is dangerous to draw conclusion from a sub group of a trial unless it forms part of the original trial protocol. In this sub group it is suggested that 3 people caught covid so it is based on very small number. If they redo a proper trial with the half dose, full dose and get 90% then great. Otherwise they are just winging it. Lol a swinger trying to second guess people with the iq of a phone number
Yup yup Oxford University are just making shit up that's totally how anything works "The government set the bar at 50% efficacy for approval so Oxford thought they weren't doing too badly at 62% until their competitors came out with results above 90%. Remember Oxford University stand to make a lot of money if their vaccine works. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths. As per usual, you are deliberately misquoting facts. The Oxford vaccine is 90% effective when administered as a half dose followed by a full dose. This will be the way it is administered rather than the 2 full dose method you are referring to. Not only does the first method offer better protection, it also allows more people to be vaccinated quicker as less is required. It also has the benefit of being more cost effective. This will prove invaluable to the developing world. They have no idea why the accidental under dosing of 2741 uk participants had a better effect but it is dangerous to draw conclusion from a sub group of a trial unless it forms part of the original trial protocol. In this sub group it is suggested that 3 people caught covid so it is based on very small number. If they redo a proper trial with the half dose, full dose and get 90% then great. Otherwise they are just winging it. Lol a swinger trying to second guess people with the iq of a phone number
Yup yup Oxford University are just making shit up that's totally how anything works
The government set the bar at 50% efficacy for approval so Oxford thought they weren't doing too badly at 62% until their competitors came out with results above 90%.
Remember Oxford University stand to make a lot of money if their vaccine works.
"The proof will be in the studies, the peer review, and the regulatory approval. And how terrible people making money in capitalism. I'm shocked and appalled. We should seize the means of production and eliminate capitalism, what a terrible thing | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths. As per usual, you are deliberately misquoting facts. The Oxford vaccine is 90% effective when administered as a half dose followed by a full dose. This will be the way it is administered rather than the 2 full dose method you are referring to. Not only does the first method offer better protection, it also allows more people to be vaccinated quicker as less is required. It also has the benefit of being more cost effective. This will prove invaluable to the developing world. They have no idea why the accidental under dosing of 2741 uk participants had a better effect but it is dangerous to draw conclusion from a sub group of a trial unless it forms part of the original trial protocol. In this sub group it is suggested that 3 people caught covid so it is based on very small number. If they redo a proper trial with the half dose, full dose and get 90% then great. Otherwise they are just winging it. Lol a swinger trying to second guess people with the iq of a phone number
Yup yup Oxford University are just making shit up that's totally how anything works
The government set the bar at 50% efficacy for approval so Oxford thought they weren't doing too badly at 62% until their competitors came out with results above 90%.
Remember Oxford University stand to make a lot of money if their vaccine works.
The proof will be in the studies, the peer review, and the regulatory approval.
And how terrible people making money in capitalism. I'm shocked and appalled. We should seize the means of production and eliminate capitalism, what a terrible thing "I am not saying there is anything wrong with making money from this, I am just saying that it speaks to motive. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths. As per usual, you are deliberately misquoting facts. The Oxford vaccine is 90% effective when administered as a half dose followed by a full dose. This will be the way it is administered rather than the 2 full dose method you are referring to. Not only does the first method offer better protection, it also allows more people to be vaccinated quicker as less is required. It also has the benefit of being more cost effective. This will prove invaluable to the developing world. They have no idea why the accidental under dosing of 2741 uk participants had a better effect but it is dangerous to draw conclusion from a sub group of a trial unless it forms part of the original trial protocol. In this sub group it is suggested that 3 people caught covid so it is based on very small number. If they redo a proper trial with the half dose, full dose and get 90% then great. Otherwise they are just winging it. Lol a swinger trying to second guess people with the iq of a phone number "So doctors and researchers can't be swingers? Are they mutually exclusive? Don't put your self down. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths. As per usual, you are deliberately misquoting facts. The Oxford vaccine is 90% effective when administered as a half dose followed by a full dose. This will be the way it is administered rather than the 2 full dose method you are referring to. Not only does the first method offer better protection, it also allows more people to be vaccinated quicker as less is required. It also has the benefit of being more cost effective. This will prove invaluable to the developing world. They have no idea why the accidental under dosing of 2741 uk participants had a better effect but it is dangerous to draw conclusion from a sub group of a trial unless it forms part of the original trial protocol. In this sub group it is suggested that 3 people caught covid so it is based on very small number. If they redo a proper trial with the half dose, full dose and get 90% then great. Otherwise they are just winging it. Lol a swinger trying to second guess people with the iq of a phone number
Yup yup Oxford University are just making shit up that's totally how anything works
The government set the bar at 50% efficacy for approval so Oxford thought they weren't doing too badly at 62% until their competitors came out with results above 90%.
Remember Oxford University stand to make a lot of money if their vaccine works.
The proof will be in the studies, the peer review, and the regulatory approval.
And how terrible people making money in capitalism. I'm shocked and appalled. We should seize the means of production and eliminate capitalism, what a terrible thing
I am not saying there is anything wrong with making money from this, I am just saying that it speaks to motive."So you think Oxford are untrustworthy? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And not let's forget Thalidomide " What has Thalidomide got to do with a vaccination? Perhaps you should say... Let’s not forget Polio, Diptheria, Typhoid and Yellow Fever. Countless millions of lives saved and millions more saved from life changing disfigurements. Thalidomide was not a vaccination | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Still early days, but it is a really positive development. Hopefully with multiple vaccines (approved) it means that there shouldn’t be any production issues. I am slightly worried that there are so many anti-vaxxers creeping out of the woodwork though! Internet anti vaxers. Some are a bit like members of fab. What they write and what they do "Ahahaha! Yeah I’m getting that sense! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"And not let's forget Thalidomide " Yes, let's not. Now, back to the vaccine. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths. As per usual, you are deliberately misquoting facts. The Oxford vaccine is 90% effective when administered as a half dose followed by a full dose. This will be the way it is administered rather than the 2 full dose method you are referring to. Not only does the first method offer better protection, it also allows more people to be vaccinated quicker as less is required. It also has the benefit of being more cost effective. This will prove invaluable to the developing world. They have no idea why the accidental under dosing of 2741 uk participants had a better effect but it is dangerous to draw conclusion from a sub group of a trial unless it forms part of the original trial protocol. In this sub group it is suggested that 3 people caught covid so it is based on very small number. If they redo a proper trial with the half dose, full dose and get 90% then great. Otherwise they are just winging it. Lol a swinger trying to second guess people with the iq of a phone number
Yup yup Oxford University are just making shit up that's totally how anything works
The government set the bar at 50% efficacy for approval so Oxford thought they weren't doing too badly at 62% until their competitors came out with results above 90%.
Remember Oxford University stand to make a lot of money if their vaccine works.
The proof will be in the studies, the peer review, and the regulatory approval.
And how terrible people making money in capitalism. I'm shocked and appalled. We should seize the means of production and eliminate capitalism, what a terrible thing
I am not saying there is anything wrong with making money from this, I am just saying that it speaks to motive."The manufacturer doesn't get to see the results until the data is complete and evaluated. There are preset, agreed triggers to determine the end of each phase of the study. It's all traceable, no one person or group can tamper with the data and the regulator (MHRA) makes the ultimate determination not oxford and not astrazeneca. The full detail of how these things are evaluated is published and freely available. Ybthe way, how much exactly do Oxford stand to gain ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"It will be interesting to see how the government spins going for the Oxford vaccine that will lead to 3 times as many deaths as the other two because it is cheaper and you can keep it in a regular freezer. Actually it's stored at 2-8 degrees in a FRIDGE as you got that wrong we can assume the bit about deaths is also pure bullshit %90 percent effective leaves 10% to catch it, 70% effective leaves 30% to catch it. Three times as many. You do the maths. As per usual, you are deliberately misquoting facts. The Oxford vaccine is 90% effective when administered as a half dose followed by a full dose. This will be the way it is administered rather than the 2 full dose method you are referring to. Not only does the first method offer better protection, it also allows more people to be vaccinated quicker as less is required. It also has the benefit of being more cost effective. This will prove invaluable to the developing world. They have no idea why the accidental under dosing of 2741 uk participants had a better effect but it is dangerous to draw conclusion from a sub group of a trial unless it forms part of the original trial protocol. In this sub group it is suggested that 3 people caught covid so it is based on very small number. If they redo a proper trial with the half dose, full dose and get 90% then great. Otherwise they are just winging it. Lol a swinger trying to second guess people with the iq of a phone number
Yup yup Oxford University are just making shit up that's totally how anything works
The government set the bar at 50% efficacy for approval so Oxford thought they weren't doing too badly at 62% until their competitors came out with results above 90%.
Remember Oxford University stand to make a lot of money if their vaccine works.
The proof will be in the studies, the peer review, and the regulatory approval.
And how terrible people making money in capitalism. I'm shocked and appalled. We should seize the means of production and eliminate capitalism, what a terrible thing
I am not saying there is anything wrong with making money from this, I am just saying that it speaks to motive.
The manufacturer doesn't get to see the results until the data is complete and evaluated. There are preset, agreed triggers to determine the end of each phase of the study.
It's all traceable, no one person or group can tamper with the data and the regulator (MHRA) makes the ultimate determination not oxford and not astrazeneca.
The full detail of how these things are evaluated is published and freely available.
Ybthe way, how much exactly do Oxford stand to gain ?"It's been produced under a not for profit agreement, so I guess Oxford get the fame but not the fortune. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting thread.. but why don't the pro vaxers just take it quietly rather than ramming it down other people's throats.. Pro Vaxers have begun the new vegans .. How do you recognize a pro vaxer... ? They will tell you . " Yes and we will loudly | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting thread.. but why don't the pro vaxers just take it quietly rather than ramming it down other people's throats.. Pro Vaxers have begun the new vegans .. How do you recognize a pro vaxer... ? They will tell you . Yes and we will loudly" Bet the anti vaxers won't make a point of letting people know they haven't been vaccinated, especially if it hinders their chance of a meet once it's safe to again? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Interesting thread.. but why don't the pro vaxers just take it quietly rather than ramming it down other people's throats.. Pro Vaxers have begun the new vegans .. How do you recognize a pro vaxer... ? They will tell you . " Probably because most of the many vax posts started daily are by anti vaxers ??? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I wonder if there is a correlation between non vaxers and barebackers..." Did you know there's direct correlation between the divorce rate in Maine and per-capita consumption of margarine? Correlation. Causation. Shmoresation. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Well non vaxers and anti vaxers are poles apart.. it's just personal choice.. Live and let live..." If you want to travel at all again after about the middle of next year, you may need to review your views on vaccinations. It is an almost certainty that almost all countries will be demanding a Coronavirus vaccination as an entry requirement. It’s not new - it was not that long ago when having a full vaccine card was a pre-requisite for travelling anywhere. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Anyone looked at the recently published lancet article with findings from the phase 2/3 trial of the Oxford vaccine... is it just me or is there something really nonsensical design about their study I can’t for the life of me understand why their comparator groups are so unevenly weighted: Between May 30 and Aug 8, 2020, 560 participants were enrolled: 160 aged 18–55 years (100 assigned to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19, 60 assigned to MenACWY), Why not 80 novel vaccine: 80 control vaccine 160 aged 56–69 years (120 assigned to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19: 40 assigned to MenACWY), Why not 60 novel vaccine: 60 control vaccine and 240 aged 70 years and older (200 assigned to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19: 40 assigned to MenACWY). Why not 100 novel vaccine: 100 control vaccine If they can’t even get the basic maths right at the outset, what’s the point going any further? I also don’t see the wisdom of the control group being given another vaccine in place of the typical placebo ... even an empty vector would’ve been better! I’ve honestly never known any trial to test a novel vaccine against another vaccine. Aside from this, I’m not sure why everyone is so excited by the finding that a half dose followed by full dose is more effective than two half doses when that very same dosing regimen was happened across by accident! Sorry but when millions are depending on trials that should be strategically designed and safely executed this doesn’t seem to me something to be cheering about. They perhaps got lucky in that no adverse outcomes were reported but will people really want to be signing up to trials where they might just stick the wrong dose in you? Surely there needs to be more rigour here? " The reason that they allocate more to the vaccinated group is because far fewer in the vaccinated group will catch covid, so you need more of them to get sufficient cases to measure properly. My understanding is that they typically use another vaccine in the control group. If they used water then the subject would suspect they received the placebo because there would be no side effects in the days after the injection. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
