Gransnet forums

Health

The Vaccine

(613 Posts)
annsixty Sun 22-Nov-20 11:39:05

Has everyone made up their minds about the vaccine yet?

I an 83 so in what is possibly the second group to be offered it.
I just cannot make a decision about whether or not to accept.

I have always had the flue jab, had pneumonia one and shingles, so why am I so undecided about this?

I have spoken to several friends in the same age group and they are all eager to go ahead, in fact one is champing at the bit and says he will be first in the queue.

Any thoughts ?

OceanMama Wed 25-Nov-20 08:24:03

Why? It seems to me there has been quite a few blanket statements made around the place to bring it on or people saying they will line up for a vaccine as soon as it's available - even months before we knew if there could be one available. I made a general statement based on some absolutist statements I've seen. You might be taking a healthy middle ground with your consideration of things but there are many who aren't.

I should add to this, I don't really care what someone else chooses to do. Get vaccinated or don't. I'll just worry about deciding for me and mine.

Juniper1 Wed 25-Nov-20 08:20:51

Tweedle24
What damage could they do?
Not sure reference to damage has reassured me. I have had 2 terrible botch jobs which caused massive bruising, from professionals. And other times perfect.
What concerns me also is the hygiene arrangements surrounding non professional administration.

Elegran Wed 25-Nov-20 08:15:48

llizzie2 Do you expect to get a different letter (or none) than everyone else in the country? Those dispatching them don't know that you are computer literate and never take the flu jab anyway. These letters are posted in bulk, everyone gets the same ones, and they have to assume the lowest possible level of IT knowledge - or even any knowledge.

OceanMama Wed 25-Nov-20 08:14:34

suziewoozie

OceanMama

I tend to think that those who accept any medication or procedure without questioning or investigating, or those who reject any medication or procedure without the same, are equally questionable. The truth is that any medication or procedure (including vaccines) has some element of risk to it. The risk might be smaller than the benefit, but it is still there, however small. Even if 1% of people suffer a particular adverse reaction to something, that's all well and good unless you are in that 1%. We don't know who that hypothetical 1% is until it's happened.

I am keeping an open mind and not committing one way or other to the vaccine or against it. I just won't be first in line because I want to see what happens to those who are quick on the uptake and make a decision when I have more information.

There’s no evidence on here that those who are willing to have the vaccine are accepting it without question or investigation. Many of us are on regular medication and are fully aware thank you of the balance of risks and benefits involved in taking medication. Just this week after test results came back I decided not to take the treatment offered after balancing the risks and benefits. However there will nearly always be a subjective element involved in such decisions as to the weighting of the various elements in the equation For example, in my recent decision, one benefit was a cosmetic improvement - I gave that no weighting but maybe had I been much younger, that might have been more important to me.
With the vaccine , the weight given to the benefits for many many people will vastly outweigh the risks. I found your post quite patronising frankly.

Why? It seems to me there has been quite a few blanket statements made around the place to bring it on or people saying they will line up for a vaccine as soon as it's available - even months before we knew if there could be one available. I made a general statement based on some absolutist statements I've seen. You might be taking a healthy middle ground with your consideration of things but there are many who aren't.

Tweedle24 Wed 25-Nov-20 08:09:12

I love the way the anti-vaccers make the accusation that their opinions are not countered with facts. What nonsense! There are some highly qualified and knowledgeable people on here alone who have done just that and many more in the wider community.

suziewoozie Wed 25-Nov-20 07:46:39

OceanMama

I tend to think that those who accept any medication or procedure without questioning or investigating, or those who reject any medication or procedure without the same, are equally questionable. The truth is that any medication or procedure (including vaccines) has some element of risk to it. The risk might be smaller than the benefit, but it is still there, however small. Even if 1% of people suffer a particular adverse reaction to something, that's all well and good unless you are in that 1%. We don't know who that hypothetical 1% is until it's happened.

I am keeping an open mind and not committing one way or other to the vaccine or against it. I just won't be first in line because I want to see what happens to those who are quick on the uptake and make a decision when I have more information.

There’s no evidence on here that those who are willing to have the vaccine are accepting it without question or investigation. Many of us are on regular medication and are fully aware thank you of the balance of risks and benefits involved in taking medication. Just this week after test results came back I decided not to take the treatment offered after balancing the risks and benefits. However there will nearly always be a subjective element involved in such decisions as to the weighting of the various elements in the equation For example, in my recent decision, one benefit was a cosmetic improvement - I gave that no weighting but maybe had I been much younger, that might have been more important to me.
With the vaccine , the weight given to the benefits for many many people will vastly outweigh the risks. I found your post quite patronising frankly.

claresc0tt Wed 25-Nov-20 06:50:07

Can't wait to get any one of the vaccines for Covid and get back to normal life. Trust in the scientists and just get on with it!

OceanMama Wed 25-Nov-20 04:01:34

I tend to think that those who accept any medication or procedure without questioning or investigating, or those who reject any medication or procedure without the same, are equally questionable. The truth is that any medication or procedure (including vaccines) has some element of risk to it. The risk might be smaller than the benefit, but it is still there, however small. Even if 1% of people suffer a particular adverse reaction to something, that's all well and good unless you are in that 1%. We don't know who that hypothetical 1% is until it's happened.

I am keeping an open mind and not committing one way or other to the vaccine or against it. I just won't be first in line because I want to see what happens to those who are quick on the uptake and make a decision when I have more information.

growstuff Wed 25-Nov-20 03:38:42

Another interesting article about anti-vaxxers:

www.mediamatters.org/coronavirus-covid-19/most-notorious-anti-vax-groups-use-facebook-lay-groundwork-against-novel

Fortunately, very few GNers are gullible enough to believe this nonsense.

growstuff Wed 25-Nov-20 03:12:48

It would appear that Children's Health Defense has fallen foul of Facebook and is suing because its fake news has been banned.

I suppose its "agents" are looking for new places to post.

growstuff Wed 25-Nov-20 03:09:12

This is what the American Council on Science and Health (Promoting science and debunking junk since 1978) has to say about Children's Health Defense:

Anti-Vaccine Group 'Children's Health Defense' Smells A Coronavirus Conspiracy

By Cameron English — April 1, 2020

Children's Health Defense says governments and corporations are using the coronavirus (SARS-COV-2) to advance a "global immunization agenda." The anti-vaccine group claims that our leaders just needed the right pandemic as a pretext to goad us into getting vaccines. This is a clever story. It's also false.

If you think the new coronavirus pandemic is an unexpected tragedy public health officials are hoping to end swiftly, you're mistaken, says anti-vaccine group Children's Health Defense (CHD).

Sure, the US government is eager to bring the virus to heel, fearing the global economy could collapse with so many people stuck at home. But never mind such inconvenient facts, the group argues, because the rich and powerful are dragging out the pandemic to advance the “global immunization agenda”—all so “Big Pharma” can profit:

Dr. Anthony Fauci, Director of National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease, is predictably shining a spotlight on risky and uncertain coronavirus vaccines that may not be available for two years … Will Big Pharma ... be allowed to cash in on this catastrophe with speculative, patentable vaccines at the expense of the therapeutics needed to save lives now?

Even worse, these plans have been in the works for a long time, CHD claims:

For those who follow the global immunization agenda … the announcement of a new pandemic didn’t come as a surprise. “Pandemic preparedness” has been well-funded and a buzz word for a long time … The latest simulation for preparedness was Event 201, a rehearsal of a coronavirus pandemic organized on October 18, 2019 in New York by Johns Hopkins University, the Gates Foundation and the World Economic Forum.

… What better than viral terror to influence public opinion and health policies on vaccine battles raging on both sides of the Atlantic?

This version of events takes factual information and contorts it into a nonsensical narrative that collapses under scrutiny. The bigger problem, however, is that spinning a sensible policy like pandemic preparedness into evidence of a worldwide conspiracy misleads politicians and the public into making decisions that amplify the risk posed by pandemics.

Planning ahead is a conspiracy?

It's true that governments and international organizations prepare for and try to anticipate disease outbreaks. This isn't the scandalous revelation CHD implies, though. Since there are seven coronaviruses that can infect humans (we knew of six before SARS-COV-2 was identified), and three cause severe illness, it makes sense that we'd prepare for one to cause a pandemic. As Johns Hopkins said of the Event 201 conference,

“The exercise illustrated areas where public/private partnerships will be necessary during the response to a severe pandemic … Experts agree that it is only a matter of time before one of these epidemics becomes global … A severe pandemic … would require reliable cooperation among several industries, national governments, and key international institutions.”

The school has denied that conference participants predicted the current crisis or modeled its impacts on public health, as the three-hour event video will confirm. But here's the CliffNotes version if you want to spend your shelter-in-place time watching Netflix: 15 experts said it was imperative to develop treatments for a novel coronavirus and a plan to quickly move resources around the globe to mitigate a pandemic.

These concerns were well founded since researchers are now rushing to develop or identify drugs that can combat the virus and health care providers are facing shortages of vital medical supplies. The more important point is that the conference was designed to prevent the very sort of “viral terror” CHD believes could be used to manipulate parents into vaccinating their kids.

“A techno-communist global government”

CHD also says international disease preparedness campaigns are designed to institute a “techno-communist global government” that can “bypass informed consent laws and constitutional rights.” We shouldn't discard our civil liberties for the sake of public health, but such over-the-top rhetoric confirms the group doesn't comprehend the threat we're facing.

Pandemics like the one we're living through are not new. There will be more in the future, and immunization will be our best bet at surviving them. Call me a globalist shill, but I'm not bothered by rich people and governments encouraging the public to get vaccinated before an infectious disease hits.

Think of the alternative: a deadly virus begins making its way across the world, taking thousands of lives as it spreads, and people with the resources and influence to stop it do nothing—or worse, encourage its spread. Now that'd be a conspiracy worth calling out.

Ironically enough, that scenario is actually closer to reality than the “globalist agenda” story. With over a million dollars in donations and Robert F Kennedy, Jr. as its founder and spokesman, Children's Health Defense is part of a well-funded movement that continues to convince parents to forgo their children's immunizations.

growstuff Wed 25-Nov-20 02:57:52

anewstart Why did you copy and paste a load of garbage from this site:

childrenshealthdefense.org/news/components-of-mrna-technology-could-lead-to-significant-adverse-events-in-one-or-more-of-our-clinical-trials-says-moderna/

Aren't you capable of putting your conspiracy into your own words?

For those who haven't clicked on the link, "Children's Health Defense" is an American anti-vaccination group.

This is what Wiki has to say about it:

A study found Children's Health Defense was one of major buyers of anti-vaccine Facebook advertising in December 2018 and February 2019, the other being Stop Mandatory Vaccination. Heavily targeting women and young couples, the advertising highlighted the alleged risks of vaccines and asked for donations. According to an analysis by NBC News, the group is one of three major sources of false claims on vaccination shared on the internet, the other two being the fake news site Natural News and the website Stop Mandatory Vaccination. Facebook subsequently refused to carry anti-vaccination advertising from the group.

...

On May 8, 2019, while some areas in the United States were struggling with a resurgence of measles due to low vaccination rates, Kathleen Kennedy Townsend, Joseph P. Kennedy and Maeve Kennedy McKean publicly stated that while their relative Robert has championed many admirable causes, he "has helped to spread dangerous misinformation over social media and is complicit in sowing distrust of the science behind vaccines."

Make your own mind up! Would you give any credence to a tin pot bunch of cranks, who seem very interested in taking your money?

growstuff Wed 25-Nov-20 02:45:50

"Do your own research."

Why oh why do so many conspiracy theorists ask this question. Reading some website by a whacky peddler of rubbish doesn't count as research.

growstuff Wed 25-Nov-20 02:43:31

"The AstraZeneca vaccine, by the way, is made with aborted human fetal cells from a 14-week-old male baby."

No. it isn't.

anewstart Wed 25-Nov-20 02:01:53

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

anewstart Wed 25-Nov-20 01:40:26

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

anewstart Wed 25-Nov-20 01:34:23

"If you tear out your enemy's tongue, it doesn't prove him a liar, it just proves you fear what he has to say."
Funny how the "strategy for countering anti-vax disinformation" never actually involves addressing the "disinformation" and proving it false.
It always and only involves censorship, name-calling, penalties and threats.
I note the "justification" for this latest encroachment into all-out tyranny is - as ever - predicated on health and longevity. "We must stamp out this evil disinformation or people will die!"
And for the seven billionth time (and that's just this morning), I wonder when it was I, or the rest of the nation, agreed it was the government's responsibility to protect our health or extend our lives?
If the government genuinely believes (which, of course, it doesn't) that this vaccine promotes optimal health and longevity, then the government is at liberty to state that belief. That is its right within a country founded upon principles of free speech - that people have the absolute right to waffle whatever nonsense they like.
Others are then at liberty to choose whether they believe the government's nonsense, or not. They are at liberty to offer counterarguments and present evidence to support their position. Other people can listen to both sides and make up their own minds. That is how people form opinions and make choices, for their health and everything else. By considering all the information and deciding.
There is no justification whatsoever for interfering with or suppressing that process on any issue, let alone one as critical and personal as deciding whether to have invasive, risky, experimental medical procedures.
That the government won't allow the process of dialogue and debate to openly take place should be a screaming red flag to every single thinking person in the country, regardless of their views on vaccines.
If they get these "emergency censorship laws" pushed through, then not only is that the death knell for any remaining last sliver of pretence we live in a "liberal democracy", but also, we can be sure, with weary predictability extrapolated from the whole of history, that these laws will never be revoked.

anewstart Wed 25-Nov-20 01:03:52

Stats were a big part of my actuarial science degree.

suziewoozie Wed 25-Nov-20 01:03:00

Keffie thanks for a great post

‘The base of the vaccine are already available so it has been about adapting Covid19 with the other vaccine strains and finding ones to work.’

This part reminded me of something Sarah Gilbert said on the lines that the lorry already existed and all they had to do was load it up.

Ziggy1914 Wed 25-Nov-20 00:28:51

Dr carrie madej

Keffie12 Wed 25-Nov-20 00:28:04

My dear friend is a medical research librarian. Its a specialist job she did many years at uni for.

Her work entails her working alongside WHO and all the other scientific medical research and communities.

I want to check info I go to her. This vaccine has not been rushed. I hope some of you who are concerned come back and read this.

1/ Vaccines can be produced much quicker than they are. The reason they usually take 5-10 years is because of all the paperwork and slow treadmill of each section going from dept to dept.

They have not been afforded the time with this. The medical science world have been working 24/7 on this and no delays have been allowed.

The slow process normally afforded they have had no time too and each section is dealt with straightaway meaning paperwork and so on. We can't afford the world to be like this for 10 years

2/ The other concern people have again involves how they have produced it so quickly.

Most don't realise that the original name of Corona virus comes from the umbrella term or group of viruses in the strain of the various types of common cold/pneumonia/flu virus whuch also includes SARS, MERS and so on. They all come under the group of Corona. Covid19 was named after.

The base of the vaccine are already available so it has been about adapting Covid19 with the other vaccine strains and finding ones to work.

That is how they have been come by so quickly and you have no here to worry.

I would rather have a jab than risk this virus and or giving it to someone

growstuff Tue 24-Nov-20 23:22:47

And I agree - science is not about beliefs. That's why it's science.

growstuff Tue 24-Nov-20 23:21:39

Alegrias2

trisher

Nothing frightens me more than people who think they have a right to dictate to others what they should or shouldn't do with their own body. Advise by all means, present figures and evidence to support your beliefs but stop playing the holier-than-thou card. It's not only wrong it's counter productive because people think who the hell are you to tell me what to do.

Not beliefs, but Science. Facts. Reality.

Some people won't listen. I hope the ones who really want to understand have got something from this thread.

Well said Alegrias.

As I keep posting, it hasn't been established whether any of the vaccines prevents transmission. At this stage, all we know is that there is a good chance that it will stop the virus from sneaking into cells via ACE2 receptors, thus preventing organ damage.

The only person who is known at this stage to benefit is the person who has been vaccinated. People in contact with the vaccinated people won't benefit, which is why the idea of people having "vaccination certificates" to travel is nonsense. It's not like the Yellow Fever vaccination. It's also why those most clinically vulnerable should be prioritised.

If people with known risk factors, which is everybody over about 60 and some other younger people, decide not to be vaccinated, that's their business. If they become seriously ill, having been given a choice, I can't say I'll be that bothered.

suziewoozie Tue 24-Nov-20 23:08:59

I can’t knit ( loved the bagpiper btw) so don’t go on threads giving opinions about how to knit. Knitting isn’t a belief system and neither is research design

Alegrias2 Tue 24-Nov-20 22:59:02

No really, not belief. Science doesn't depend on belief. If you don't know the difference, that's pretty dispiriting. Nobody's slagging you off. Don't play that card.