Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

Vaccine

1495052545594

Comments

  • how many can say they or someone they know has been struck by lightning? 
    I know 2. 
  • stonemuse said:
    Private Eye this week. The part that stands out for me is that if we had the vaccine at the start of the pandemic, at least 100,000 lives would have been prevented in the U.K., and there would have been 5 deaths from blood clots. 


    "With a UK population of around 58.2 million the risk of being struck by lightning (indoors and outdoors combined) is one person in 1.2 million and the risk of being struck and killed by lightning is one person in 19 million"

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223811436_Deaths_and_injuries_caused_by_lightning_in_the_United_Kingdom_Analyses_of_two_databases

    People trying to downplay the clotting risk is dangerous. It needs to be scrutinised properly rather than just hand-waved away. 
    Vaccine available March 2020. 

    Hypothetically:

    Don’t take the vaccine, 127,000 covid deaths, no blood clot deaths
    Take the vaccine, 27,000 covid deaths, 5 blood clot deaths. 

    What do you choose?
  • Surely the people that passed it as safe, initially, are the ones to sue and A Z have no control on who is given it.
  • how many can say they or someone they know has been struck by lightning? 
    I know 2. 
    I know at least 5 people who have had the AZ jab. no problems so far.
  • how many can say they or someone they know has been struck by lightning? 
    I do. In fact he’s been struck twice. Both times playing golf.
  • stonemuse said:
    stonemuse said:
    Private Eye this week. The part that stands out for me is that if we had the vaccine at the start of the pandemic, at least 100,000 lives would have been prevented in the U.K., and there would have been 5 deaths from blood clots. 


    "With a UK population of around 58.2 million the risk of being struck by lightning (indoors and outdoors combined) is one person in 1.2 million and the risk of being struck and killed by lightning is one person in 19 million"

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223811436_Deaths_and_injuries_caused_by_lightning_in_the_United_Kingdom_Analyses_of_two_databases

    People trying to downplay the clotting risk is dangerous. It needs to be scrutinised properly rather than just hand-waved away. 
    Vaccine available March 2020. 

    Hypothetically:

    Don’t take the vaccine, 127,000 covid deaths, no blood clot deaths
    Take the vaccine, 27,000 covid deaths, 5 blood clot deaths. 

    What do you choose?
    Pfizer?

    This isn't an either/or. 

    This is a 'maybe an alternative might be safer?' 
  • There are no data that prove the vaccine provides immunity from, or prevents the transmission of the virus.
    It will temper the aggresiveness of the symptoms if contracted, nothing more.
  • edited April 2021
    stonemuse said:
    stonemuse said:
    Private Eye this week. The part that stands out for me is that if we had the vaccine at the start of the pandemic, at least 100,000 lives would have been prevented in the U.K., and there would have been 5 deaths from blood clots. 


    "With a UK population of around 58.2 million the risk of being struck by lightning (indoors and outdoors combined) is one person in 1.2 million and the risk of being struck and killed by lightning is one person in 19 million"

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223811436_Deaths_and_injuries_caused_by_lightning_in_the_United_Kingdom_Analyses_of_two_databases

    People trying to downplay the clotting risk is dangerous. It needs to be scrutinised properly rather than just hand-waved away. 
    Vaccine available March 2020. 

    Hypothetically:

    Don’t take the vaccine, 127,000 covid deaths, no blood clot deaths
    Take the vaccine, 27,000 covid deaths, 5 blood clot deaths. 

    What do you choose?
    Pfizer?

    This isn't an either/or. 

    This is a 'maybe an alternative might be safer?' 
    Pfizer has been linked to blood clots too. 

    Bottom line, tens of thousands of deaths could have been prevented if the vaccine had been available  ... which now applies to future deaths which WILL be prevented. 
  • stonemuse said:
    stonemuse said:
    stonemuse said:
    Private Eye this week. The part that stands out for me is that if we had the vaccine at the start of the pandemic, at least 100,000 lives would have been prevented in the U.K., and there would have been 5 deaths from blood clots. 


    "With a UK population of around 58.2 million the risk of being struck by lightning (indoors and outdoors combined) is one person in 1.2 million and the risk of being struck and killed by lightning is one person in 19 million"

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223811436_Deaths_and_injuries_caused_by_lightning_in_the_United_Kingdom_Analyses_of_two_databases

    People trying to downplay the clotting risk is dangerous. It needs to be scrutinised properly rather than just hand-waved away. 
    Vaccine available March 2020. 

    Hypothetically:

    Don’t take the vaccine, 127,000 covid deaths, no blood clot deaths
    Take the vaccine, 27,000 covid deaths, 5 blood clot deaths. 

    What do you choose?
    Pfizer?

    This isn't an either/or. 

    This is a 'maybe an alternative might be safer?' 
    Pfizer has been linked to blood clots too. 

    Bottom line, tens of thousands of deaths could have been prevented if the vaccine had been available  ... which now applies to future deaths which WILL be prevented. 
    AZ is safer than having no vaccine of course. 

    We have at least 8 vaccines available. Isn't it in science's best interest to figure out which one is safer and then increase production of that type of vaccine? 

    Especially with word that booster jabs will be needed in the future. 

    Just going ahead with all of them, then discovering that under 30s may have been safer not even having the vaccine is a bit too late. 
  • Sponsored links:


  • edited April 2021
    stonemuse said:
    stonemuse said:
    stonemuse said:
    Private Eye this week. The part that stands out for me is that if we had the vaccine at the start of the pandemic, at least 100,000 lives would have been prevented in the U.K., and there would have been 5 deaths from blood clots. 


    "With a UK population of around 58.2 million the risk of being struck by lightning (indoors and outdoors combined) is one person in 1.2 million and the risk of being struck and killed by lightning is one person in 19 million"

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223811436_Deaths_and_injuries_caused_by_lightning_in_the_United_Kingdom_Analyses_of_two_databases

    People trying to downplay the clotting risk is dangerous. It needs to be scrutinised properly rather than just hand-waved away. 
    Vaccine available March 2020. 

    Hypothetically:

    Don’t take the vaccine, 127,000 covid deaths, no blood clot deaths
    Take the vaccine, 27,000 covid deaths, 5 blood clot deaths. 

    What do you choose?
    Pfizer?

    This isn't an either/or. 

    This is a 'maybe an alternative might be safer?' 
    Pfizer has been linked to blood clots too. 

    Bottom line, tens of thousands of deaths could have been prevented if the vaccine had been available  ... which now applies to future deaths which WILL be prevented. 
    And this doesn't even scratch the surface of the number of times they've been sued for negligence and fraud.
  • edited April 2021
    Redskin said:
    stonemuse said:
    stonemuse said:
    stonemuse said:
    Private Eye this week. The part that stands out for me is that if we had the vaccine at the start of the pandemic, at least 100,000 lives would have been prevented in the U.K., and there would have been 5 deaths from blood clots. 


    "With a UK population of around 58.2 million the risk of being struck by lightning (indoors and outdoors combined) is one person in 1.2 million and the risk of being struck and killed by lightning is one person in 19 million"

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223811436_Deaths_and_injuries_caused_by_lightning_in_the_United_Kingdom_Analyses_of_two_databases

    People trying to downplay the clotting risk is dangerous. It needs to be scrutinised properly rather than just hand-waved away. 
    Vaccine available March 2020. 

    Hypothetically:

    Don’t take the vaccine, 127,000 covid deaths, no blood clot deaths
    Take the vaccine, 27,000 covid deaths, 5 blood clot deaths. 

    What do you choose?
    Pfizer?

    This isn't an either/or. 

    This is a 'maybe an alternative might be safer?' 
    Pfizer has been linked to blood clots too. 

    Bottom line, tens of thousands of deaths could have been prevented if the vaccine had been available  ... which now applies to future deaths which WILL be prevented. 
    And this doesn't even scratch the surface of the number of times they've been sued for negligence and fraud.

    Just like every single other drug company. Suing drug companies is almost as lucrative a business as developing drugs themselves. 
  • edited April 2021
    Redskin said:
    stonemuse said:
    stonemuse said:
    stonemuse said:
    Private Eye this week. The part that stands out for me is that if we had the vaccine at the start of the pandemic, at least 100,000 lives would have been prevented in the U.K., and there would have been 5 deaths from blood clots. 


    "With a UK population of around 58.2 million the risk of being struck by lightning (indoors and outdoors combined) is one person in 1.2 million and the risk of being struck and killed by lightning is one person in 19 million"

    https://www.researchgate.net/publication/223811436_Deaths_and_injuries_caused_by_lightning_in_the_United_Kingdom_Analyses_of_two_databases

    People trying to downplay the clotting risk is dangerous. It needs to be scrutinised properly rather than just hand-waved away. 
    Vaccine available March 2020. 

    Hypothetically:

    Don’t take the vaccine, 127,000 covid deaths, no blood clot deaths
    Take the vaccine, 27,000 covid deaths, 5 blood clot deaths. 

    What do you choose?
    Pfizer?

    This isn't an either/or. 

    This is a 'maybe an alternative might be safer?' 
    Pfizer has been linked to blood clots too. 

    Bottom line, tens of thousands of deaths could have been prevented if the vaccine had been available  ... which now applies to future deaths which WILL be prevented. 
    And this doesn't even scratch the surface of the number of times they've been sued for negligence and fraud.

    Just like every single other drug company. Suing drug companies is almost as lucrative a business as developing drugs themselves. 
    But they're only made to pay out $2.3b if they're guilty. And as I said, this particular case is just one of many where they have been found guilty of fraud, negligence and gross mendacity.
  • Mother in law is one of the volunteers at the vaccination centre in Epping and there were 14 Pfizer ones left from no shows yesterday evening so everyone’s encouraged to ask who they know if they want a vaccine this has been going on for a few weeks when she’s been there , so my wife eventually went and had one last night she’s only 38 so not due yet , no after effects so far

    *********
    Good on Mrs Oohaah.
    It's worrying how many people do not make these appointments.  What a waste it can be.
  • 2nd AZ jab booked for Thursday this week, 8 weeks after the first one. I had no problems after the first other than being freezing cold for one afternoon, 3 days after it.
  • I live in Finland so this is a bit different for me.
    But I have a blood clotting issue and have had 5 blood clots in the past 5 years.
    (I am now on Eliquis for life)
    They ruled out the oxAZ Jab because of this underlying health issue and because I am 30 years old  (Apparently a small minority Under 30's have had blood clot reactions to this vaccine)
    I had the first Pfizer jab last week and I have been lucky enough to feel absolutely fine. I had a sore arm for a few days but that was it.
    I have heard the second jab isn't as nice but will still take it, I am due that at the end of June.

    It is remarkable to see the turn around in England and by how much the infection rates and death's have dropped!
    I heard from several sources that the second Pfizer jab would have more side effects than the first. Had the second jab on Friday and had none. Out in the sun yesterday and walked 10km.

    Active cases in the Borough of Greenwich down into double figures.
  • Sponsored links:


  • 2nd AZ jab booked for Thursday this week, 8 weeks after the first one. I had no problems after the first other than being freezing cold for one afternoon, 3 days after it.
    Interestingly I had similar symptoms exactly a week after my first jab
  • An acquaintance's son is doing research at one of our top universities into the effects of the vaccines.  People who've had the two jabs with a four week gap, as originally planned, now have only 30% antibodies compared to what they had after the vaccines had kicked in to full effect.  If the twelve week gap jabs replicate this, there will be a big surge in cases around September.  So, book your holidays for August.

    To give you an idea of how good the group is he's working in at his uni, they predicted pretty much everything that happened from last June onwards once the Government laid out the restrictions or lack of them.
  • edited April 2021
    An acquaintance's son is doing research at one of our top universities into the effects of the vaccines.  People who've had the two jabs with a four week gap, as originally planned, now have only 30% antibodies compared to what they had after the vaccines had kicked in to full effect.  If the twelve week gap jabs replicate this, there will be a big surge in cases around September.  So, book your holidays for August.

    To give you an idea of how good the group is he's working in at his uni, they predicted pretty much everything that happened from last June onwards once the Government laid out the restrictions or lack of them.
    Could you please provide a link to the data or if not at least which university this research is being conducted so I can have a look see. This is the most significant comment I have seen for weeks so would really like to dig into this. Seems to go against the published data so far ? 
  • An acquaintance's son is doing research at one of our top universities into the effects of the vaccines.  People who've had the two jabs with a four week gap, as originally planned, now have only 30% antibodies compared to what they had after the vaccines had kicked in to full effect.  If the twelve week gap jabs replicate this, there will be a big surge in cases around September.  So, book your holidays for August.

    To give you an idea of how good the group is he's working in at his uni, they predicted pretty much everything that happened from last June onwards once the Government laid out the restrictions or lack of them.
    My understanding is that antibodies as a result of the vaccine have been shown to last (or be detectable) for around 5 months. The fact that they are not detectable doesn't mean that protection disappears, and I'm not aware of mass testing of T cells.

    Is the 30% you state the level of antibodies remaining, or the number of people who still have detectable antibodies?

      
  • An acquaintance's son is doing research at one of our top universities into the effects of the vaccines.  People who've had the two jabs with a four week gap, as originally planned, now have only 30% antibodies compared to what they had after the vaccines had kicked in to full effect.  If the twelve week gap jabs replicate this, there will be a big surge in cases around September.  So, book your holidays for August.

    To give you an idea of how good the group is he's working in at his uni, they predicted pretty much everything that happened from last June onwards once the Government laid out the restrictions or lack of them.
    Antibodies isn't the only form of immunity you get from a vaccine though. It's just the easiest to test for. They always become less visible over time. Does not mean that the protection is not there wither through antibodies, T cells or other forms.
  • A top up vaccination is planned for the Autumn.
  • Crusty54 said:
    A top up vaccination is planned for the Autumn.
    YEs but that is to provide additional protection potentially against new variants, it does not mean the protection from the initial vaccine has worn off
  • The current timeline is for all adults to be offered a vaccine by the end of June? So I'm guessing second doses by the autumn?

    Therefore the autumn top up will commence for those who received their original dose back in January, and those who received their second dose last by, say March?
  • Ross said:
    The current timeline is for all adults to be offered a vaccine by the end of June? So I'm guessing second doses by the autumn?

    Therefore the autumn top up will commence for those who received their original dose back in January, and those who received their second dose last by, say March?
    I’m guessing that secondary “top up” vaccines will be targeted at over 65’s and vulnerable rather than across the board for everyone. 
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!