FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Booster Jab
Booster Jab
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) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In my experience the side effects are nothing compared to actually having covid" Well said  | |||
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) | |||
"Had the booster yesterday pfizer just a slightly pain in my arm nothing more . Modern the first 2 but same no more then arm pain and that's it guess I'm lucky or it was just water "Pfizer has an Apple chip in it whereas Moderna has a Microsoft one.  | |||
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) | |||
"Just curious to know but how many of you will continue to receive booster shots indefinitely? An how many boosters will be enough? " If it's like the flu jab and needed every year then I'll take it every year. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just curious to know but how many of you will continue to receive booster shots indefinitely? An how many boosters will be enough? " I'll take as many as I'm advised to have. Vaccines don't scare me | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just curious to know but how many of you will continue to receive booster shots indefinitely? An how many boosters will be enough? I'll take as many as I'm advised to have. Vaccines don't scare me" This. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just curious to know but how many of you will continue to receive booster shots indefinitely? An how many boosters will be enough? " People get flu jabs every year nobody complains or makes a pint of calling it out
As Covid slowly makes its way into the annual illnesses I expect it will be added to a flue vaccine and nobody will be trying to score points in the vaccine argument  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Had AZ for first two and Pfizer for booster. No symptoms from any of them." Same here. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just curious to know but how many of you will continue to receive booster shots indefinitely? An how many boosters will be enough? " As often as recommended. I have a flu jab yearly. What's the difference? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"How long does the booster immunity last? I read a paper that referenced 3-4 months but this was some time ago. " Doubt any could claim to give immunity. I guess we'll know how effective they are against Omicron in a few weeks/months time. | |||
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) | |||
"No. You can't name names. " Fair enough. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Love how anti-vaxxers daren't be drawn into a public argument they can't win so message you privately instead of in the chat you set up.... Should I name names?!" I'm now able to post publicly in the forums so will happily repeat what I sent you, in quotation marks, below. "Can't post publicly. Can you explain how not having the booster will risk other's lives please?" It is a genuine question and one I hope you are able to answer. Thanks. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes ... by not having the booster you are more susceptible to catching Covid, more likley to have a serious illness, more likley to require hospital treatment and more likley to die. By unecessarily taking up a hopital bed/ICU you are denying the use of that bed to somebody else. Im not saying anyone should be denied the best medical care but we should All do our bit for society by having the booster. So yes potentialy you are risking other peoples lives by not taking the booster. ICU beds are a finite number and really dont need to be filled by people who from a little scratch to the arm could avoid it." There you go Scrabble. Do you need some pretty pictures to help? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Just curious to know but how many of you will continue to receive booster shots indefinitely? An how many boosters will be enough? " Will continue as often as is needed. When we go on holiday to lots of places we get vaccinated. Many of these need boosters. We are now one of those places. Everywhere is one of those places. | |||
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) | |||
"I had the Pfizer booster the week before last. Just a bit of a sore arm for 24 hours, that was all. I was the same with the first two jabs, they were Astra Seneca and just a sore arm for a short time too x" Zeneca x | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes ... by not having the booster you are more susceptible to catching Covid, more likley to have a serious illness, more likley to require hospital treatment and more likley to die. By unecessarily taking up a hopital bed/ICU you are denying the use of that bed to somebody else. Im not saying anyone should be denied the best medical care but we should All do our bit for society by having the booster. So yes potentialy you are risking other peoples lives by not taking the booster. ICU beds are a finite number and really dont need to be filled by people who from a little scratch to the arm could avoid it." Thanks for your reply. As it stands, your answer is just a chain of events, based on the assumption that the worst case scenario for each of those events is going to happen. Do you have a figure, for example per 100,000 of population, of the scenario you posted occuring? Thanks | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes ... by not having the booster you are more susceptible to catching Covid, more likley to have a serious illness, more likley to require hospital treatment and more likley to die. By unecessarily taking up a hopital bed/ICU you are denying the use of that bed to somebody else. Im not saying anyone should be denied the best medical care but we should All do our bit for society by having the booster. So yes potentialy you are risking other peoples lives by not taking the booster. ICU beds are a finite number and really dont need to be filled by people who from a little scratch to the arm could avoid it. Thanks for your reply. As it stands, your answer is just a chain of events, based on the assumption that the worst case scenario for each of those events is going to happen. Do you have a figure, for example per 100,000 of population, of the scenario you posted occuring? Thanks" British Medical Journal ... its an easy google. "What do the data on hospital admissions show? An analysis of UK data from the National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS) and the Coronavirus Clinical Information Network (CO-CIN),1 endorsed by the UK Scientific and Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE),2 shows that of 40?000 patients with covid-19 who were admitted to hospital between December 2020 and July 2021 a total of 33?496 (84%) had not been vaccinated. It found that 5198 (13%) of these patients had received their first vaccine and 1274 (3%) their second. A total of 611 patients with previous covid-19 (reinfection) were not included in the analysis." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" There you go Scrabble. Do you need some pretty pictures to help?" No thank you. However, what I do ask is for you to respond to posts in a civil manner. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes ... by not having the booster you are more susceptible to catching Covid, more likley to have a serious illness, more likley to require hospital treatment and more likley to die. By unecessarily taking up a hopital bed/ICU you are denying the use of that bed to somebody else. Im not saying anyone should be denied the best medical care but we should All do our bit for society by having the booster. So yes potentialy you are risking other peoples lives by not taking the booster. ICU beds are a finite number and really dont need to be filled by people who from a little scratch to the arm could avoid it. Thanks for your reply. As it stands, your answer is just a chain of events, based on the assumption that the worst case scenario for each of those events is going to happen. Do you have a figure, for example per 100,000 of population, of the scenario you posted occuring? Thanks British Medical Journal ... its an easy google. "What do the data on hospital admissions show? An analysis of UK data from the National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS) and the Coronavirus Clinical Information Network (CO-CIN),1 endorsed by the UK Scientific and Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE),2 shows that of 40?000 patients with covid-19 who were admitted to hospital between December 2020 and July 2021 a total of 33?496 (84%) had not been vaccinated. It found that 5198 (13%) of these patients had received their first vaccine and 1274 (3%) their second. A total of 611 patients with previous covid-19 (reinfection) were not included in the analysis."" Interesting statistics. Unfortunately they don't prove that not having the booster puts others lives at risk because the NHS only started delivering COVID booster jabs (to people in eligible groups) from 16th September 2021. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"To answer further your question on rates per 100,000 Same BMJ article. Pretty clear on the difference between vaxed and un vaxed In its latest surveillance report Public Health England emphasised that the rate of hospital admissions and death from covid remained “substantially greater” in unvaccinated than in vaccinated people.6 For example, between the week beginning Monday 16 August 2021 and the week ending Sunday 12 September, the rate of hospital admissions of over 80s was 50.5 per 100?000 in the fully vaccinated and 143.9 per 100?000 in the unvaccinated, while deaths were 45.5 and 145.4 per 100?000, respectively. These trends were seen across the board. For example, for 60-69 year olds the hospital admission rates were 13.5 per 100?000 in the fully vaccinated and 74.3 per 100?000 in the unvaccinated, while deaths were 4.1 and 24.3 per 100?000, respectively." Again, the booster rollout had not started so these figures do not help the OP's statement that not having a booster puts others lives at risk. So we know exactly what unvaccinated means, could you confirm the definition of unvaccinated for any statistics you quote please? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"had to miss mine, as dispite having both previous jabs, i still got covid, and i have to test clear for 30 days before i can have my booster, does make me wander why i had the first two tbh, still going to have the booster when able too tho, but does make me wander how effective the jabs are tbh, oh and stay safe people, covid sucks big stile" The vaccine does not necessarily prevent catching Covid. It depends how much virus was passed to you and how your body reacts. If you do develop Covid the severity of illness is significantly reduced (including not dying of it). Rubbish for you that you caught it but without the vaccine could have been much worse. The vaccine also significantly reduces the level of virus that you might have passed on to others. Nothing is perfect, but being vaccinated is significantly better for the person who receives it and those around them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Can anyone give me scientific evidence that any of the vaccines are worthwhile or even that they are working? MRNA vaccine is a first of its kind, slightly concerning also that the likes of Pfizer and Moderna want to hold the data for 55 years on these. And no liability to any of the manufacturers? Is it any wonder the people are becoming more sick a year into the vaccine rollout? With an MRNA it’s a live virus they put into you which promotes our body to create anti bodies. Like all living things we are all different and this will most definitely have an adverse effect on health problems in the future. Let’s not forget the scaremongering since day one, all of the lies we’ve been told. Wake up people. " There is a lot of test data. What organisation do you trust? WHO? BMA? CDC? Nature magazine? The Economist? FT? The vaccines were developed very fast and at scale. It is a new process. They needed this legal cover. The consequences of non vaccination are the hospitalisations and deaths that we saw previously which have been massively reduced. Trials were still carried out before the mass vaccination began with the normal number of test subjects. All drug records are maintained for decades, but you don't wait decades before introducing a new drug. MRNA is not a live vaccine. It is a copy of the surface "spike" protein that your body's immune system learns to match in case of real infection. You can look this up too. All medical treatments have side effects and a small number are severe or fatal. Significantly ower than the risk of the disease but no, not "most definitely" anything. What scaremongering? That millions of people globally would become seriously hundreds of thousands would die? That happened. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"With an MRNA it’s a live virus they put into you which promotes our body to create anti bodies. " In reality, it is what it says it is, Messenger Ribo-nucleic-acid. Wrapped in a lipid coating. After injection it enters body cells and instructs the cells "protein factory" to make, and display on the cells surface, the spike protein of the sars-cov-2 virus. Someday, soon, all vaccines will be made that way. Advanced trials are currently being performed on anti-HIV mRNA vaccines. As well as being tested as a means of attacking prostate cancer etc. But believe what you like to.. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"With an MRNA it’s a live virus they put into you which promotes our body to create anti bodies. In reality, it is what it says it is, Messenger Ribo-nucleic-acid. Wrapped in a lipid coating. After injection it enters body cells and instructs the cells "protein factory" to make, and display on the cells surface, the spike protein of the sars-cov-2 virus. Someday, soon, all vaccines will be made that way. Advanced trials are currently being performed on anti-HIV mRNA vaccines. As well as being tested as a means of attacking prostate cancer etc. But believe what you like to.." CDC-USA: "To trigger an immune response, many vaccines put a weakened or inactivated germ into our bodies. Not mRNA vaccines. Instead, mRNA vaccines use mRNA created in a laboratory to teach our cells how to make a protein—or even just a piece of a protein—that triggers an immune response inside our bodies. That immune response, which produces antibodies, is what protects us from getting infected if the real virus enters our bodies. COVID vaccine First, COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are given in the upper arm muscle. The mRNA will enter the muscle cells and instruct the cells’ machinery to produce a harmless piece of what is called the spike protein. The spike protein is found on the surface of the virus that causes COVID-19. After the protein piece is made, our cells break down the mRNA and remove it. Next, our cells display the spike protein piece on their surface. Our immune system recognizes that the protein doesn’t belong there. This triggers our immune system to produce antibodies and activate other immune cells to fight off what it thinks is an infection. This is what your body might do to fight off the infection if you got sick with COVID-19. At the end of the process, our bodies have learned how to protect against future infection from the virus that causes COVID-19. The benefit of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, like all vaccines, is that those vaccinated gain this protection without ever having to risk the potentially serious consequences of getting sick with COVID-19" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"With an MRNA it’s a live virus they put into you which promotes our body to create anti bodies. In reality, it is what it says it is, Messenger Ribo-nucleic-acid. Wrapped in a lipid coating. After injection it enters body cells and instructs the cells "protein factory" to make, and display on the cells surface, the spike protein of the sars-cov-2 virus. Someday, soon, all vaccines will be made that way. Advanced trials are currently being performed on anti-HIV mRNA vaccines. As well as being tested as a means of attacking prostate cancer etc. But believe what you like to.. CDC-USA: "To trigger an immune response, many vaccines put a weakened or inactivated germ into our bodies. Not mRNA vaccines. Instead, mRNA vaccines use mRNA created in a laboratory to teach our cells how to make a protein—or even just a piece of a protein—that triggers an immune response inside our bodies. That immune response, which produces antibodies, is what protects us from getting infected if the real virus enters our bodies. COVID vaccine First, COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are given in the upper arm muscle. The mRNA will enter the muscle cells and instruct the cells’ machinery to produce a harmless piece of what is called the spike protein. The spike protein is found on the surface of the virus that causes COVID-19. After the protein piece is made, our cells break down the mRNA and remove it. Next, our cells display the spike protein piece on their surface. Our immune system recognizes that the protein doesn’t belong there. This triggers our immune system to produce antibodies and activate other immune cells to fight off what it thinks is an infection. This is what your body might do to fight off the infection if you got sick with COVID-19. At the end of the process, our bodies have learned how to protect against future infection from the virus that causes COVID-19. The benefit of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, like all vaccines, is that those vaccinated gain this protection without ever having to risk the potentially serious consequences of getting sick with COVID-19"" You mention above that your body will learn how to protect against future infection from the virus that causes COVID-19 but fail to mention how long it will take to do this. Do you know how long this will take? More importantly, do the pharmaceutical companies producing the mRNA vaccines know how long this process is? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"With an MRNA it’s a live virus they put into you which promotes our body to create anti bodies. In reality, it is what it says it is, Messenger Ribo-nucleic-acid. Wrapped in a lipid coating. After injection it enters body cells and instructs the cells "protein factory" to make, and display on the cells surface, the spike protein of the sars-cov-2 virus. Someday, soon, all vaccines will be made that way. Advanced trials are currently being performed on anti-HIV mRNA vaccines. As well as being tested as a means of attacking prostate cancer etc. But believe what you like to.. CDC-USA: "To trigger an immune response, many vaccines put a weakened or inactivated germ into our bodies. Not mRNA vaccines. Instead, mRNA vaccines use mRNA created in a laboratory to teach our cells how to make a protein—or even just a piece of a protein—that triggers an immune response inside our bodies. That immune response, which produces antibodies, is what protects us from getting infected if the real virus enters our bodies. COVID vaccine First, COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are given in the upper arm muscle. The mRNA will enter the muscle cells and instruct the cells’ machinery to produce a harmless piece of what is called the spike protein. The spike protein is found on the surface of the virus that causes COVID-19. After the protein piece is made, our cells break down the mRNA and remove it. Next, our cells display the spike protein piece on their surface. Our immune system recognizes that the protein doesn’t belong there. This triggers our immune system to produce antibodies and activate other immune cells to fight off what it thinks is an infection. This is what your body might do to fight off the infection if you got sick with COVID-19. At the end of the process, our bodies have learned how to protect against future infection from the virus that causes COVID-19. The benefit of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, like all vaccines, is that those vaccinated gain this protection without ever having to risk the potentially serious consequences of getting sick with COVID-19" You mention above that your body will learn how to protect against future infection from the virus that causes COVID-19 but fail to mention how long it will take to do this. Do you know how long this will take? More importantly, do the pharmaceutical companies producing the mRNA vaccines know how long this process is?" What is wrong? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"With an MRNA it’s a live virus they put into you which promotes our body to create anti bodies. In reality, it is what it says it is, Messenger Ribo-nucleic-acid. Wrapped in a lipid coating. After injection it enters body cells and instructs the cells "protein factory" to make, and display on the cells surface, the spike protein of the sars-cov-2 virus. Someday, soon, all vaccines will be made that way. Advanced trials are currently being performed on anti-HIV mRNA vaccines. As well as being tested as a means of attacking prostate cancer etc. But believe what you like to.. CDC-USA: "To trigger an immune response, many vaccines put a weakened or inactivated germ into our bodies. Not mRNA vaccines. Instead, mRNA vaccines use mRNA created in a laboratory to teach our cells how to make a protein—or even just a piece of a protein—that triggers an immune response inside our bodies. That immune response, which produces antibodies, is what protects us from getting infected if the real virus enters our bodies. COVID vaccine First, COVID-19 mRNA vaccines are given in the upper arm muscle. The mRNA will enter the muscle cells and instruct the cells’ machinery to produce a harmless piece of what is called the spike protein. The spike protein is found on the surface of the virus that causes COVID-19. After the protein piece is made, our cells break down the mRNA and remove it. Next, our cells display the spike protein piece on their surface. Our immune system recognizes that the protein doesn’t belong there. This triggers our immune system to produce antibodies and activate other immune cells to fight off what it thinks is an infection. This is what your body might do to fight off the infection if you got sick with COVID-19. At the end of the process, our bodies have learned how to protect against future infection from the virus that causes COVID-19. The benefit of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, like all vaccines, is that those vaccinated gain this protection without ever having to risk the potentially serious consequences of getting sick with COVID-19" You mention above that your body will learn how to protect against future infection from the virus that causes COVID-19 but fail to mention how long it will take to do this. Do you know how long this will take? More importantly, do the pharmaceutical companies producing the mRNA vaccines know how long this process is? What is wrong?" Wrong with asking how long the mRNA learning process will take? Nothing, it is a perfectly valid question. In fact it is a critical metric that will enable the NHS to plan ahead. However, you have to question the efficacy of the mRNA vaccine to enable the body 'to learn how to protect against future infections' if a booster is now required. And what about people who had non mRNA vaccines for their first two doses and are now being given an mRNA booster? Is the mRNA booster a super dose? Otherwise they may as well have been given a placebo instead of the two AZ vaccines. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Yes ... by not having the booster you are more susceptible to catching Covid, more likley to have a serious illness, more likley to require hospital treatment and more likley to die. By unecessarily taking up a hopital bed/ICU you are denying the use of that bed to somebody else. Im not saying anyone should be denied the best medical care but we should All do our bit for society by having the booster. So yes potentialy you are risking other peoples lives by not taking the booster. ICU beds are a finite number and really dont need to be filled by people who from a little scratch to the arm could avoid it. Thanks for your reply. As it stands, your answer is just a chain of events, based on the assumption that the worst case scenario for each of those events is going to happen. Do you have a figure, for example per 100,000 of population, of the scenario you posted occuring? Thanks British Medical Journal ... its an easy google. "What do the data on hospital admissions show? An analysis of UK data from the National Immunisation Management Service (NIMS) and the Coronavirus Clinical Information Network (CO-CIN),1 endorsed by the UK Scientific and Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE),2 shows that of 40?000 patients with covid-19 who were admitted to hospital between December 2020 and July 2021 a total of 33?496 (84%) had not been vaccinated. It found that 5198 (13%) of these patients had received their first vaccine and 1274 (3%) their second. A total of 611 patients with previous covid-19 (reinfection) were not included in the analysis." Interesting statistics. Unfortunately they don't prove that not having the booster puts others lives at risk because the NHS only started delivering COVID booster jabs (to people in eligible groups) from 16th September 2021." OP, seeing as you posted the original statement that 'not having the booster puts others lives at risk', maybe you can shed some light on this? Your contribution to this discussion would be most welcome. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"had to miss mine, as dispite having both previous jabs, i still got covid, and i have to test clear for 30 days before i can have my booster, does make me wander why i had the first two tbh, still going to have the booster when able too tho, but does make me wander how effective the jabs are tbh, oh and stay safe people, covid sucks big stile" It's not to prevent you getting covid but to make the impact of getting it less on your system that's the point of having the vaccine Yes I'm currently getting over having covid and I'm still suffering 2 weeks after testing positive but I'm grateful for having my vaccinations I actually dread to think how bad I could have been otherwise | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In my experience the side effects are nothing compared to actually having covid" What’s it like having Covid 19 have you had it personally?? Thanks | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In my experience the side effects are nothing compared to actually having covid What’s it like having Covid 19 have you had it personally?? Thanks " Could barely move for 2 weeks. Bad chest, temperature, sore throat, aches, headache, no taste or smell. Lost my voice & completely knackered. First time I tried to exercise again I nearly threw up. I found the side effects to the first jab were actually pretty similar to the illness but milder and condensed into a couple of days. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In my experience the side effects are nothing compared to actually having covid What’s it like having Covid 19 have you had it personally?? Thanks Could barely move for 2 weeks. Bad chest, temperature, sore throat, aches, headache, no taste or smell. Lost my voice & completely knackered. First time I tried to exercise again I nearly threw up. I found the side effects to the first jab were actually pretty similar to the illness but milder and condensed into a couple of days." This was your experience of Covid after the vaccination though, right? So would have been more severe without. Also, different for everyone. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse" Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right?" What’s your point ? you said it yourself … why then aren’t the government on a health drive ? I’ve heard no mention of getting a healthy lifestyle just all vaccine talk | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? What’s your point ? you said it yourself … why then aren’t the government on a health drive ? I’ve heard no mention of getting a healthy lifestyle just all vaccine talk " Its a one size fits all blinkered approach thats why. They also are making no effort to treat anyone until it becomes hospital level severe. May be the only disease I know of that is ignored until you require hospitisation. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In my experience the side effects are nothing compared to actually having covid What’s it like having Covid 19 have you had it personally?? Thanks Could barely move for 2 weeks. Bad chest, temperature, sore throat, aches, headache, no taste or smell. Lost my voice & completely knackered. First time I tried to exercise again I nearly threw up. I found the side effects to the first jab were actually pretty similar to the illness but milder and condensed into a couple of days. This was your experience of Covid after the vaccination though, right? So would have been more severe without. Also, different for everyone." No. I had covid a year ago. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right?" No but doesn’t healthy living eradicate a lot of the other illnesses and diseases that take up those precious hospital beds? Why is mitigating against covid the ONLY action that is seen to be useful, selfless, right thing to do for the greater good? How is ‘not eating yourself into a coma and staying out of hospital’ not doing the right thing for the greater good? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? What’s your point ? you said it yourself … why then aren’t the government on a health drive ? I’ve heard no mention of getting a healthy lifestyle just all vaccine talk Its a one size fits all blinkered approach thats why. They also are making no effort to treat anyone until it becomes hospital level severe. May be the only disease I know of that is ignored until you require hospitisation. " You cannot completely change your lifestyle and habits to marginally reduce the effects of a global pandemic. Have you missed the years of messaging on healthy living, eating and exercise? What more would you have liked to happen? The vaccines are necessary however healthy you are. Covid will still cause you severe long term illness or death even if you're a super-fit triathlete. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? What’s your point ? you said it yourself … why then aren’t the government on a health drive ? I’ve heard no mention of getting a healthy lifestyle just all vaccine talk Its a one size fits all blinkered approach thats why. They also are making no effort to treat anyone until it becomes hospital level severe. May be the only disease I know of that is ignored until you require hospitisation. You cannot completely change your lifestyle and habits to marginally reduce the effects of a global pandemic. Have you missed the years of messaging on healthy living, eating and exercise? What more would you have liked to happen? The vaccines are necessary however healthy you are. Covid will still cause you severe long term illness or death even if you're a super-fit triathlete." If you believe the only answer is vaccines forever then I can’t help you … next | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? No but doesn’t healthy living eradicate a lot of the other illnesses and diseases that take up those precious hospital beds? Why is mitigating against covid the ONLY action that is seen to be useful, selfless, right thing to do for the greater good? How is ‘not eating yourself into a coma and staying out of hospital’ not doing the right thing for the greater good? " Indeed, obesity alone cause not only a massive strain on the NHS, its also a leading cause of negative outcomes from covid and many other illnesses...but eat out to help out, have another big mac for 70 pence. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? No but doesn’t healthy living eradicate a lot of the other illnesses and diseases that take up those precious hospital beds? Why is mitigating against covid the ONLY action that is seen to be useful, selfless, right thing to do for the greater good? How is ‘not eating yourself into a coma and staying out of hospital’ not doing the right thing for the greater good? " See my other post. There have been literally years of health messaging on eating and exercise. However fit you are Covid can still make you seriously ill or kill you. It will also help reduce spread. Vaccine take-up is the single most important thing in a pandemic. We have vaccines and don't want them. Most of the rest of the world would be delighted to have them. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? What’s your point ? you said it yourself … why then aren’t the government on a health drive ? I’ve heard no mention of getting a healthy lifestyle just all vaccine talk Its a one size fits all blinkered approach thats why. They also are making no effort to treat anyone until it becomes hospital level severe. May be the only disease I know of that is ignored until you require hospitisation. You cannot completely change your lifestyle and habits to marginally reduce the effects of a global pandemic. Have you missed the years of messaging on healthy living, eating and exercise? What more would you have liked to happen? The vaccines are necessary however healthy you are. Covid will still cause you severe long term illness or death even if you're a super-fit triathlete." I have zero effects from covid, which I caught pre-vaccination and changed my lifestyle massively moreso due to going off the rails during lockdown. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? No but doesn’t healthy living eradicate a lot of the other illnesses and diseases that take up those precious hospital beds? Why is mitigating against covid the ONLY action that is seen to be useful, selfless, right thing to do for the greater good? How is ‘not eating yourself into a coma and staying out of hospital’ not doing the right thing for the greater good? See my other post. There have been literally years of health messaging on eating and exercise. However fit you are Covid can still make you seriously ill or kill you. It will also help reduce spread. Vaccine take-up is the single most important thing in a pandemic. We have vaccines and don't want them. Most of the rest of the world would be delighted to have them. " You’re missing the point. I’m not talking about the government message I’m talking about the self righteousness here! The finger keeps being pointed at unvaccinated individuals as the problem, because of their taking up hospital capacity. Yet I do not see people bullying those who are obese or smoke or drink or drive in their cars! It’s an absolute contradiction of everything else you say. How often you gone without hearing this year to prevent 1,000s of deaths from climate change? Yeah thought not!  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right?" So apparently just like the vaccines... | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? No but doesn’t healthy living eradicate a lot of the other illnesses and diseases that take up those precious hospital beds? Why is mitigating against covid the ONLY action that is seen to be useful, selfless, right thing to do for the greater good? How is ‘not eating yourself into a coma and staying out of hospital’ not doing the right thing for the greater good? See my other post. There have been literally years of health messaging on eating and exercise. However fit you are Covid can still make you seriously ill or kill you. It will also help reduce spread. Vaccine take-up is the single most important thing in a pandemic. We have vaccines and don't want them. Most of the rest of the world would be delighted to have them. You’re missing the point. I’m not talking about the government message I’m talking about the self righteousness here! The finger keeps being pointed at unvaccinated individuals as the problem, because of their taking up hospital capacity. Yet I do not see people bullying those who are obese or smoke or drink or drive in their cars! It’s an absolute contradiction of everything else you say. How often you gone without hearing this year to prevent 1,000s of deaths from climate change? Yeah thought not! "Heating* Ffs! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? What’s your point ? you said it yourself … why then aren’t the government on a health drive ? I’ve heard no mention of getting a healthy lifestyle just all vaccine talk Its a one size fits all blinkered approach thats why. They also are making no effort to treat anyone until it becomes hospital level severe. May be the only disease I know of that is ignored until you require hospitisation. You cannot completely change your lifestyle and habits to marginally reduce the effects of a global pandemic. Have you missed the years of messaging on healthy living, eating and exercise? What more would you have liked to happen? The vaccines are necessary however healthy you are. Covid will still cause you severe long term illness or death even if you're a super-fit triathlete. If you believe the only answer is vaccines forever then I can’t help you … next " If you believe that "being healthy" gives you immunity from illness then I don't need your help. We do require boosters for many vaccines and have for years. Have a look on the NHS and WHO websites. Just like flu. This is a new one. You so seem to have managed to miss all of the years of Government messaging about a healthy lifestyle, so I guess your anger and confusion has some explanation. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? So apparently just like the vaccines..." No, not like the vaccines. The vaccines prime you with antibodies so that the virus does not take hold as it is being fought very early. You are far less likely to become severely ill if you are succeptible. Being healthy helps you survive severe illness after you become severely ill. Interesting interpretation though after all of the posts explaining this to you. What information on vaccines would you find acceptable or understandable? What source would be convincing? Are there any? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? No but doesn’t healthy living eradicate a lot of the other illnesses and diseases that take up those precious hospital beds? Why is mitigating against covid the ONLY action that is seen to be useful, selfless, right thing to do for the greater good? How is ‘not eating yourself into a coma and staying out of hospital’ not doing the right thing for the greater good? See my other post. There have been literally years of health messaging on eating and exercise. However fit you are Covid can still make you seriously ill or kill you. It will also help reduce spread. Vaccine take-up is the single most important thing in a pandemic. We have vaccines and don't want them. Most of the rest of the world would be delighted to have them. You’re missing the point. I’m not talking about the government message I’m talking about the self righteousness here! The finger keeps being pointed at unvaccinated individuals as the problem, because of their taking up hospital capacity. Yet I do not see people bullying those who are obese or smoke or drink or drive in their cars! It’s an absolute contradiction of everything else you say. How often you gone without hearing this year to prevent 1,000s of deaths from climate change? Yeah thought not! "Well, unvaccinated people facilitate faster and wider spread of the virus and become severely ill and require hospital treatment at a much higher rate. There is a lot of societal disapproval of drink drivers and more and more the obese. Fat people are bullied all the time. However, "normal" body mass in this country is overweight so perception of obese is somewhat skewed. This is, however, a global pandemic not a systemic societal medical problem. They are not comparable. No contradictions at all. Don't really get your point though. We should not give people a hard time about not getting vaccinated during a global pandemic, bit should be concentrating on messaging about healthy living? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? What’s your point ? you said it yourself … why then aren’t the government on a health drive ? I’ve heard no mention of getting a healthy lifestyle just all vaccine talk Its a one size fits all blinkered approach thats why. They also are making no effort to treat anyone until it becomes hospital level severe. May be the only disease I know of that is ignored until you require hospitisation. You cannot completely change your lifestyle and habits to marginally reduce the effects of a global pandemic. Have you missed the years of messaging on healthy living, eating and exercise? What more would you have liked to happen? The vaccines are necessary however healthy you are. Covid will still cause you severe long term illness or death even if you're a super-fit triathlete.I have zero effects from covid, which I caught pre-vaccination and changed my lifestyle massively moreso due to going off the rails during lockdown." You're very lucky due to your specific genetic makeup then. No more, no less. Millions have not been and you don't know until you've caught it. No consequences, minor symptoms or serious illness (short or long-term) or death. Quite a spread to gamble on. Having a healthy lifestyle is good regardless, particularly impressive during the times we're living through | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? What’s your point ? you said it yourself … why then aren’t the government on a health drive ? I’ve heard no mention of getting a healthy lifestyle just all vaccine talk Its a one size fits all blinkered approach thats why. They also are making no effort to treat anyone until it becomes hospital level severe. May be the only disease I know of that is ignored until you require hospitisation. You cannot completely change your lifestyle and habits to marginally reduce the effects of a global pandemic. Have you missed the years of messaging on healthy living, eating and exercise? What more would you have liked to happen? The vaccines are necessary however healthy you are. Covid will still cause you severe long term illness or death even if you're a super-fit triathlete.I have zero effects from covid, which I caught pre-vaccination and changed my lifestyle massively moreso due to going off the rails during lockdown. You're very lucky due to your specific genetic makeup then. No more, no less. Millions have not been and you don't know until you've caught it. No consequences, minor symptoms or serious illness (short or long-term) or death. Quite a spread to gamble on. Having a healthy lifestyle is good regardless, particularly impressive during the times we're living through "I have my bad moments but as long as the good outweigh the bad I stay in decent shape. Balance is key. I'm not advocating not being vaccinated by any stretch either. I'm all about personal choice tho. I got vaccinated for two main reasons, I believed it stopped the spread and I was planning to travel. The balls in the air on both of those now. They can't even give a straight answer(or don't know) whether the booster protects against omicron so I'm likely not getting it to have to get another updated one in 3-6 months. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Because I'm ancient I had my first this time last year. The second at the beginning of March and the third halfway through September. All were the Pfizer jab, apart from a mild sore arm for a couple of days in September no problems. The best bit is as I am on the original Test and Trace programme I am sampled every month for which I get paid £25 a time. RESULT! "I was part of an antibody study and got nothing! Dang  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? So apparently just like the vaccines... No, not like the vaccines. The vaccines prime you with antibodies so that the virus does not take hold as it is being fought very early. You are far less likely to become severely ill if you are succeptible. Being healthy helps you survive severe illness after you become severely ill. Interesting interpretation though after all of the posts explaining this to you. What information on vaccines would you find acceptable or understandable? What source would be convincing? Are there any?" A no-fault compensation scheme, paid for by a levy for each vaccines produced, for those who have died or have serious effects from the vaccines, would be a start. Currently, the individual has to take full unmitigated responsibility for any potentially serious effects of a vaccine. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? So apparently just like the vaccines... No, not like the vaccines. The vaccines prime you with antibodies so that the virus does not take hold as it is being fought very early. You are far less likely to become severely ill if you are succeptible. Being healthy helps you survive severe illness after you become severely ill. Interesting interpretation though after all of the posts explaining this to you. What information on vaccines would you find acceptable or understandable? What source would be convincing? Are there any? A no-fault compensation scheme, paid for by a levy for each vaccines produced, for those who have died or have serious effects from the vaccines, would be a start. Currently, the individual has to take full unmitigated responsibility for any potentially serious effects of a vaccine." Your wish is granted. It was in 2020. The UK has an existing regime governing vaccine compensation, according to which a ‘Vaccine Damage Payment’ may be payable to a person who has been severely disabled as a result of a vaccination. As of 31 December 2020, the COVID-19 vaccination is included in this compensation regime. https://www.gov.uk/ Search "Vaccine Damage Payment" | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"The science says everyone needs to lose weight, take vitamins and cut out unhealthy sugary foods. But you won’t find the great British public complying with that, OH NO! much easier to take 20 boosters and blame the unvaxxed… Science believers my arse Healthy living does not provide immunity to a virus or an illness. It just makes you more likely to survive. You get that, right? So apparently just like the vaccines... No, not like the vaccines. The vaccines prime you with antibodies so that the virus does not take hold as it is being fought very early. You are far less likely to become severely ill if you are succeptible. Being healthy helps you survive severe illness after you become severely ill. Interesting interpretation though after all of the posts explaining this to you. What information on vaccines would you find acceptable or understandable? What source would be convincing? Are there any? A no-fault compensation scheme, paid for by a levy for each vaccines produced, for those who have died or have serious effects from the vaccines, would be a start. Currently, the individual has to take full unmitigated responsibility for any potentially serious effects of a vaccine. Your wish is granted. It was in 2020. The UK has an existing regime governing vaccine compensation, according to which a ‘Vaccine Damage Payment’ may be payable to a person who has been severely disabled as a result of a vaccination. As of 31 December 2020, the COVID-19 vaccination is included in this compensation regime. https://www.gov.uk/ Search "Vaccine Damage Payment"" I see what you've written on the parallel thread on how many deaths there have really been due to the vaccine (4 verified in the UK btw). I will anticipate you cutting and pasting your answer
You sound like you want all medical treatments to be 100% safe and effective otherwise they cannot be deployed.
Is that what you want? Absolute certainty otherwise bankruptcy or ultra high prices to cover the insurance? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I will anticipate you cutting and pasting your answer
You sound like you want all medical treatments to be 100% safe and effective otherwise they cannot be deployed.
Is that what you want? Absolute certainty otherwise bankruptcy or ultra high prices to cover the insurance?"The only absolute certainty is bankruptcy for the people who suffer severe effects from the vaccines. As for the £120,000, that helps but it will soon dry up. If the risk of severe effects is so small then the pharmaceutical companies can easily afford it! Pfizer are used to paying out. They had to pay $2.3 billion for fraudulent marketing. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In my experience the side effects are nothing compared to actually having covid What’s it like having Covid 19 have you had it personally?? Thanks " I'm still actually trying to get over covid that's why I said "in my experience", as for me it's been worse than the side affects I experienced from both jabs put together (not had my booster yet and have to wait until next month at least before I'm allowed to have it now), personally it has been like flu but so much worse it's quite disorienting going dizzy while sat still or only lifting your head off the pillow and any movement tires you out like you've done a marathon | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I will anticipate you cutting and pasting your answer
You sound like you want all medical treatments to be 100% safe and effective otherwise they cannot be deployed.
Is that what you want? Absolute certainty otherwise bankruptcy or ultra high prices to cover the insurance?
The only absolute certainty is bankruptcy for the people who suffer severe effects from the vaccines. As for the £120,000, that helps but it will soon dry up.
If the risk of severe effects is so small then the pharmaceutical companies can easily afford it! Pfizer are used to paying out. They had to pay $2.3 billion for fraudulent marketing."And if they suffer serious complications from Covid what happens financially ? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"In my experience the side effects are nothing compared to actually having covid What’s it like having Covid 19 have you had it personally?? Thanks I'm still actually trying to get over covid that's why I said "in my experience", as for me it's been worse than the side affects I experienced from both jabs put together (not had my booster yet and have to wait until next month at least before I'm allowed to have it now), personally it has been like flu but so much worse it's quite disorienting going dizzy while sat still or only lifting your head off the pillow and any movement tires you out like you've done a marathon" I had dizzy spells too. They continued for a long time. Not terrible but not right My wife had terrible fatigue. For quite a while she'd make panting type noises a bit like a dog when attempting exercise. She also talked a lot of 'aching bones'. There were other weird things like rashes and tingling fingers too. Hopefully I have freaked you out! And fingers crossed you feel better quickly. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I will anticipate you cutting and pasting your answer
You sound like you want all medical treatments to be 100% safe and effective otherwise they cannot be deployed.
Is that what you want? Absolute certainty otherwise bankruptcy or ultra high prices to cover the insurance?
The only absolute certainty is bankruptcy for the people who suffer severe effects from the vaccines. As for the £120,000, that helps but it will soon dry up.
If the risk of severe effects is so small then the pharmaceutical companies can easily afford it! Pfizer are used to paying out. They had to pay $2.3 billion for fraudulent marketing.
And if they suffer serious complications from Covid what happens financially ?"I suspect there will be serious financial hardship on par with suffering serious effects from the vaccine. Are you expecting a different outcome financially? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" There you go Scrabble. Do you need some pretty pictures to help? No thank you. However, what I do ask is for you to respond to posts in a civil manner." It’s exactly responses like this that create division with the people promoting the vaccine believing they are superior. All you did was ask a sensible question. | |||
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) | |||
"Had the first two and that’s it not having any more. I’ve not felt really well ever since having them Never had a flu jab so not going to have a booster every four months " I said exactly the same! Had COVID. Two jabs with side effects. Flu jab each year. Just couldn't be arsed with yet another one. But did it anyway and thankfully this time hasn't been so bad. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I will anticipate you cutting and pasting your answer
You sound like you want all medical treatments to be 100% safe and effective otherwise they cannot be deployed.
Is that what you want? Absolute certainty otherwise bankruptcy or ultra high prices to cover the insurance?
The only absolute certainty is bankruptcy for the people who suffer severe effects from the vaccines. As for the £120,000, that helps but it will soon dry up.
If the risk of severe effects is so small then the pharmaceutical companies can easily afford it! Pfizer are used to paying out. They had to pay $2.3 billion for fraudulent marketing.
And if they suffer serious complications from Covid what happens financially ?
I suspect there will be serious financial hardship on par with suffering serious effects from the vaccine.
Are you expecting a different outcome financially?"I was expecting an answer not a question. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I will anticipate you cutting and pasting your answer
You sound like you want all medical treatments to be 100% safe and effective otherwise they cannot be deployed.
Is that what you want? Absolute certainty otherwise bankruptcy or ultra high prices to cover the insurance?
The only absolute certainty is bankruptcy for the people who suffer severe effects from the vaccines. As for the £120,000, that helps but it will soon dry up.
If the risk of severe effects is so small then the pharmaceutical companies can easily afford it! Pfizer are used to paying out. They had to pay $2.3 billion for fraudulent marketing.
And if they suffer serious complications from Covid what happens financially ?
I suspect there will be serious financial hardship on par with suffering serious effects from the vaccine.
Are you expecting a different outcome financially?
I was expecting an answer not a question."I gave you my answer - 'I suspect there will be serious financial hardship on par with suffering serious effects from the vaccine.' Then asked if you are expecting a different financial outcome. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I will anticipate you cutting and pasting your answer
You sound like you want all medical treatments to be 100% safe and effective otherwise they cannot be deployed.
Is that what you want? Absolute certainty otherwise bankruptcy or ultra high prices to cover the insurance?
The only absolute certainty is bankruptcy for the people who suffer severe effects from the vaccines. As for the £120,000, that helps but it will soon dry up.
If the risk of severe effects is so small then the pharmaceutical companies can easily afford it! Pfizer are used to paying out. They had to pay $2.3 billion for fraudulent marketing.
And if they suffer serious complications from Covid what happens financially ?
I suspect there will be serious financial hardship on par with suffering serious effects from the vaccine.
Are you expecting a different outcome financially?
I was expecting an answer not a question.
I gave you my answer - 'I suspect there will be serious financial hardship on par with suffering serious effects from the vaccine.'
Then asked if you are expecting a different financial outcome. "What information do you have to support your suspicion? Should the vaccine being withheld because it is impossible to insure against or will cost grounds for significant financial compensation? If there is something that can prevent serious illness and death but it is not made available, would that be a bad thing? Why are you anti-vax? What's the actual reason that you don't want people to get vaccinated against Covid? | |||
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) | |||
" I will anticipate you cutting and pasting your answer
You sound like you want all medical treatments to be 100% safe and effective otherwise they cannot be deployed.
Is that what you want? Absolute certainty otherwise bankruptcy or ultra high prices to cover the insurance?
The only absolute certainty is bankruptcy for the people who suffer severe effects from the vaccines. As for the £120,000, that helps but it will soon dry up.
If the risk of severe effects is so small then the pharmaceutical companies can easily afford it! Pfizer are used to paying out. They had to pay $2.3 billion for fraudulent marketing.
And if they suffer serious complications from Covid what happens financially ?
I suspect there will be serious financial hardship on par with suffering serious effects from the vaccine.
Are you expecting a different outcome financially?
I was expecting an answer not a question.
I gave you my answer - 'I suspect there will be serious financial hardship on par with suffering serious effects from the vaccine.'
Then asked if you are expecting a different financial outcome.
What information do you have to support your suspicion? Should the vaccine being withheld because it is impossible to insure against or will cost grounds for significant financial compensation?
If there is something that can prevent serious illness and death but it is not made available, would that be a bad thing?
Why are you anti-vax? What's the actual reason that you don't want people to get vaccinated against Covid?"'What information do you have to support your suspicion?' If someone is seriously ill in hospital, they are more than likely going to experience financial hardship because they are not working. 'Should the vaccine being withheld because it is impossible to insure against or will cost grounds for significant financial compensation?' The vaccine rollout will continue unabated because the manufacturers have immunity from public liability and the government have too much political capital invested in this project. Any enhanced compensation scheme could be considered as an admission that the vaccines are flawed. 'If there is something that can prevent serious illness and death but it is not made available, would that be a bad thing?' A loaded question deserves a loaded answer... you mean like cancer treatments, mental health care, end of life care etc. have not been made available? 'Why are you anti-vax?' At this moment in time, nothing has convinced me to get vaccinated against COVID. If that is considered to be anti-vax then I guess I must be anti-vax. However, I would describe myself as part of the control group. 'What's the actual reason that you don't want people to get vaccinated against Covid?' I've got no problem with people who want to get vaccinated. I have friends, family, work colleagues who have been single, double, boosted. It is their free choice. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Sore arm and wiped for a day. Pfizer" Same here with Pfizer. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I will anticipate you cutting and pasting your answer
You sound like you want all medical treatments to be 100% safe and effective otherwise they cannot be deployed.
Is that what you want? Absolute certainty otherwise bankruptcy or ultra high prices to cover the insurance?
The only absolute certainty is bankruptcy for the people who suffer severe effects from the vaccines. As for the £120,000, that helps but it will soon dry up.
If the risk of severe effects is so small then the pharmaceutical companies can easily afford it! Pfizer are used to paying out. They had to pay $2.3 billion for fraudulent marketing.
And if they suffer serious complications from Covid what happens financially ?
I suspect there will be serious financial hardship on par with suffering serious effects from the vaccine.
Are you expecting a different outcome financially?
I was expecting an answer not a question.
I gave you my answer - 'I suspect there will be serious financial hardship on par with suffering serious effects from the vaccine.'
Then asked if you are expecting a different financial outcome.
What information do you have to support your suspicion? Should the vaccine being withheld because it is impossible to insure against or will cost grounds for significant financial compensation?
If there is something that can prevent serious illness and death but it is not made available, would that be a bad thing?
Why are you anti-vax? What's the actual reason that you don't want people to get vaccinated against Covid?
'What information do you have to support your suspicion?'
If someone is seriously ill in hospital, they are more than likely going to experience financial hardship because they are not working.
'Should the vaccine being withheld because it is impossible to insure against or will cost grounds for significant financial compensation?'
The vaccine rollout will continue unabated because the manufacturers have immunity from public liability and the government have too much political capital invested in this project. Any enhanced compensation scheme could be considered as an admission that the vaccines are flawed.
'If there is something that can prevent serious illness and death but it is not made available, would that be a bad thing?'
A loaded question deserves a loaded answer... you mean like cancer treatments, mental health care, end of life care etc. have not been made available?
'Why are you anti-vax?'
At this moment in time, nothing has convinced me to get vaccinated against COVID. If that is considered to be anti-vax then I guess I must be anti-vax. However, I would describe myself as part of the control group.
'What's the actual reason that you don't want people to get vaccinated against Covid?'
I've got no problem with people who want to get vaccinated. I have friends, family, work colleagues who have been single, double, boosted.
It is their free choice."If a vaccine causes illness should people be compensated? Yes. There is a scheme in place. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? Which is the greater risk? It is not a "loaded question" at all and your "answer" was confusing. It is the converse of the one you are asking. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? There are so many questions about the, genuinely quite unique, line of argument against vaccination that you are pursuing and why you are so concerned I am content that you are offering yourself as a part of the control group. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? Are you concerned about its safety? Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If a vaccine causes illness should people be compensated? Yes. There is a scheme in place. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? Which is the greater risk? It is not a "loaded question" at all and your "answer" was confusing. It is the converse of the one you are asking. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? There are so many questions about the, genuinely quite unique, line of argument against vaccination that you are pursuing and why you are so concerned I am content that you are offering yourself as a part of the control group. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? Are you concerned about its safety? Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? Do you feel that the consequences are negligible?" Q. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? A. Are you really asking this question! Do you know how much it costs to provide 24/7 care for somebody? £120,000 will be gone in a year. Q. So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? A. U12.9 (COVID-19 vaccines causing adverse effects in therapeutic use, unspecified) - 13 U07.1 (COVID-19, virus identified) - 142,207 Q. Which is the greater risk? A. Risk is calculated by multiplying the threat by the vulnerability. If you have negligible risk from COVID, yet suffer an adverse reaction to the vaccine, then having the vaccine is a greater risk. Q. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? A. Nobody is liable for it. It is called market forces. Of course, a government can change the laws so the legal requirements disappear! Q. Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? A. I compared drug safety with aircraft safety. Both can cause death and injury so they are equivalent. A global pandemic should not affect safety standards. If your garage failed to tighten a brake pipe and blamed the global pandemic I'm sure you'd submit a complaint. Q. Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? A. I'm just questioning the narrative. Q. Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? A. ? Q. Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? A. I question their efficacy and I am concerned about the lack of long term test data and that the vaccines are being rolled out to younger people who are not at risk from COVID. Q. Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? A. I have no reason to like them. Q. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? A. No Q. Are you concerned about its safety? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? A. Yes. | |||
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) | |||
" Taken to A&E obviously, took blood confirmed from the results of that they believe it was a tonic clonic seizure caused by the vaccine (I have that in black and white on my discharge note) subsequently lost my driving licence for 1 year, because I can't drive lost my car allowance at work which is worth £6k. Currently pursuing medical negligence claim as there is quite a.bit of evidence already to suggest Pfizer causes seizures, now again for clarity it is approximately 1/50,000 this happens, however I would be as bold to say of you have a history of seizures or epilepsy then perhaps you are at higher risk and shouldn't be given it. So until I know what the possible side effects of any vaccine are no more jabs for me, I'm not anti-vax just have to protect myself, at 42 relatively healthy epilepsy is of higher risk than COVID, and if entirely honest the mental health knock from losing independence is of more risk than COVID. " I’m really sorry this happened to you, and I hope you get proper compensation. It’s this sort of thing that people should think about, and if they do get labelled an anti vaxxer. You’re risk of Covid was virtually zero, as is many millions of people between the ages of 12-50, yet they are being bullied and pressured into getting a vaccine that has a greater risk of side effects and an unknown risk of long term side effects. It also has zero effect of reducing spread, similar to masks and the label of the unvaccinated being responsible for everything is disgusting. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"You’re risk of Covid was virtually zero, as is many millions of people between the ages of 12-50, yet they are being bullied and pressured into getting a vaccine that has a greater risk of side effects and an unknown risk of long term side effects. It also has zero effect of reducing spread, similar to masks and the label of the unvaccinated being responsible for everything is disgusting." Stupid claim 1: You have virtually zero risk of covid if you're under 50 Stupid claim 2: The vaccines have greater risk of side effects than covid Stupid claim 3: Vaccines have zero effect on reducing spread Stupid claim 4: Masks have zero effect I don't mind people being sceptical. I am too. But don't talk utter bullshit. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I am pretty Pro-vaccine though I believe greatly it should be an individual choice and not mandated ever. I had AZ for my first two and then Pfizer for my third about a month and a bit ago. First two not too much of a problem felt like a bad cold and a bit lethargic. Pfizer had the jab on a Friday evening, felt like crap all of Saturday, light headed on Sunday. Come 8(ish) in the evening Sunday collapsed in the kitchen and had an epileptic seizure, now for clarity I do have epilepsy however I have been seizure free for a decade. Was found by my parents anything up to an hour I'd been on the floor, they called for medical assistance, came round when the paramedics were with me, at this point I could have been out of it for up to an hour and a half. Taken to A&E obviously, took blood confirmed from the results of that they believe it was a tonic clonic seizure caused by the vaccine (I have that in black and white on my discharge note) subsequently lost my driving licence for 1 year, because I can't drive lost my car allowance at work which is worth £6k. Currently pursuing medical negligence claim as there is quite a.bit of evidence already to suggest Pfizer causes seizures, now again for clarity it is approximately 1/50,000 this happens, however I would be as bold to say of you have a history of seizures or epilepsy then perhaps you are at higher risk and shouldn't be given it. So until I know what the possible side effects of any vaccine are no more jabs for me, I'm not anti-vax just have to protect myself, at 42 relatively healthy epilepsy is of higher risk than COVID, and if entirely honest the mental health knock from losing independence is of more risk than COVID. " Sorry to hear about the adverse reaction. Good luck pursuing your medical negligence claim. A quick search for 'tonic clonic seizure Pfizer vaccine' on the Internet shows yours is not an isolated case. Conversely the UK Epilepsy Society give no warnings of any increased risk of seizures on their Covid information page. Under the heading 'Are the COVID-19 vaccines safe for people with epilepsy?', they actually quote the Association of British Neurologists, saying 'all COVID-19 vaccines are safe for people with neurological conditions such as epilepsy'! It goes on to say... 'The COVID-19 vaccines approved for use in the UK have met the strict safety standards set by the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Authority (MHRA). So far, millions of people have received a COVID-19 vaccine and reports of serious side-effects have been very rare. We know that some people with epilepsy are worried about having a seizure after getting the vaccine. The MHRA monitors the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines, including any reports of seizures. They have confirmed to us that they haven't found any link between COVID-19 vaccines and seizures, or an increase in seizures after vaccination in people with epilepsy.' No warnings of a higher risk of seizures or advice to stay in contact with other people and not drive after having the vaccines. Just cozy reassuring statements saying vaccines are safe for people with epilepsy. That is negligence! | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Stupid claim 1: You have virtually zero risk of covid if you're under 50 22.8 in 100,000 mortality rate people for those between 40/50. A 99.988% survival rate. 7.4 in 100,000 between 30/40. That’s pretty close to zero no? So it’s not a stupid claim, also this includes people with existing underlying conditions. Stupid claim 2: The vaccines have greater risk of side effects than covid Nobody has any idea on the long term effects of vaccine after vaccine after vaccine. Even if the risk is 0.03% that’s greater than the risk of dying from Covid if you are under 50, so again not stupid. Stupid claim 3: Vaccines have zero effect on reducing spread Why are the two most vaccinated countries in the world (UK and Israel) having the biggest surge in cases and why isn’t Africa a complete disaster zone full of Covid? Stupid claim 4: Masks have zero effect A piece of flimsy cloth does nothing to stop particles getting through. A 3 layered medical grade mask does. Why did it take the WHO 6 months to work out of masks actually have any benefit? I don't mind people being sceptical. I am too. But don't talk utter bullshit." May I suggest you stop believing everything BBC and SKY tell you and do some proper research. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" Stupid claim 1: You have virtually zero risk of covid if you're under 50 22.8 in 100,000 mortality rate people for those between 40/50. A 99.988% survival rate. 7.4 in 100,000 between 30/40. That’s pretty close to zero no? So it’s not a stupid claim, also this includes people with existing underlying conditions. Stupid claim 2: The vaccines have greater risk of side effects than covid Nobody has any idea on the long term effects of vaccine after vaccine after vaccine. Even if the risk is 0.03% that’s greater than the risk of dying from Covid if you are under 50, so again not stupid. Stupid claim 3: Vaccines have zero effect on reducing spread Why are the two most vaccinated countries in the world (UK and Israel) having the biggest surge in cases and why isn’t Africa a complete disaster zone full of Covid? Stupid claim 4: Masks have zero effect A piece of flimsy cloth does nothing to stop particles getting through. A 3 layered medical grade mask does. Why did it take the WHO 6 months to work out of masks actually have any benefit? I don't mind people being sceptical. I am too. But don't talk utter bullshit. May I suggest you stop believing everything BBC and SKY tell you and do some proper research." Ah, the classic "Do your own research" Those Facebook doctors really do know their stuff | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If a vaccine causes illness should people be compensated? Yes. There is a scheme in place. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? Which is the greater risk? It is not a "loaded question" at all and your "answer" was confusing. It is the converse of the one you are asking. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? There are so many questions about the, genuinely quite unique, line of argument against vaccination that you are pursuing and why you are so concerned I am content that you are offering yourself as a part of the control group. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? Are you concerned about its safety? Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? Q. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? A. Are you really asking this question! Do you know how much it costs to provide 24/7 care for somebody? £120,000 will be gone in a year. Q. So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? A. U12.9 (COVID-19 vaccines causing adverse effects in therapeutic use, unspecified) - 13 U07.1 (COVID-19, virus identified) - 142,207 Q. Which is the greater risk? A. Risk is calculated by multiplying the threat by the vulnerability. If you have negligible risk from COVID, yet suffer an adverse reaction to the vaccine, then having the vaccine is a greater risk. Q. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? A. Nobody is liable for it. It is called market forces. Of course, a government can change the laws so the legal requirements disappear! Q. Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? A. I compared drug safety with aircraft safety. Both can cause death and injury so they are equivalent. A global pandemic should not affect safety standards. If your garage failed to tighten a brake pipe and blamed the global pandemic I'm sure you'd submit a complaint. Q. Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? A. I'm just questioning the narrative. Q. Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? A. ? Q. Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? A. I question their efficacy and I am concerned about the lack of long term test data and that the vaccines are being rolled out to younger people who are not at risk from COVID. Q. Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? A. I have no reason to like them. Q. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? A. No Q. Are you concerned about its safety? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? A. Yes." Are you trying to convince yourself ? Seems like you might have, congratulations and please leave others to make their own mind up by reading facts. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"had to miss mine, as dispite having both previous jabs, i still got covid, and i have to test clear for 30 days before i can have my booster, does make me wander why i had the first two tbh, still going to have the booster when able too tho, but does make me wander how effective the jabs are tbh, oh and stay safe people, covid sucks big stile It's not to prevent you getting covid but to make the impact of getting it less on your system that's the point of having the vaccine Yes I'm currently getting over having covid and I'm still suffering 2 weeks after testing positive but I'm grateful for having my vaccinations I actually dread to think how bad I could have been otherwise" maybe i wasnt very clear, im glad ive had 2 jabs so fr, infact i had four on doctors orders due to my weak immune system, and yes im sure it saved my life, however its not a very good vaccine if it doesnt stop it was my point, i had all the usual jabs at shcool, polio, etc cant remember the othere, and ive never had any of those illness, but ive had jabs and still got covid, so it doesnt work very well does it. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"had to miss mine, as dispite having both previous jabs, i still got covid, and i have to test clear for 30 days before i can have my booster, does make me wander why i had the first two tbh, still going to have the booster when able too tho, but does make me wander how effective the jabs are tbh, oh and stay safe people, covid sucks big stile It's not to prevent you getting covid but to make the impact of getting it less on your system that's the point of having the vaccine Yes I'm currently getting over having covid and I'm still suffering 2 weeks after testing positive but I'm grateful for having my vaccinations I actually dread to think how bad I could have been otherwise maybe i wasnt very clear, im glad ive had 2 jabs so fr, infact i had four on doctors orders due to my weak immune system, and yes im sure it saved my life, however its not a very good vaccine if it doesnt stop it was my point, i had all the usual jabs at shcool, polio, etc cant remember the othere, and ive never had any of those illness, but ive had jabs and still got covid, so it doesnt work very well does it." Vaccines don't stop viruses from getting inside you, all they do is help you fight it off. Most vaccines don't stop infection, only a very few do this. So its really a case of how your body deals with the infection. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If a vaccine causes illness should people be compensated? Yes. There is a scheme in place. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? Which is the greater risk? It is not a "loaded question" at all and your "answer" was confusing. It is the converse of the one you are asking. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? There are so many questions about the, genuinely quite unique, line of argument against vaccination that you are pursuing and why you are so concerned I am content that you are offering yourself as a part of the control group. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? Are you concerned about its safety? Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? Q. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? A. Are you really asking this question! Do you know how much it costs to provide 24/7 care for somebody? £120,000 will be gone in a year. Q. So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? A. U12.9 (COVID-19 vaccines causing adverse effects in therapeutic use, unspecified) - 13 U07.1 (COVID-19, virus identified) - 142,207 Q. Which is the greater risk? A. Risk is calculated by multiplying the threat by the vulnerability. If you have negligible risk from COVID, yet suffer an adverse reaction to the vaccine, then having the vaccine is a greater risk. Q. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? A. Nobody is liable for it. It is called market forces. Of course, a government can change the laws so the legal requirements disappear! Q. Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? A. I compared drug safety with aircraft safety. Both can cause death and injury so they are equivalent. A global pandemic should not affect safety standards. If your garage failed to tighten a brake pipe and blamed the global pandemic I'm sure you'd submit a complaint. Q. Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? A. I'm just questioning the narrative. Q. Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? A. ? Q. Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? A. I question their efficacy and I am concerned about the lack of long term test data and that the vaccines are being rolled out to younger people who are not at risk from COVID. Q. Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? A. I have no reason to like them. Q. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? A. No Q. Are you concerned about its safety? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? A. Yes. Are you trying to convince yourself ? Seems like you might have, congratulations and please leave others to make their own mind up by reading facts." Hilarious! Didn't you just suggest a Christmas truce on another thread? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"May I suggest you stop believing everything BBC and SKY tell you and do some proper research." Sure
Which pub do you use for your research? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A year from now, some people will be on their 6th shot, calling others 'selfish' for declining the 5th. LOL. Watch..." I’ve asked several times now, how often will the boosters be required? We know it’s likely to be more frequent than an annual jab, but what are we talking? Every 3 months? 4? 5? 6? Still can’t find an answer anywhere. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I’ve asked several times now, how often will the boosters be required? We know it’s likely to be more frequent than an annual jab, but what are we talking? Every 3 months? 4? 5? 6? Still can’t find an answer anywhere." As often as it takes to protect the NHS? Nothing else it seems matters. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Had Moderna on Monday. Felt an electric shock in my middle finger. Needle felt very thick and blunt. Nobody at the vax cntre aka the old Next store upstairs in Queensgate (shh, it's a secret!), had seen a reaction like that. Glad I've got a few weeks off. My arm was aching all night and I had no sleep. Energy levels were low today, just like flu. It honestly feels like an industrial stapler has been used on the injection zone." Feeling less sore, stiff and sleepy today. All hail the power of chicken soup and a single dose sleeping tablet. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A year from now, some people will be on their 6th shot, calling others 'selfish' for declining the 5th. LOL. Watch... I’ve asked several times now, how often will the boosters be required? We know it’s likely to be more frequent than an annual jab, but what are we talking? Every 3 months? 4? 5? 6? Still can’t find an answer anywhere." Noone knows. To make strong predictions when faced with uncertainty is foolish (albeit the kind of thing Boris would do!) The plan is going to have to change as the facts change. But that doesn't mean the vaccines don't have value. They just aren't a silver bullet that some alluded to. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A year from now, some people will be on their 6th shot, calling others 'selfish' for declining the 5th. LOL. Watch... I’ve asked several times now, how often will the boosters be required? We know it’s likely to be more frequent than an annual jab, but what are we talking? Every 3 months? 4? 5? 6? Still can’t find an answer anywhere." Sajid Javid told the Commons two weeks ago that the requirement is to be 2 jabs every 6 months. A peculiar way of saying a 'booster' every 3 months | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"had to miss mine, as dispite having both previous jabs, i still got covid, and i have to test clear for 30 days before i can have my booster, does make me wander why i had the first two tbh, still going to have the booster when able too tho, but does make me wander how effective the jabs are tbh, oh and stay safe people, covid sucks big stile It's not to prevent you getting covid but to make the impact of getting it less on your system that's the point of having the vaccine Yes I'm currently getting over having covid and I'm still suffering 2 weeks after testing positive but I'm grateful for having my vaccinations I actually dread to think how bad I could have been otherwise maybe i wasnt very clear, im glad ive had 2 jabs so fr, infact i had four on doctors orders due to my weak immune system, and yes im sure it saved my life, however its not a very good vaccine if it doesnt stop it was my point, i had all the usual jabs at shcool, polio, etc cant remember the othere, and ive never had any of those illness, but ive had jabs and still got covid, so it doesnt work very well does it. Vaccines don't stop viruses from getting inside you, all they do is help you fight it off. Most vaccines don't stop infection, only a very few do this. So its really a case of how your body deals with the infection. " as i said ive had more jabs than most due to my weak imune system, as i had lymphoma a few years ago, bloody catch anything going now, never used to get anything | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A year from now, some people will be on their 6th shot, calling others 'selfish' for declining the 5th. LOL. Watch... I’ve asked several times now, how often will the boosters be required? We know it’s likely to be more frequent than an annual jab, but what are we talking? Every 3 months? 4? 5? 6? Still can’t find an answer anywhere." this booster came 6 months after peoples second due to the waning protection. As we get infected and vaccinated protection gets better and better. so I would guess at least 6 months or longer. Obviously things can change. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"What ever Boris tell us to do, it won't apply to him. So let's all do the conga and put up a meet-me-now at his place on Xmas Eve and NYE "
I'm pretty sure I have a mere mortal immune system, not a BoJo one, so no ta | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"this booster came 6 months after peoples second due to the waning protection. As we get infected and vaccinated protection gets better and better. so I would guess at least 6 months or longer. Obviously things can change." According to another post, 'the mRNA vaccines send messages to train our immune systems to recognise the virus to stimulate the production of antibodies and T cells'. That sounds like the opposite to waning protection. In fact it describes a robust and future proof solution. So why isn't it working? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"this booster came 6 months after peoples second due to the waning protection. As we get infected and vaccinated protection gets better and better. so I would guess at least 6 months or longer. Obviously things can change. According to another post, 'the mRNA vaccines send messages to train our immune systems to recognise the virus to stimulate the production of antibodies and T cells'. That sounds like the opposite to waning protection. In fact it describes a robust and future proof solution. So why isn't it working?" as I understand bit the are different types of B and T cells. The vaccines are good at creating cells that can fight today, but less good at producing memory cells that can get the immune system up and running in the future. So we have a bunch of trained soliders today but no training camps for future wars. Natural immunity can be better at producing memory cells. But the level of immunity is varied across people (I think more so than vaccined immunity). | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"this booster came 6 months after peoples second due to the waning protection. As we get infected and vaccinated protection gets better and better. so I would guess at least 6 months or longer. Obviously things can change. According to another post, 'the mRNA vaccines send messages to train our immune systems to recognise the virus to stimulate the production of antibodies and T cells'. That sounds like the opposite to waning protection. In fact it describes a robust and future proof solution. So why isn't it working?" thats a good question and not being a virologist I don't know. It seems to vary depending on the person (age, gender, whether they smoke etc). But all vaccines have some kind of waning protection, but it never goes to zero. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If a vaccine causes illness should people be compensated? Yes. There is a scheme in place. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? Which is the greater risk? It is not a "loaded question" at all and your "answer" was confusing. It is the converse of the one you are asking. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? There are so many questions about the, genuinely quite unique, line of argument against vaccination that you are pursuing and why you are so concerned I am content that you are offering yourself as a part of the control group. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? Are you concerned about its safety? Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? Q. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? A. Are you really asking this question! Do you know how much it costs to provide 24/7 care for somebody? £120,000 will be gone in a year. Q. So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? A. U12.9 (COVID-19 vaccines causing adverse effects in therapeutic use, unspecified) - 13 U07.1 (COVID-19, virus identified) - 142,207 Q. Which is the greater risk? A. Risk is calculated by multiplying the threat by the vulnerability. If you have negligible risk from COVID, yet suffer an adverse reaction to the vaccine, then having the vaccine is a greater risk. Q. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? A. Nobody is liable for it. It is called market forces. Of course, a government can change the laws so the legal requirements disappear! Q. Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? A. I compared drug safety with aircraft safety. Both can cause death and injury so they are equivalent. A global pandemic should not affect safety standards. If your garage failed to tighten a brake pipe and blamed the global pandemic I'm sure you'd submit a complaint. Q. Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? A. I'm just questioning the narrative. Q. Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? A. ? Q. Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? A. I question their efficacy and I am concerned about the lack of long term test data and that the vaccines are being rolled out to younger people who are not at risk from COVID. Q. Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? A. I have no reason to like them. Q. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? A. No Q. Are you concerned about its safety? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? A. Yes." In the end, your attitude is driven by your last two answers. You do not actually seem to believe that Covid 19 constitutes any risk. Certainly you seem to feel that you are invulnerable to any serious consequences, which through blind luck is possible. I do not know if you believe, nor care, of it represents a serious risk to anyone else. From that perspective it is unlikely that you will feel that a global pandemic requires any change in behaviour or even exists. If you hold this belief after all that has happened so far then any further discussion is pointless. If the vaccine compensation scheme is inadequate then you should lobby to change it for all vaccines, surely? Unlimited liability should be in place for anything that any company ever does. I guess the consequences of this do not occur to you or why vaccination may be considered a common good. The greater risk, even in a lower risk group remains catching Covid-19. Check it out. Of course, that is taking a completely self-centred view. The risk to society in not being vaccinated is one of those things that may not register for some people. Generally speaking, the lives of hundreds of people per day are not being lost when an aircraft is not available for use. Unlike a vaccine. So, not at all similar. Regardless in either the design of an aircraft or that of a drug a sales price is set and a production and sales ramp up put in place to manage cashflow and insurance payments to allow for a managed risk mitigation process. Even though you may not feel that there has been any urgency, national governments have so a different process was put in place. I guess that you have no alternative but to accept it. The same amount of testing has been conducted for these vaccines as any drug rollout. I suppose you are unaware of which steps in the process were changed. It was not the testing breadth or duration of testing. Again, as you understand less about the process than the certification authorities and vaccine developers you will just have to abstain from all new drug developments, and possibly some existing ones as you have become aware that they are developed in a manner unacceptable to you? As correlation and causation have been linked to the reduction in serious illness and infection with the vaccination then no information is or will ever be available that satisfies your requirements. Happily, your opinion will not change the current medical and scientific understanding. I can only hope that you do not create doubt in others such that they do not get vaccinated and become ill or that you carelessly infect others who become ill or die. I guess we'll never know. Cheerio. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If a vaccine causes illness should people be compensated? Yes. There is a scheme in place. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? Which is the greater risk? It is not a "loaded question" at all and your "answer" was confusing. It is the converse of the one you are asking. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? There are so many questions about the, genuinely quite unique, line of argument against vaccination that you are pursuing and why you are so concerned I am content that you are offering yourself as a part of the control group. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? Are you concerned about its safety? Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? Q. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? A. Are you really asking this question! Do you know how much it costs to provide 24/7 care for somebody? £120,000 will be gone in a year. Q. So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? A. U12.9 (COVID-19 vaccines causing adverse effects in therapeutic use, unspecified) - 13 U07.1 (COVID-19, virus identified) - 142,207 Q. Which is the greater risk? A. Risk is calculated by multiplying the threat by the vulnerability. If you have negligible risk from COVID, yet suffer an adverse reaction to the vaccine, then having the vaccine is a greater risk. Q. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? A. Nobody is liable for it. It is called market forces. Of course, a government can change the laws so the legal requirements disappear! Q. Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? A. I compared drug safety with aircraft safety. Both can cause death and injury so they are equivalent. A global pandemic should not affect safety standards. If your garage failed to tighten a brake pipe and blamed the global pandemic I'm sure you'd submit a complaint. Q. Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? A. I'm just questioning the narrative. Q. Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? A. ? Q. Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? A. I question their efficacy and I am concerned about the lack of long term test data and that the vaccines are being rolled out to younger people who are not at risk from COVID. Q. Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? A. I have no reason to like them. Q. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? A. No Q. Are you concerned about its safety? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? A. Yes. In the end, your attitude is driven by your last two answers. You do not actually seem to believe that Covid 19 constitutes any risk. Certainly you seem to feel that you are invulnerable to any serious consequences, which through blind luck is possible. I do not know if you believe, nor care, of it represents a serious risk to anyone else. From that perspective it is unlikely that you will feel that a global pandemic requires any change in behaviour or even exists. If you hold this belief after all that has happened so far then any further discussion is pointless. If the vaccine compensation scheme is inadequate then you should lobby to change it for all vaccines, surely? Unlimited liability should be in place for anything that any company ever does. I guess the consequences of this do not occur to you or why vaccination may be considered a common good. The greater risk, even in a lower risk group remains catching Covid-19. Check it out. Of course, that is taking a completely self-centred view. The risk to society in not being vaccinated is one of those things that may not register for some people. Generally speaking, the lives of hundreds of people per day are not being lost when an aircraft is not available for use. Unlike a vaccine. So, not at all similar. Regardless in either the design of an aircraft or that of a drug a sales price is set and a production and sales ramp up put in place to manage cashflow and insurance payments to allow for a managed risk mitigation process. Even though you may not feel that there has been any urgency, national governments have so a different process was put in place. I guess that you have no alternative but to accept it. The same amount of testing has been conducted for these vaccines as any drug rollout. I suppose you are unaware of which steps in the process were changed. It was not the testing breadth or duration of testing. Again, as you understand less about the process than the certification authorities and vaccine developers you will just have to abstain from all new drug developments, and possibly some existing ones as you have become aware that they are developed in a manner unacceptable to you? As correlation and causation have been linked to the reduction in serious illness and infection with the vaccination then no information is or will ever be available that satisfies your requirements. Happily, your opinion will not change the current medical and scientific understanding. I can only hope that you do not create doubt in others such that they do not get vaccinated and become ill or that you carelessly infect others who become ill or die. I guess we'll never know. Cheerio." The same amount of time has not gone into testing the vaccines as other medication. Everyone knows that. Stop spreading misinformation. Its comments like that that cause problems for some who are not antivaxers but just want ALL the data and information before they take the jab. Whereas on the other hand, I am quite happy to listen to Sajid Javid who confirmed on the news that 'We know that the first 2 vaccines don't work, but the get booster' and take his comment also with a pinch of salt. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"this booster came 6 months after peoples second due to the waning protection. As we get infected and vaccinated protection gets better and better. so I would guess at least 6 months or longer. Obviously things can change. According to another post, 'the mRNA vaccines send messages to train our immune systems to recognise the virus to stimulate the production of antibodies and T cells'. That sounds like the opposite to waning protection. In fact it describes a robust and future proof solution. So why isn't it working?as I understand bit the are different types of B and T cells. The vaccines are good at creating cells that can fight today, but less good at producing memory cells that can get the immune system up and running in the future. So we have a bunch of trained soliders today but no training camps for future wars. Natural immunity can be better at producing memory cells. But the level of immunity is varied across people (I think more so than vaccined immunity). " This seems a reasonable summary. A bit more information here. Natural immunity being better is not necessarily true, I believe, but you have to catch the disease to develop natural immunity so... Some more information here in a readable form: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02532-4 | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"A year from now, some people will be on their 6th shot, calling others 'selfish' for declining the 5th. LOL. Watch... I’ve asked several times now, how often will the boosters be required? We know it’s likely to be more frequent than an annual jab, but what are we talking? Every 3 months? 4? 5? 6? Still can’t find an answer anywhere. this booster came 6 months after peoples second due to the waning protection. As we get infected and vaccinated protection gets better and better. so I would guess at least 6 months or longer. Obviously things can change." Israel now on booster 4, Germany have theirs on order for April, so the answer seems to be every 3-4 months Or until people realise that isn't really sustainable long-term for the entire adult population of a country But fuck knows how long it will take for that to happen | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If a vaccine causes illness should people be compensated? Yes. There is a scheme in place. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? Which is the greater risk? It is not a "loaded question" at all and your "answer" was confusing. It is the converse of the one you are asking. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? There are so many questions about the, genuinely quite unique, line of argument against vaccination that you are pursuing and why you are so concerned I am content that you are offering yourself as a part of the control group. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? Are you concerned about its safety? Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? Q. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? A. Are you really asking this question! Do you know how much it costs to provide 24/7 care for somebody? £120,000 will be gone in a year. Q. So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? A. U12.9 (COVID-19 vaccines causing adverse effects in therapeutic use, unspecified) - 13 U07.1 (COVID-19, virus identified) - 142,207 Q. Which is the greater risk? A. Risk is calculated by multiplying the threat by the vulnerability. If you have negligible risk from COVID, yet suffer an adverse reaction to the vaccine, then having the vaccine is a greater risk. Q. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? A. Nobody is liable for it. It is called market forces. Of course, a government can change the laws so the legal requirements disappear! Q. Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? A. I compared drug safety with aircraft safety. Both can cause death and injury so they are equivalent. A global pandemic should not affect safety standards. If your garage failed to tighten a brake pipe and blamed the global pandemic I'm sure you'd submit a complaint. Q. Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? A. I'm just questioning the narrative. Q. Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? A. ? Q. Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? A. I question their efficacy and I am concerned about the lack of long term test data and that the vaccines are being rolled out to younger people who are not at risk from COVID. Q. Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? A. I have no reason to like them. Q. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? A. No Q. Are you concerned about its safety? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? A. Yes. In the end, your attitude is driven by your last two answers. You do not actually seem to believe that Covid 19 constitutes any risk. Certainly you seem to feel that you are invulnerable to any serious consequences, which through blind luck is possible. I do not know if you believe, nor care, of it represents a serious risk to anyone else. From that perspective it is unlikely that you will feel that a global pandemic requires any change in behaviour or even exists. If you hold this belief after all that has happened so far then any further discussion is pointless. If the vaccine compensation scheme is inadequate then you should lobby to change it for all vaccines, surely? Unlimited liability should be in place for anything that any company ever does. I guess the consequences of this do not occur to you or why vaccination may be considered a common good. The greater risk, even in a lower risk group remains catching Covid-19. Check it out. Of course, that is taking a completely self-centred view. The risk to society in not being vaccinated is one of those things that may not register for some people. Generally speaking, the lives of hundreds of people per day are not being lost when an aircraft is not available for use. Unlike a vaccine. So, not at all similar. Regardless in either the design of an aircraft or that of a drug a sales price is set and a production and sales ramp up put in place to manage cashflow and insurance payments to allow for a managed risk mitigation process. Even though you may not feel that there has been any urgency, national governments have so a different process was put in place. I guess that you have no alternative but to accept it. The same amount of testing has been conducted for these vaccines as any drug rollout. I suppose you are unaware of which steps in the process were changed. It was not the testing breadth or duration of testing. Again, as you understand less about the process than the certification authorities and vaccine developers you will just have to abstain from all new drug developments, and possibly some existing ones as you have become aware that they are developed in a manner unacceptable to you? As correlation and causation have been linked to the reduction in serious illness and infection with the vaccination then no information is or will ever be available that satisfies your requirements. Happily, your opinion will not change the current medical and scientific understanding. I can only hope that you do not create doubt in others such that they do not get vaccinated and become ill or that you carelessly infect others who become ill or die. I guess we'll never know. Cheerio. The same amount of time has not gone into testing the vaccines as other medication. Everyone knows that. Stop spreading misinformation. Its comments like that that cause problems for some who are not antivaxers but just want ALL the data and information before they take the jab. Whereas on the other hand, I am quite happy to listen to Sajid Javid who confirmed on the news that 'We know that the first 2 vaccines don't work, but the get booster' and take his comment also with a pinch of salt. "I am not the one spreading misinformation. Time taken is not the same as the amount of testing. You really should look it up yourself, bit if you do not wish to, here is a good summary: https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/is-the-covid19-vaccine-safe Some key points: "The relatively quick development of these vaccines does not mean safety measures were skipped. There are several reasons why the COVID-19 vaccines were developed faster than other vaccines: The technologies used to develop the COVID-19 vaccines have been in development for years to prepare for outbreaks of infectious viruses. The manufacturing processes were ready very early in the COVID-19 pandemic. Countries shared genetic information when it was available about SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19, which gave vaccine developers an early start at finding a vaccine. The testing processes for the vaccines didn’t skip any steps, but the vaccine developers conducted some stages of the process simultaneously to gather as much data as quickly as possible. Governments gave money to vaccine developers in advance, so the companies had resources they needed. Some types of COVID-19 vaccines were created using messenger RNA (mRNA), a new technology that allows a faster approach than the traditional way vaccines are made. Social media enabled companies to reach out to and enroll study volunteers, and plenty of people wanted to help, so there were enough research participants to test the COVID-19 vaccines. Because SARS-CoV-2 is so contagious and widespread, many volunteers who got the vaccines were exposed to the virus, and with so many exposures, it took a shorter time to see if the vaccines worked. Companies began manufacturing vaccines ahead of their authorization or approval so some supplies would be ready if authorization occurred." | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That sounds like the opposite to waning protection. In fact it describes a robust and future proof solution. So why isn't it working? thats a good question and not being a virologist I don't know. It seems to vary depending on the person (age, gender, whether they smoke etc). But all vaccines have some kind of waning protection, but it never goes to zero." I can understand the waning in non mRNA vaccines. But the mRNA are 'next generation', and represent a new dawn in health care science, an opportunity to build back better. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" I can understand the waning in non mRNA vaccines. But the mRNA are 'next generation', and represent a new dawn in health care science, an opportunity to build back better." Next generation but old technology: 'In late 1987, Robert Malone performed a landmark experiment. He mixed strands of messenger RNA with droplets of fat, to create a kind of molecular stew. Human cells bathed in this genetic gumbo absorbed the mRNA, and began producing proteins from it1. Realizing that this discovery might have far-reaching potential in medicine, Malone, a graduate student at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, California, later jotted down some notes, which he signed and dated. If cells could create proteins from mRNA delivered into them, he wrote on 11 January 1988, it might be possible to “treat RNA as a drug”. Another member of the Salk lab signed the notes, too, for posterity. Later that year, Malone’s experiments showed that frog embryos absorbed such mRNA2. It was the first time anyone had used fatty droplets to ease mRNA’s passage into a living organism. Those experiments were a stepping stone towards two of the most important and profitable vaccines in history: the mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines given to hundreds of millions of people around the world. Global sales of these are expected to top US$50 billion in 2021 alone.' | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If a vaccine causes illness should people be compensated? Yes. There is a scheme in place. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? Which is the greater risk? It is not a "loaded question" at all and your "answer" was confusing. It is the converse of the one you are asking. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? There are so many questions about the, genuinely quite unique, line of argument against vaccination that you are pursuing and why you are so concerned I am content that you are offering yourself as a part of the control group. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? Are you concerned about its safety? Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? Q. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? A. Are you really asking this question! Do you know how much it costs to provide 24/7 care for somebody? £120,000 will be gone in a year. Q. So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? A. U12.9 (COVID-19 vaccines causing adverse effects in therapeutic use, unspecified) - 13 U07.1 (COVID-19, virus identified) - 142,207 Q. Which is the greater risk? A. Risk is calculated by multiplying the threat by the vulnerability. If you have negligible risk from COVID, yet suffer an adverse reaction to the vaccine, then having the vaccine is a greater risk. Q. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? A. Nobody is liable for it. It is called market forces. Of course, a government can change the laws so the legal requirements disappear! Q. Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? A. I compared drug safety with aircraft safety. Both can cause death and injury so they are equivalent. A global pandemic should not affect safety standards. If your garage failed to tighten a brake pipe and blamed the global pandemic I'm sure you'd submit a complaint. Q. Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? A. I'm just questioning the narrative. Q. Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? A. ? Q. Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? A. I question their efficacy and I am concerned about the lack of long term test data and that the vaccines are being rolled out to younger people who are not at risk from COVID. Q. Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? A. I have no reason to like them. Q. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? A. No Q. Are you concerned about its safety? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? A. Yes. In the end, your attitude is driven by your last two answers. You do not actually seem to believe that Covid 19 constitutes any risk. Certainly you seem to feel that you are invulnerable to any serious consequences, which through blind luck is possible. I do not know if you believe, nor care, of it represents a serious risk to anyone else. From that perspective it is unlikely that you will feel that a global pandemic requires any change in behaviour or even exists. If you hold this belief after all that has happened so far then any further discussion is pointless. If the vaccine compensation scheme is inadequate then you should lobby to change it for all vaccines, surely? Unlimited liability should be in place for anything that any company ever does. I guess the consequences of this do not occur to you or why vaccination may be considered a common good. The greater risk, even in a lower risk group remains catching Covid-19. Check it out. Of course, that is taking a completely self-centred view. The risk to society in not being vaccinated is one of those things that may not register for some people. Generally speaking, the lives of hundreds of people per day are not being lost when an aircraft is not available for use. Unlike a vaccine. So, not at all similar. Regardless in either the design of an aircraft or that of a drug a sales price is set and a production and sales ramp up put in place to manage cashflow and insurance payments to allow for a managed risk mitigation process. Even though you may not feel that there has been any urgency, national governments have so a different process was put in place. I guess that you have no alternative but to accept it. The same amount of testing has been conducted for these vaccines as any drug rollout. I suppose you are unaware of which steps in the process were changed. It was not the testing breadth or duration of testing. Again, as you understand less about the process than the certification authorities and vaccine developers you will just have to abstain from all new drug developments, and possibly some existing ones as you have become aware that they are developed in a manner unacceptable to you? As correlation and causation have been linked to the reduction in serious illness and infection with the vaccination then no information is or will ever be available that satisfies your requirements. Happily, your opinion will not change the current medical and scientific understanding. I can only hope that you do not create doubt in others such that they do not get vaccinated and become ill or that you carelessly infect others who become ill or die. I guess we'll never know. Cheerio. The same amount of time has not gone into testing the vaccines as other medication. Everyone knows that. Stop spreading misinformation. Its comments like that that cause problems for some who are not antivaxers but just want ALL the data and information before they take the jab. Whereas on the other hand, I am quite happy to listen to Sajid Javid who confirmed on the news that 'We know that the first 2 vaccines don't work, but the get booster' and take his comment also with a pinch of salt.
I am not the one spreading misinformation. Time taken is not the same as the amount of testing. You really should look it up yourself, bit if you do not wish to, here is a good summary:
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/is-the-covid19-vaccine-safe
Some key points:
"The relatively quick development of these vaccines does not mean safety measures were skipped. There are several reasons why the COVID-19 vaccines were developed faster than other vaccines:
The technologies used to develop the COVID-19 vaccines have been in development for years to prepare for outbreaks of infectious viruses. The manufacturing processes were ready very early in the COVID-19 pandemic.
Countries shared genetic information when it was available about SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19, which gave vaccine developers an early start at finding a vaccine.
The testing processes for the vaccines didn’t skip any steps, but the vaccine developers conducted some stages of the process simultaneously to gather as much data as quickly as possible.
Governments gave money to vaccine developers in advance, so the companies had resources they needed.
Some types of COVID-19 vaccines were created using messenger RNA (mRNA), a new technology that allows a faster approach than the traditional way vaccines are made.
Social media enabled companies to reach out to and enroll study volunteers, and plenty of people wanted to help, so there were enough research participants to test the COVID-19 vaccines.
Because SARS-CoV-2 is so contagious and widespread, many volunteers who got the vaccines were exposed to the virus, and with so many exposures, it took a shorter time to see if the vaccines worked.
Companies began manufacturing vaccines ahead of their authorization or approval so some supplies would be ready if authorization occurred.""Thanks for the link. I had a look. The main paragraph was this....'Yes. All of the coronavirus vaccines approved or authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are very safe and also very good at preventing serious or fatal cases of COVID-19. The risk of serious side effects associated with these vaccines is very small.' I wonder why then if the vaccines are safe, why are the CDC currently requesting they should be allowed to release the trial data in 55 years time. If they are so safe, why not release the full document now in relation to Pfizer? It is after all one of the main players in terms of vaccines now that J&J and Astra zeneca have dwindled away. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" If a vaccine causes illness should people be compensated? Yes. There is a scheme in place. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? Which is the greater risk? It is not a "loaded question" at all and your "answer" was confusing. It is the converse of the one you are asking. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? There are so many questions about the, genuinely quite unique, line of argument against vaccination that you are pursuing and why you are so concerned I am content that you are offering yourself as a part of the control group. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? Are you concerned about its safety? Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? Q. Why should the compensation be more than £120,000? What makes you 'suspect' that the consequences would require more than this? A. Are you really asking this question! Do you know how much it costs to provide 24/7 care for somebody? £120,000 will be gone in a year. Q. So far, there have been 4 deaths attributed to the vaccine. How many deaths have been attributed to Covid? A. U12.9 (COVID-19 vaccines causing adverse effects in therapeutic use, unspecified) - 13 U07.1 (COVID-19, virus identified) - 142,207 Q. Which is the greater risk? A. Risk is calculated by multiplying the threat by the vulnerability. If you have negligible risk from COVID, yet suffer an adverse reaction to the vaccine, then having the vaccine is a greater risk. Q. If a treatment exists for Covid or any other disease but the legal requirements make it too expensive to use and people die as a consequence, who is liable for that? A. Nobody is liable for it. It is called market forces. Of course, a government can change the laws so the legal requirements disappear! Q. Vaccine development in a global pandemic is not really equivalent to aircraft design is it? A. I compared drug safety with aircraft safety. Both can cause death and injury so they are equivalent. A global pandemic should not affect safety standards. If your garage failed to tighten a brake pipe and blamed the global pandemic I'm sure you'd submit a complaint. Q. Why are you questioning the circumstances around the legal situation about the vaccine so vociferously? A. I'm just questioning the narrative. Q. Why is it a problem for you that requires resolution? A. ? Q. Are you implying that the vaccines are unsafe? A. I question their efficacy and I am concerned about the lack of long term test data and that the vaccines are being rolled out to younger people who are not at risk from COVID. Q. Do you not like pharmaceutical companies? A. I have no reason to like them. Q. The reduction in Covid infections and hospital admissions after the vaccine rollout does not convince you of its efficacy? A. No Q. Are you concerned about its safety? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that you have a small risk of catching Covid? A. Yes Q. Do you feel that the consequences are negligible? A. Yes. In the end, your attitude is driven by your last two answers. You do not actually seem to believe that Covid 19 constitutes any risk. Certainly you seem to feel that you are invulnerable to any serious consequences, which through blind luck is possible. I do not know if you believe, nor care, of it represents a serious risk to anyone else. From that perspective it is unlikely that you will feel that a global pandemic requires any change in behaviour or even exists. If you hold this belief after all that has happened so far then any further discussion is pointless. If the vaccine compensation scheme is inadequate then you should lobby to change it for all vaccines, surely? Unlimited liability should be in place for anything that any company ever does. I guess the consequences of this do not occur to you or why vaccination may be considered a common good. The greater risk, even in a lower risk group remains catching Covid-19. Check it out. Of course, that is taking a completely self-centred view. The risk to society in not being vaccinated is one of those things that may not register for some people. Generally speaking, the lives of hundreds of people per day are not being lost when an aircraft is not available for use. Unlike a vaccine. So, not at all similar. Regardless in either the design of an aircraft or that of a drug a sales price is set and a production and sales ramp up put in place to manage cashflow and insurance payments to allow for a managed risk mitigation process. Even though you may not feel that there has been any urgency, national governments have so a different process was put in place. I guess that you have no alternative but to accept it. The same amount of testing has been conducted for these vaccines as any drug rollout. I suppose you are unaware of which steps in the process were changed. It was not the testing breadth or duration of testing. Again, as you understand less about the process than the certification authorities and vaccine developers you will just have to abstain from all new drug developments, and possibly some existing ones as you have become aware that they are developed in a manner unacceptable to you? As correlation and causation have been linked to the reduction in serious illness and infection with the vaccination then no information is or will ever be available that satisfies your requirements. Happily, your opinion will not change the current medical and scientific understanding. I can only hope that you do not create doubt in others such that they do not get vaccinated and become ill or that you carelessly infect others who become ill or die. I guess we'll never know. Cheerio. The same amount of time has not gone into testing the vaccines as other medication. Everyone knows that. Stop spreading misinformation. Its comments like that that cause problems for some who are not antivaxers but just want ALL the data and information before they take the jab. Whereas on the other hand, I am quite happy to listen to Sajid Javid who confirmed on the news that 'We know that the first 2 vaccines don't work, but the get booster' and take his comment also with a pinch of salt.
I am not the one spreading misinformation. Time taken is not the same as the amount of testing. You really should look it up yourself, bit if you do not wish to, here is a good summary:
https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/is-the-covid19-vaccine-safe
Some key points:
"The relatively quick development of these vaccines does not mean safety measures were skipped. There are several reasons why the COVID-19 vaccines were developed faster than other vaccines:
The technologies used to develop the COVID-19 vaccines have been in development for years to prepare for outbreaks of infectious viruses. The manufacturing processes were ready very early in the COVID-19 pandemic.
Countries shared genetic information when it was available about SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19, which gave vaccine developers an early start at finding a vaccine.
The testing processes for the vaccines didn’t skip any steps, but the vaccine developers conducted some stages of the process simultaneously to gather as much data as quickly as possible.
Governments gave money to vaccine developers in advance, so the companies had resources they needed.
Some types of COVID-19 vaccines were created using messenger RNA (mRNA), a new technology that allows a faster approach than the traditional way vaccines are made.
Social media enabled companies to reach out to and enroll study volunteers, and plenty of people wanted to help, so there were enough research participants to test the COVID-19 vaccines.
Because SARS-CoV-2 is so contagious and widespread, many volunteers who got the vaccines were exposed to the virus, and with so many exposures, it took a shorter time to see if the vaccines worked.
Companies began manufacturing vaccines ahead of their authorization or approval so some supplies would be ready if authorization occurred."
Thanks for the link. I had a look.
The main paragraph was this....'Yes. All of the coronavirus vaccines approved or authorized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) are very safe and also very good at preventing serious or fatal cases of COVID-19. The risk of serious side effects associated with these vaccines is very small.'
I wonder why then if the vaccines are safe, why are the CDC currently requesting they should be allowed to release the trial data in 55 years time.
If they are so safe, why not release the full document now in relation to Pfizer?
It is after all one of the main players in terms of vaccines now that J&J and Astra zeneca have dwindled away. "So the same amount of testing has been conducted. That is clear. Good. You can "wonder" thereby implying that there is a conspiracy to harm us with vaccines developed to reduce the severity of a global pandemic or just find out why the 55 year release has been suggested. It is not at the end of 55years, it is the rate that the FDA thinks that it can release the data after checking. It is about practicality. "Justice Department lawyers representing the FDA note in court papers that the plaintiffs are seeking a huge amount of vaccine-related material – about 329,000 pages." "But the FDA can’t simply turn the documents over wholesale. The records must be reviewed to redact “confidential business and trade secret information of Pfizer or BioNTech and personal privacy information of patients who participated in clinical trials,” wrote DOJ lawyers in a joint status report filed Monday. The FDA proposes releasing 500 pages per month on a rolling basis, noting that the branch that would handle the review has only 10 employees and is currently processing about 400 other FOIA requests. “By processing and making interim responses based on 500-page increments, FDA will be able to provide more pages to more requesters, thus avoiding a system where a few large requests monopolize finite processing resources and where fewer requesters’ requests are being fulfilled,” DOJ lawyers wrote, pointing to other court decisions where the 500-page-per-month schedule was upheld." "To meet the plaintiffs’ proposed FOIA deadline, the FDA would have to process a daunting 80,000 pages a month." https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/wait-what-fda-wants-55-years-process-foia-request-over-vaccine-data-2021-11-18/ | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"and from the same website, its good to see they post the side effects from a Pfizer shot... https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseases/coronavirus/covid-vaccine-side-effects If i am putting something in my body, I want to make an informed choice. Not just take a shot so I can go on holiday as a lot of people I know have said. I think rather than pushing the vaccines which are helping some, we should have more transparency over the reactions etc rather than just dismissing everything and pinning all hope on the booster, and then a 4th shot and then a 5th shot etc." You seem to have found the side effects and you are given a leaflet at the time of vaccination and look it up yourself at any time. I'm not sure what the problem is. The vaccines help everyone as they also reduce beds being used by the majority unvaccinated Covid patients and requiring which would enable other medical conditions to be treated. There is also a higher chance of new variants developing in the unvaccinated population. It helps anybody susceptible to the virus from becoming as seriously ill as they might have been unvaccinated. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Reality is breaking through and the vaccine/lockdown extremists are losing control of the narrative" The daily COVID UK death rate dropped from the thousands before vaccinations to the hundreds after. I guess I'll just need to be content with that, then. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I am pretty Pro-vaccine though I believe greatly it should be an individual choice and not mandated ever. I had AZ for my first two and then Pfizer for my third about a month and a bit ago. First two not too much of a problem felt like a bad cold and a bit lethargic. Pfizer had the jab on a Friday evening, felt like crap all of Saturday, light headed on Sunday. Come 8(ish) in the evening Sunday collapsed in the kitchen and had an epileptic seizure, now for clarity I do have epilepsy however I have been seizure free for a decade. Was found by my parents anything up to an hour I'd been on the floor, they called for medical assistance, came round when the paramedics were with me, at this point I could have been out of it for up to an hour and a half. Taken to A&E obviously, took blood confirmed from the results of that they believe it was a tonic clonic seizure caused by the vaccine (I have that in black and white on my discharge note) subsequently lost my driving licence for 1 year, because I can't drive lost my car allowance at work which is worth £6k. Currently pursuing medical negligence claim as there is quite a.bit of evidence already to suggest Pfizer causes seizures, now again for clarity it is approximately 1/50,000 this happens, however I would be as bold to say of you have a history of seizures or epilepsy then perhaps you are at higher risk and shouldn't be given it. So until I know what the possible side effects of any vaccine are no more jabs for me, I'm not anti-vax just have to protect myself, at 42 relatively healthy epilepsy is of higher risk than COVID, and if entirely honest the mental health knock from losing independence is of more risk than COVID. " The elephant in the room... The Epilepsy Society in the UK gives no warning of any increased risk of seizures on their Covid information page. Under the heading 'Are the COVID-19 vaccines safe for people with epilepsy?', they actually quote the Association of British Neurologists, saying 'all COVID-19 vaccines are safe for people with neurological conditions such as epilepsy'. 'The MHRA monitors the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines, including any reports of seizures. They have confirmed to us that they haven't found any link between COVID-19 vaccines and seizures, or an increase in seizures after vaccination in people with epilepsy.' A quick Internet search for 'tonic clonic seizure Pfizer vaccine' shows this is not an isolated case. Informed consent has been abandoned. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I am pretty Pro-vaccine though I believe greatly it should be an individual choice and not mandated ever. I had AZ for my first two and then Pfizer for my third about a month and a bit ago. First two not too much of a problem felt like a bad cold and a bit lethargic. Pfizer had the jab on a Friday evening, felt like crap all of Saturday, light headed on Sunday. Come 8(ish) in the evening Sunday collapsed in the kitchen and had an epileptic seizure, now for clarity I do have epilepsy however I have been seizure free for a decade. Was found by my parents anything up to an hour I'd been on the floor, they called for medical assistance, came round when the paramedics were with me, at this point I could have been out of it for up to an hour and a half. Taken to A&E obviously, took blood confirmed from the results of that they believe it was a tonic clonic seizure caused by the vaccine (I have that in black and white on my discharge note) subsequently lost my driving licence for 1 year, because I can't drive lost my car allowance at work which is worth £6k. Currently pursuing medical negligence claim as there is quite a.bit of evidence already to suggest Pfizer causes seizures, now again for clarity it is approximately 1/50,000 this happens, however I would be as bold to say of you have a history of seizures or epilepsy then perhaps you are at higher risk and shouldn't be given it. So until I know what the possible side effects of any vaccine are no more jabs for me, I'm not anti-vax just have to protect myself, at 42 relatively healthy epilepsy is of higher risk than COVID, and if entirely honest the mental health knock from losing independence is of more risk than COVID. The elephant in the room... The Epilepsy Society in the UK gives no warning of any increased risk of seizures on their Covid information page. Under the heading 'Are the COVID-19 vaccines safe for people with epilepsy?', they actually quote the Association of British Neurologists, saying 'all COVID-19 vaccines are safe for people with neurological conditions such as epilepsy'. 'The MHRA monitors the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines, including any reports of seizures. They have confirmed to us that they haven't found any link between COVID-19 vaccines and seizures, or an increase in seizures after vaccination in people with epilepsy.' A quick Internet search for 'tonic clonic seizure Pfizer vaccine' shows this is not an isolated case. Informed consent has been abandoned." Then some more work needs to be done for this specific group, or perhaps it doesn't because although specifically meaningful the issue is not statistically significant. Why not do something about it instead of posting on here? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"Reality is breaking through and the vaccine/lockdown extremists are losing control of the narrative" Reality hasn't changed. You may just inhabit a different one. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You so seem to have managed to miss all of the years of Government messaging about a healthy lifestyle, so I guess your anger and confusion has some explanation." I should listen to a bunch of twats, many of who are overweight, d*unk in the commons, use cocaine and cruise Wombles-common? That'll happen. Not. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I am pretty Pro-vaccine though I believe greatly it should be an individual choice and not mandated ever. I had AZ for my first two and then Pfizer for my third about a month and a bit ago. First two not too much of a problem felt like a bad cold and a bit lethargic. Pfizer had the jab on a Friday evening, felt like crap all of Saturday, light headed on Sunday. Come 8(ish) in the evening Sunday collapsed in the kitchen and had an epileptic seizure, now for clarity I do have epilepsy however I have been seizure free for a decade. Was found by my parents anything up to an hour I'd been on the floor, they called for medical assistance, came round when the paramedics were with me, at this point I could have been out of it for up to an hour and a half. Taken to A&E obviously, took blood confirmed from the results of that they believe it was a tonic clonic seizure caused by the vaccine (I have that in black and white on my discharge note) subsequently lost my driving licence for 1 year, because I can't drive lost my car allowance at work which is worth £6k. Currently pursuing medical negligence claim as there is quite a.bit of evidence already to suggest Pfizer causes seizures, now again for clarity it is approximately 1/50,000 this happens, however I would be as bold to say of you have a history of seizures or epilepsy then perhaps you are at higher risk and shouldn't be given it. So until I know what the possible side effects of any vaccine are no more jabs for me, I'm not anti-vax just have to protect myself, at 42 relatively healthy epilepsy is of higher risk than COVID, and if entirely honest the mental health knock from losing independence is of more risk than COVID. The elephant in the room... The Epilepsy Society in the UK gives no warning of any increased risk of seizures on their Covid information page. Under the heading 'Are the COVID-19 vaccines safe for people with epilepsy?', they actually quote the Association of British Neurologists, saying 'all COVID-19 vaccines are safe for people with neurological conditions such as epilepsy'. 'The MHRA monitors the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines, including any reports of seizures. They have confirmed to us that they haven't found any link between COVID-19 vaccines and seizures, or an increase in seizures after vaccination in people with epilepsy.' A quick Internet search for 'tonic clonic seizure Pfizer vaccine' shows this is not an isolated case. Informed consent has been abandoned." to balance one should also look as seizures associated with covid. Seems there may be risks there too. It seems that possibly all vaccines could trigger seizures too. Not that caused by or triggered by makes a difference to those involved. To the guy who had the seziure, I hope youre okay (not withstanding the fall out you mentioned). Don't want to trivialis what you've been through by throwing stats etc at it.  | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
| |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" That sounds like the opposite to waning protection. In fact it describes a robust and future proof solution. So why isn't it working? thats a good question and not being a virologist I don't know. It seems to vary depending on the person (age, gender, whether they smoke etc). But all vaccines have some kind of waning protection, but it never goes to zero. I can understand the waning in non mRNA vaccines. But the mRNA are 'next generation', and represent a new dawn in health care science, an opportunity to build back better." mRNA vaccines just avoid the whole "getting infected" part.....instead of the cell being invaded by the virus, the encapsulated mRNA enter cells and institutes the manufacture of the protein that would be expressed on the cell surface after a genuine infection.. A virologist would be of not much use with the immune system, you probably want an immunologist. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I am pretty Pro-vaccine though I believe greatly it should be an individual choice and not mandated ever. I had AZ for my first two and then Pfizer for my third about a month and a bit ago. First two not too much of a problem felt like a bad cold and a bit lethargic. Pfizer had the jab on a Friday evening, felt like crap all of Saturday, light headed on Sunday. Come 8(ish) in the evening Sunday collapsed in the kitchen and had an epileptic seizure, now for clarity I do have epilepsy however I have been seizure free for a decade. Was found by my parents anything up to an hour I'd been on the floor, they called for medical assistance, came round when the paramedics were with me, at this point I could have been out of it for up to an hour and a half. Taken to A&E obviously, took blood confirmed from the results of that they believe it was a tonic clonic seizure caused by the vaccine (I have that in black and white on my discharge note) subsequently lost my driving licence for 1 year, because I can't drive lost my car allowance at work which is worth £6k. Currently pursuing medical negligence claim as there is quite a.bit of evidence already to suggest Pfizer causes seizures, now again for clarity it is approximately 1/50,000 this happens, however I would be as bold to say of you have a history of seizures or epilepsy then perhaps you are at higher risk and shouldn't be given it. So until I know what the possible side effects of any vaccine are no more jabs for me, I'm not anti-vax just have to protect myself, at 42 relatively healthy epilepsy is of higher risk than COVID, and if entirely honest the mental health knock from losing independence is of more risk than COVID. The elephant in the room... The Epilepsy Society in the UK gives no warning of any increased risk of seizures on their Covid information page. Under the heading 'Are the COVID-19 vaccines safe for people with epilepsy?', they actually quote the Association of British Neurologists, saying 'all COVID-19 vaccines are safe for people with neurological conditions such as epilepsy'. 'The MHRA monitors the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines, including any reports of seizures. They have confirmed to us that they haven't found any link between COVID-19 vaccines and seizures, or an increase in seizures after vaccination in people with epilepsy.' A quick Internet search for 'tonic clonic seizure Pfizer vaccine' shows this is not an isolated case. Informed consent has been abandoned. Then some more work needs to be done for this specific group, or perhaps it doesn't because although specifically meaningful the issue is not statistically significant. Why not do something about it instead of posting on here?" I thought you'd said goodbye. It's statistically significant to anyone who has suffered an adverse reaction. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
" You so seem to have managed to miss all of the years of Government messaging about a healthy lifestyle, so I guess your anger and confusion has some explanation. I should listen to a bunch of twats, many of who are overweight, d*unk in the commons, use cocaine and cruise Wombles-common? That'll happen. Not." Well, the health messaging comes from the Government departments, not from MPs and Ministers. You can ignore them if you wish though. | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
"I am pretty Pro-vaccine though I believe greatly it should be an individual choice and not mandated ever. I had AZ for my first two and then Pfizer for my third about a month and a bit ago. First two not too much of a problem felt like a bad cold and a bit lethargic. Pfizer had the jab on a Friday evening, felt like crap all of Saturday, light headed on Sunday. Come 8(ish) in the evening Sunday collapsed in the kitchen and had an epileptic seizure, now for clarity I do have epilepsy however I have been seizure free for a decade. Was found by my parents anything up to an hour I'd been on the floor, they called for medical assistance, came round when the paramedics were with me, at this point I could have been out of it for up to an hour and a half. Taken to A&E obviously, took blood confirmed from the results of that they believe it was a tonic clonic seizure caused by the vaccine (I have that in black and white on my discharge note) subsequently lost my driving licence for 1 year, because I can't drive lost my car allowance at work which is worth £6k. Currently pursuing medical negligence claim as there is quite a.bit of evidence already to suggest Pfizer causes seizures, now again for clarity it is approximately 1/50,000 this happens, however I would be as bold to say of you have a history of seizures or epilepsy then perhaps you are at higher risk and shouldn't be given it. So until I know what the possible side effects of any vaccine are no more jabs for me, I'm not anti-vax just have to protect myself, at 42 relatively healthy epilepsy is of higher risk than COVID, and if entirely honest the mental health knock from losing independence is of more risk than COVID. The elephant in the room... The Epilepsy Society in the UK gives no warning of any increased risk of seizures on their Covid information page. Under the heading 'Are the COVID-19 vaccines safe for people with epilepsy?', they actually quote the Association of British Neurologists, saying 'all COVID-19 vaccines are safe for people with neurological conditions such as epilepsy'. 'The MHRA monitors the safety of the COVID-19 vaccines, including any reports of seizures. They have confirmed to us that they haven't found any link between COVID-19 vaccines and seizures, or an increase in seizures after vaccination in people with epilepsy.' A quick Internet search for 'tonic clonic seizure Pfizer vaccine' shows this is not an isolated case. Informed consent has been abandoned. Then some more work needs to be done for this specific group, or perhaps it doesn't because although specifically meaningful the issue is not statistically significant. Why not do something about it instead of posting on here? I thought you'd said goodbye. It's statistically significant to anyone who has suffered an adverse reaction. " I did, on that thread, but then this nonsense too. "...although specifically meaningful the issue is not statistically significant" Significant and statistically significant mean different things, don't they? | |||
Reply privately (closed, thread got too big) | |||
