How Likely Are You To Take The Covid Vaccine?

Huskaris said:

Spent quite a while thinking about it, as although not anti vax at all, I am slightly, slightly skeptical. 

I'll basically not have it until asked to, so if not enough people have taken it for herd immunity to kick in in order to protect society, I will put myself forward, but won't choose to as soon as I am eligible (which won't be for a long time anyway).

That way I won't be taking a vaccine off someone that would seek comfort from having one, but will take it if it is required for the benefit of society. 

Can’t see anything wrong with this view. 

ShootersHillGuru said:

The only reason that there is a question mark over post vaccination transmission is because this is a 100% new vaccine. We know that it protects because it has been trialled but what happens from then on is still an unknown. I would say that it is highly unlikely that it doesn’t provide at least some transmission benefits. I expect that the scientific community think that too but as it’s an unknown they are erring on the side of caution. 

As the vaccine rollout begins they will get more and more data to review effectiveness and guidance will improve. I'm just glad it's started.

Wheresmeticket? said:

stevexreeve said:

McBobbin said:

thewolfboy said:

ShootersHillGuru said:

I’ve posted this before and don’t mean to minimise the importance of thalidomide and those that were affected by it. It was a tragedy.

The point I’m making is that thalidomide affected 10,000 people. A tragedy no question but Covid-19 has already killed 60,000 people in this country alone and 1.5 million people worldwide. 

The problem with these statistics is that they are malleable. People, especially the geriatrics, were dying anyway and Covid-19 was the last straw that wiped them out. Poor things. The point being is that they many of these old folk were at deaths door anyway with cancer and suchlike, but Covid-19 was given as the killer on the death certificate. I wish we had a statistic of previously healthy people who suddenly died of Covid-19. 

What use would that statistic be? One report I saw shows that if you catch covid your risk of dying in a particular year doubles. So for most people that not very likely. You only need to look at the excess deaths over the spring to show that many more people died than would have died normally. 

Around 600,000 people die "normally" in a year.

Around a tenth of that amount (60,000) excess deaths will occur this year.

It is fair to ask whether the majority of those excess deaths were children, adults with families, or people over 80.

I believe a child dying or being born with no limbs is a 10,000 times worse than a demented 94 year old dying from flu, cancer covid or whatever.  It's only my opinion but I'm sure my demented 94 year old mother would have agreed with me before she died earlier this year.

Yes because the  choice is that clear cut isn't it: "demented" (to use your idiotic word) 94 yr old versus child being born with no limbs.

I fear for a society where the attitude that your right to life depends on how old you are or whether you have an illness is acceptable.

I think the post was looking for a reaction. If it wasn’t and represents a thought process then god help us.

Already something new learned if you suffer from some allergies

I have changed from being slightly worried to show me the needle snd I am beyond shocked at listening to some of the viewpoints, particularly to some who have shocking health with asthma. If I was in their boat I’d be banging the door down.  I’ve listened to one particular family member who has gone mad with the worry of it and took it all seriously to now saying she’s not having it. 

clb74 said:

I'm bracing myself to waking up one morning over the next month to the headline 
The vaccination rollout has come to a halt .
M r Smith having been advised to not have the vaccine has now decided to go to court backed by human rights lawyers.
Mr Smith states that until everyone can have the vaccine safely the vaccination process should be stopped.
It's not right that he should be treated like a 2nd class citizen his Lawyers explained.
The case is estimated to go on for 2 years.

Upwards of 50,000 people have now been vaccinated. The chances of things going spectacularly tits north are now virtually impossible. Keep doing what you’ve been doing for the next four / five months and by summer next year things will look a whole lot better. 

StigThundercock said:

Todds_right_hook said:

An ex colleague who has always enjoyed white powder and his wife who likes Botox are both being very active on social media in putting across their anti vaccine views. Mainly based on they don’t want untested substances in their bodies. The irony!!!

There's really no irony there at all - have you replied to their social media bullshit with questions about their predelictions for injesting toxins in pursuit of temporary highs and mutilation of her appearance? 

Idiotic, Gullible and vain - truly the nap hand

If ironic was not the correct word, idiotic gullible and vain  fit the bill!

Stig said:

Todds_right_hook said:

An ex colleague who has always enjoyed white powder and his wife who likes Botox are both being very active on social media in putting across their anti vaccine views. Mainly based on they don’t want untested substances in their bodies. The irony!!!

Does his wife know that the 'tox' in botox is literally short for toxin?

Probably not. Unless they’ve explained that on TOWIE

clive said:

A promising Australian candidate for a coronavirus vaccine has been abandoned after trial participants returned false HIV positive results.

Australia had previously agreed to buy 51 million doses of the vaccine being developed by Australian firm CSL and the University of Queensland (UQ).

The government said orders of other vaccines would now fill the shortfall.

CSL and UQ stressed that the positive results were false - meaning trial participants' health was not at risk.

The Australian government said it had now entered an agreement for the Novavax vaccine, and upped its existing order of the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-55269381

"But it also generated HIV antibodies in some recipients - which meant it showed false positives for HIV. Further testing proved the HIV wasn't there."

Scientist problems... Try to cure COVID, cure AIDS instead...

(I'm sure it's not as simple as that before someone corrects me).

On another note, I love how the Russians call their rockets and their vaccines the same thing. Although "sputnik" as I understand actually means "travelling companion"

iainment said:

hoof_it_up_to_benty said:

ShootersHillGuru said:

The only reason that there is a question mark over post vaccination transmission is because this is a 100% new vaccine. We know that it protects because it has been trialled but what happens from then on is still an unknown. I would say that it is highly unlikely that it doesn’t provide at least some transmission benefits. I expect that the scientific community think that too but as it’s an unknown they are erring on the side of caution. 

As the vaccine rollout begins they will get more and more data to review effectiveness and guidance will improve. I'm just glad it's started.

So the last phase of testing begins. Hmm.

Yup.  It's called Phase IV ... just like every other commercially available drug.

To quote Super Thomas Sandgaard from last night "get that shot then we can all get back to the Valley sooner".

SoundAsa£ said:

I am definitely going to go with the Oxford vaccine because it seems to be being suggested it’s more successful for the elderly. Plus it’s being produced here in The UK, so logically should be readily available going forward.
Another thing I have been trying to ascertain is whether or not you will be able to change vaccine brands later down the line if for example they come up with one that’s 100% (or as near as damn it), successful.

From what I understand you can’t pick which vaccine you want. It depends on what is available when your turn comes up.

Dave Rudd said:

Hal1x said:

Just had a thought if it has to be kept at minus 37 or whatever surely it must be like injecting a freezing cold rod into your arm? 

Schoolboy error.

The patient has to acclimatise first by sitting in a freezer for an hour.  Then the injection doesn't feel so.

iainment said:

SoundAsa£ said:

I am definitely going to go with the Oxford vaccine because it seems to be being suggested it’s more successful for the elderly. Plus it’s being produced here in The UK, so logically should be readily available going forward.
Another thing I have been trying to ascertain is whether or not you will be able to change vaccine brands later down the line if for example they come up with one that’s 100% (or as near as damn it), successful.

From what I understand you can’t pick which vaccine you want. It depends on what is available when your turn comes up.

At present there is only one vaccine. You’re right though, initially at least the vaccine will be given on availability. The Oxford AZ vaccine will be given to the majority of people because we have purchased most of that and it’s relatively easy storage and transport capabilities. Later in the process when there is more data perhaps next winter if and when booster vaccinations are required it might be possible to target specific groups with a specific vaccine based on data showing what vaccines worked best for particular groups eg age, ethnicity etc.