|
Forum topic poll
Will you be taking the Covid 19 vaccine?
Sign in to vote or view the poll results
|
| Author |
Topic: Will you be getting the Covid Vaccine? |
262 replies
|
|
|
Quote ( Mark Pinnick @ January 8th 2021,15:03:50 ) Quote ( Ignacio Belatti @ January 8th 2021,14:02:53
I think, if I am understanding your posts correctly, that your main problem is with the restrictions which are placed on you and your countrymen? The need for those is not something I can comment on, and, of course, you are entitled to your opinion on these measures (even if I were to think they were necessary, having reviewed all of the reasoning).
There are several people on this forum who have very good knowledge of matters relating to medicine manufacture, and they are rightly calling out the parts which they view as inflammatory
Thanks, the first person that replys about what I said and is not mocking me.
I wont debate the technicality, if its a flu or not. An ostrich is a bird that do not fly. I dont give a sh*t if its a proteine or a bacteria or a cocodrile. It has flu symptoms in almost all cases. Arguably, the moratlity is close. Me and my family are not willing to live enclosed and with paranoia. We have kept it all as ususal. Why?
I think many governments overreacted in many ways. And I have the right to do so. I mean, who the hell on earth trusts the government???
I think there are better solutions that shutting it all down.
To be clear, Im not into the cons theo crap or the anti-vaccine movement. I have a 7 old month daughter and she has every vaccine.
What I was just wanting to say before this exploded is:
1) I dont care my neighbour cousing works in Pfizer and says its ok. I dont think so. Im not gonna die of Covid. I prefer to wait and see what happens with vaccinated people. I have the right to do what I want with my body.
2) I do believe Covid cases and deaths are pumped up numbers. No matter that the press or WHO or Google says. This is what I think.
3) I will take care of myself, contact with others, protocols, etc etc but I will not keep silent while the government forbids my family to work, open their business or walk in the streets.
Do any of you think Im a bad person. Fine. Do you think Im ignorant. Fine. I just dont care. The only fish that goes with the flow is the dead fish.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Ignacio Belatti @ January 8th 2021,17:59:06 ) It has flu symptoms in almost all cases. Arguably, the moratlity is close. Me and my family are not willing to live enclosed and with paranoia. We have kept it all as ususal. Why?
Seasonal flu kills around 0.1% of patients while COVID-19 kills around 2%. It is 20 times more deadly. It is not arguably close, in my opinion.
Also, it is proven to be more easily transmitted.
Quote ( Ignacio Belatti @ January 8th 2021,17:59:06 ) I think many governments overreacted in many ways. And I have the right to do so. I mean, who the hell on earth trusts the government???
I think there are better solutions that shutting it all down.
This was mainly due to the fact that this disease also has a very high hospitalization rate. Not just that, but we need machines to support breathing, which were not as common before. Therefore, Hospitals get full, resources are spent and people do not get treatment. Not just for COVID, but this is killing a lot more people since there is no further capacity to treat other diseases that would be treated otherwise.
That is why governments are reacting this way. If this gets out of order, it quickly becomes much more than a flu, it has a great impact in health facilities.
Regarding your other points, I understand you feel that way.
I don't think there would be a worldwide conspiracy to increase death numbers, or cause a economic recession intentionally. But that's me. And I hope you respect that opinion just as I respect yours. Even if I don't agree with what you defend.
EDIT: Next time, if you want people to respect your opinion, don't start by calling them sheep and idiots. Just a quick advice.
|
|
|
|
I'm 43 and I don't remember people around me who died from seasonal flu as far as my memory can go back in the years. There are certainly more people around me who died for covid-19 in 2020 than those who died for a seasonal flu (always around me) in the last 30 years or so.
Between 2007 and 2017 in Italy 5,060 people died of flu, with an average of 460 death per year. Covid-19 is still killing hundreds of people every day in Italy. And this only thanks to lockdowns and restrictions, otherwise I can't imagine what this number would be. What are we talking about? Covid-19 is not like a fucking seasonal flu.
|
|
|
|
its not even just about the fatality rate, its about it being a nasty virus. Ppl I know personally who had it in march, still having chest problems, and one has a heart condition that is much worse now and has never improved back to what it was before covid.
Its leaving a big imprint even on those who 'recover'.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( James Hitchen @ January 8th 2021,13:21:51 ) the only testing you’ll be able to see is the external testing done by independent bodies
The testing isn't done by independent bodies. It's done by the drug companies and then the results are scrutinised by national bodies. In the case of Sputnik V the Russian government's Ministry of Health owns the Gamaleya Institute and so when the Ministry of Health approved the vaccine it was checking it's own home-work. It also did that without any phase 3 trial data whatsoever so people were justified in being up in arms and calling it a worthless political/nationalistic approval which only damaged trust in the vaccine.
No stringent regulatory authority has yet approved Sputnik V, and neither has the WHO which seems to be saying it doesn't have the full data submitted yet. Let's also not forget even in countries with recognised SRAs we're only getting *emergency* use approvals for any of these vaccines. They haven't undergone any long term safety testing because there hasn't been enough time.
Quote ( James Hitchen @ January 8th 2021,13:40:58 ) The proof of testing is available and the results show it’s fine. Why should I not trust it?
If you think the press release with basic preliminary data we've seen so far constitute 'proof' you need to go back to science classes. Yes, if we take what we've seen at face value it looks promising and there's no big reason to believe it isn't safe or efficacious but that's very far from proof it's okay. It's not even strong evidence.
(With all respect to Russian nationals here) we're talking about a state recently caught putting it's own athletes' health at risk with a highly organised illicit drugging operation, for the sake of national pride. A pandemic vaccine is a perfect opportunity for national pride buff (to prop up Putin's approval ratings at a difficult time and so on) and they're certainly going all out to promote it. So there is plenty of reason to cross examine the data very carefully.
Hell, even in the US and the UK where there's drug approval reputation and a massive healthcare industry to look after (which a botched approval would do long-term harm to) there's enough potential for conflict of interest and the agencies are unlikely to be truly independent of political influence, given the public health backdrop. (The European Medicines Agency is arguably the one most likely to be independent but even they've been under severe time pressure).
Personally if I was 90 years old and Sputnik V was the only vaccine being offered in current circumstances I might be inclined to take my chances with it, but I'd way prefer to wait for someone trustworthy and at least a bit independent to okay it first.
Quote ( Miel Soeterbroek @ January 8th 2021,13:41:09 ) Why wouldn't it be? Do you think AstraZeneca would start trialling a combination of their own vaccine and Sputnik if they had doubts whether Sputnik V was safe?
Sorry, no. AstraZeneca have their own commercial and research reasons for doing trials (mainly they seemed to agree it while panicking about lower efficacy in their vaccine but now think delaying the booster shot is the key to getting more favourable immunogenicity). They're not a regulatory body, they're not actually even a company very familiar with taking vaccines to market, and they wouldn't have seen anything approaching proper phase 3 data from the Sputnik V trial when they agreed to the collab, because no one else had. It's safe enough to do phase 3 trials in, sure. That's not the same as it being safe enough to roll out to millions of people.
|
|
|
|
Independent bodies examine the companies testing and will do their own testing to correlate and check that it’s accurate data they’ve been handed. However they won’t do their own complete testing on it unless they are given reason to. I don’t know what the testing situation is with the Sputnik vaccine. As I said if the testing proves it’s safe why wouldn’t I take it.
as for proof it’s nothing to do with the social media articles, got a few better sources than that for the UK ones. If you’re talking about Sputnik I merely said if there’s enough proof of it being tested I won’t have an issue taking it. :)
I’m not overly concerned about the Sputnik vaccine, there’s been no significant issues with it so far, if there was any serious issues with it we’d know by now. It’s not like European agencies haven’t looked at it in great detail. It’s widely accepted it’s a valid vaccine even if it’s not as effective as other ones which are available due to not using mRNA.
as for AstraZeneca you seem to forget Oxford helped them due to their lack of history in the area. They aren’t a bunch of monkeys like you make them sound.
|
|
|
|
Quote ( James Hitchen @ January 12th 2021,15:57:10 ) If you’re talking about Sputnik I merely said if there’s enough proof of it being tested I won’t have an issue taking it. :)
Isn't what you said which is the whole reason I quoted & replied, but okay :) (I'm assuming you'd care about the results of the testing too).
Quote ( James Hitchen @ January 12th 2021,15:57:10 ) It’s not like European agencies haven’t looked at it in great detail.
I'm not aware they have. Can you point me to some source?
Quote ( James Hitchen @ January 12th 2021,15:57:10 ) It’s widely accepted it’s a valid vaccine even if it’s not as effective as other ones which are available due to not using mRNA.
Not really. All that's happening so far is no one really wants to cause alarm by calling it out too harshly, and there's cautious optimism over it eventually being approved. Again, it hasn't been approved by the World Health Organisation nor any agency the WHO regards as stringent. A few countries (Argentina, Algeria, Belarus, the Palestinian Authority, maybe more) desperate to secure supply have approved it but there's also some drama over whether they get the first shot or both shots since the second is apparently in shorter supply. People have to make their own judgement whether to take it or not and there is of course for many a serious urgency to take any vaccine which might work. Which is fine. But you're making it sound like it's a bona fide likely safe drug alongside the Pfizer, Moderna and AstraZeneca vaccines and I don't think the facts support that just yet.
Quote ( James Hitchen @ January 12th 2021,15:57:10 ) as for AstraZeneca you seem to forget Oxford helped them due to their lack of history in the area. They aren’t a bunch of monkeys like you make them sound.
You're reading too much into what I said. They're not a reputable source for whether Sputnik V is safe for widespread use, is all. We have independent agencies to approve drugs, not drug companies just saying "it seems fine, actually it's the best, give me your money". The opioid epidemic is a good example of the potential conflicts of interest.
For that matter AstraZeneca aren't even claiming Sputnik V is okay for widespread use yet, and I bet if you ask any one of the Oxford team they would say the same: have some patience while the WHO investigate the data (when they're actually given it), or at least wait for a peer reviewed publication of it in a reputable journal.
|
|
|
|
Sorry I’m on mobile so quoting is a pain in the ass.
I don’t have any articles or anything on it at hand at the minute. I’m sure a Google search will bring up some reputable sources. I can’t say I search up articles on this stuff to have at hand. ;)
I think the debate over what is classed as a reputable body for verifying and approving a vaccine becomes a bit more of a political discussion than biological. But what I would have to remind you, do you think Russia would be willing to give certain groups their vaccine to approve? They may feel they aren’t valid and may screw the results to make them look bad. Some may see the Russian Governments testing as more valid than other groups. It’s hard to say ;)
my comment towards AstraZeneca was aimed more at your point about their lack of experience and panicking at lack of effectiveness in their product. They aren’t stupid enough to become concerned over the situation there were in, they’d be very aware of the situation they are in. But you can’t read into their relationship with the Sputnik vaccine on its success. You could say if they discard that approach it’s because the Sputnik is unsafe but at the same time it could be because it doesn’t change the effectiveness. Ultimately that’s a metric which is not good for measuring another vaccine by. But they absolutely would not use the Sputnik vaccine without looking into it first.
|
|
|
|
can we like not get pissed off at each other because of a vaccine
just take it or dont take it and stop arguing about it for gods sake
|
|
|
|
Quote ( James Hitchen @ January 12th 2021,17:19:07 ) They aren’t stupid enough to become concerned over the situation there were in, they’d be very aware of the situation they are in.
Stupid isn't the word I'd use, maybe panic was the wrong word too, but they definitely got some confusing data and put out a very tentative theory that their vaccine was more effective with a half first dose and then a full second dose. One reason that might have been the case is that the immune system develops antibodies to the adenovirus vector after being given the first shot, which reduces the effectiveness of the second shot, and maybe a lower dose first time reduces that unwanted immunity.
The Sputnik V vaccine uses two different adenoviruses to avoid that potential problem, but they find it more difficult to manufacture the second part of it. So I can see why it made sense at the time for both to look at pooling their efforts, from a scientific and potentially also a commercial perspective. However if Oxford/AstraZeneca can really get 90%(*) effectiveness now just by leaving it 3 months between full doses I wouldn't be too surprised if the collaboration doesn't get any further than the lab, but yea you're right it still won't say anything either way about the value of the Sputnik V vaccine. And I'm speculating about the motive.
(*) I think the 90% is worth going after because it's an indicator of longevity of protection, not because the extra 20% of people avoiding a cough is very important.
Quote ( James Hitchen @ January 12th 2021,17:19:07 ) I think the debate over what is classed as a reputable body for verifying and approving a vaccine becomes a bit more of a political discussion than biological.
From a scientific perspective it's fairly straightforward that a country approving a drug without seeing phase 3 trial data is taking a bigger risk than one which has seen the data and is satisfied with the risk and benefits. Whether the risk is bigger than the risk from COVID and from lockdowns is a much harder assessment and includes political aspects because the risk falls on different parts of the population in different ways. There's also longer term risks to reputation of vaccination programmes in general if an approved vaccine turns out to have terrible side-effects only after millions have already received it.
|
|
|
|
i am going to donate 100 pounds to the nhs #go NHS
|
|
|
|
I always find it funny with anti-government sentiments on this topic. Governments around the world have struggled to agree on anything for thousands of years, yet suddenly agree en masse now for enforced lockdowns for a pandemic. They are suddenly all agreeing on a topic when they all hate each other and have been arguing and warring for thousands of years.
|
|
|
|
Never thought Bradley Peen would end up saying something more respectable than two Jaguars and yet here we are
|
|
|
|
in fact i'm upping it to 1000 pounds
|
|
|
|
and 1000 pounds to cancer research
1000 pounds to my local doctors as well
|
|
|
|
|
i had covid for a little bit in march but this is my way of saying thank you
|
|
|
|
NHS = the best thing ever no joke they saved my life
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Ignacio Belatti @ January 8th 2021,17:59:06 )
<!-- gpro_300x250 -->
(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
Quote ( Mark Pinnick @ January 8th 2021,15:03:50 )
Quote ( Ignacio Belatti @ January 8th 2021,14:02:53
Do any of you think Im a bad person.
i don't think you are a bad person ignacio :)
i think you are a nice and respectable person
and those who disagree will have to go through me
|
|
|
|
God bless all nhs workers during this horrific pandemic
|
|
|
|
Bradley Preen is not Paul's DA confirmed.
|
|
|
|
i got a warning from vlad :(
|
|
|
|
I'd really like to hear more about the NHS, Bradley.
|
|
|
|
|
|
well.. the nhs are the following letters
National
Health
Service
the caps are the nhs bits
i suppose being in america has a differnet service???
if so please could you tell me :)
|
|
|
|
Oh it's way too messy and complicated here. I wish we had three lovely letters like you guys. The Caps bit is really interesting indeed! God bless the NHS!
|
|
|
|
i understand.
the american hospitals must have been like the 1800s fire stations over here in england (very complictaed)
|
|
|
|
i think the nhs should become ihs
International
Health
Service
or whs
Worldwide
Health
Service
and there are obviously smaller and noobier hospitals
nhs is the best thing ever
well that's my thinking anyway
|
|
|
|
Wait until Bradley finds out i'm an NHS worker, then he will have different views about the NHS :P
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Kyle Morris @ January 12th 2021,19:12:34 ) Wait until Bradley finds out i'm an NHS worker, then he will have different views about the NHS :P
And me. :)
|
|
|
|
Quote ( Bradley Preen @ January 12th 2021,19:09:26 ) i think the nhs should become ihs
It's like John Lennon's "Imagine" with no virus or poverty and such types
That's really good thinking i think
|
|
|
|
ive already got a 3rd leg, i dont need another, lol
|
|
Deutsch
Español
Română
Italiano
Português
Português
Français
Polski
Русский
Български
Македонски
Српски
Nederlands
Vlaams
Suomi
Lietuvių
Čeština
Magyar
Eesti keel
Slovenčina
Türkçe
Shqip
Ελληνικά
Hrvatski
Bahasa Melayu
Dansk
Pirate
