I am all for questioning dictates and traditions and examining the facts, but all too often activists take the opposite view simply to be confrontational, very much like the party in opposition in parliament.
The facts surrounding C19 point to the viruses' success at transmission and how leaving the method to fight it to "common sense" is a very weak argument. We know that a true lock down ( all la the first wave) was instrumental in reducing the spread by denying the virus hosts to transport and spread it. Subsequent lock downs have not been as rigorous (E.g. Schools and more businesses being open), its these cracks in the process where the virus finds a means to survive.
I have consistently suggested that the game changer will be an effective vaccine, but that will only work if its is used across the greatest majority of the population.
If activists believe that society must give them the freedom to behave as they wish, then they must be prepared to accept their innate responsibilities they have to protect all other members of society from this plague.
I will not pursue this line any further in this thread.
Last edited:
I don't think we will be rushing out to get the vaccine as soon as it is available as we both feel that there has not been enough trials for long term risk and obviously no long term testing.
At the moment it is a known fact that people who have had Covid19 have become reinfected with the virus as the immunity was only short term.
At the moment it is a known fact that people who have had Covid19 have become reinfected with the virus as the immunity was only short term.
Actually i would agree with you Buckman about the vaccine my wife who is Nurse said she would rather wait and see how it does .
There is no doubt that someone who has had the virus and recovered can indeed pick the virus up again carry it and thus potentially pass it to someone else. There are only a hand full of people who have apparently had a repeat infection with symptoms. The vast majority so far it has been a once only infection, though we are still in the early days so these figure may change.
I cannot understand the thought process that says "no" to a vaccine when there is clinical evidence of a high success rate, Its akin to deciding to walk through the lion enclosure at a a safari park on the wrong side of the fence! Even if it only protects for a while, its giving you a better chance.
Also by taking the vaccine and getting some immunity, you are not only helping yourself, but you will also be helping to break the transmission routes to other people. Its harping back to the herd immunity concept.
I cannot understand the thought process that says "no" to a vaccine when there is clinical evidence of a high success rate, Its akin to deciding to walk through the lion enclosure at a a safari park on the wrong side of the fence! Even if it only protects for a while, its giving you a better chance.
Also by taking the vaccine and getting some immunity, you are not only helping yourself, but you will also be helping to break the transmission routes to other people. Its harping back to the herd immunity concept.
As and when offered we will definitely have the vaccine on offer irrespective of the fact it has not followed the normal testing protocols as explained by Prof Van Tam this morning.
However until further testing is complete I will not recommend it to a pregnant or about to get pregnant woman. Most of you will remember Thaldomide🤬🤬😢😢
However until further testing is complete I will not recommend it to a pregnant or about to get pregnant woman. Most of you will remember Thaldomide🤬🤬😢😢
There are some of us with medical issues that may be adversely affected by a vaccine that has not been tested thoroughly as the vaccine could have a bad reaction with medication that we already are taking for our current condition.
Assuming that it will come through, once the safety data is accepted by the MHRA, I would like the vaccine asap and also for those dear to me (I will be a fair way down the list in terms of criteria: mid 40's, in generally good health - which is right and appropriate.) I appreciate that for some with underlying issues careful risk : benefit considerations will need to be made which is right. BUT thinking ahead, people can't be forced to have the vaccine, so an idea, to throw out there, those that do take the immunisation could be issued with a passport / membership card once they've completed the treatment course and those with a valid reason an exemption card. Premises could then if they choose request showing these to allow admission - (not doing away with face coverings / social distancing until science advises ok.) This is not going down the ID card / nanny state route, but in these odd times i do think this could help us? I wonder how many of the anti-vax brigade would then stay true to their cause?
Last edited:
There may be some people who by dint of their pre-existing medical conditions might not tolerate the vaccine well which is why I wrote " except where professional medical counter concerns exist."
From what I have gleaned so far, the Pfizer vaccine should have no worse after effects than the normal flu vaccines, just minor issues such as a achy arm and may be a headache for a few hours - a small price to pay if it prevents you from catching C19. Its worth remembering that the Pfizer trials involved 40,000 people, That is a very big trial, and is likely to show up most of the problems the vaccine might have. I appreciate there may be some very rare side effects it doesn't show, you can never say never.
Compare that to the breathing difficulties that typify the problems for patients who develop C19 symptoms, and some of the long term post infection conditions that have proliferated. Prevention has got to be better than cure.
Remember, whilst we obviously are concerned about self preservation, but we also have a responsibility to protect those around us. If the medics have no concerns then I believe to protect you, your family and friends taking one of the vaccines is a very sensible thing to do.
The decision about the dangers of the vaccine should be take between the patient and their medical professional who is best placed to offer safety advice.
From what I have gleaned so far, the Pfizer vaccine should have no worse after effects than the normal flu vaccines, just minor issues such as a achy arm and may be a headache for a few hours - a small price to pay if it prevents you from catching C19. Its worth remembering that the Pfizer trials involved 40,000 people, That is a very big trial, and is likely to show up most of the problems the vaccine might have. I appreciate there may be some very rare side effects it doesn't show, you can never say never.
Compare that to the breathing difficulties that typify the problems for patients who develop C19 symptoms, and some of the long term post infection conditions that have proliferated. Prevention has got to be better than cure.
Remember, whilst we obviously are concerned about self preservation, but we also have a responsibility to protect those around us. If the medics have no concerns then I believe to protect you, your family and friends taking one of the vaccines is a very sensible thing to do.
The decision about the dangers of the vaccine should be take between the patient and their medical professional who is best placed to offer safety advice.
I know this course of action will never be accepted but my answer to people who refuse the vaccine would be to refuse any NHS treatment to any one who got infected after refusing, I’d let the virus run its course with no medical intervention whatsoever, the molly coddling do-gooders would never accept it though.
BP
BP
I already have a NHS immunisation card with all my vaccinations on, except my childhood ones, so my Hepatitis, Yellow fever, Cholera, TB , Meningitis, Flu, Tetanus, I wonder if this new Vaccine has been tested for ineractions with all these other ones.
Parksy
Moderator
I agree completely.
I take 21 tablets ( 6 of these are 3 times per day which is still 15 different tablets) plus 2 blasts of inhaler every day for the rest of my life.
I'm more than happy to be vaccinated against Covid 19 if my GP will confirm that the vaccine will not lead to complications with the meds that I already take, or make the heart failure, atrial fibrillation and COPD that I have any worse than it is.
I find those remarks very offensive as surely it is up to the individual any way whether they want an injection or not as not all people are selfish just because they do not want the vaccine for whatever reason. After all no one is forcing anyone to have the flu vaccine.
This article may well put all your minds at rest subject to your own GP agreeing you are a suitable candidate. There will be some who should not rush to have it as I said earlier.
Note Pfizer are charging ten times more for their vaccine than Astra Zeneca.
The vaccines use a different scientific approach but that should not affect the end result.
www.telegraph.co.uk
The Pfizer trial involved over 45000 people but be aware. We don’t know their ages or gender. The trials are less than six months old. At my age , I will still gladly have either Pfizer or Astra but if a female in your family , pregnant now or soon I say no.
Note Pfizer are charging ten times more for their vaccine than Astra Zeneca.
The vaccines use a different scientific approach but that should not affect the end result.
How close is a Covid-19 vaccine after the Pfizer breakthrough - and who will get it first?
A vaccine against coronavirus could help beat lockdown and help life get back to normal - pharmaceutical giant Pfizer believes it's close
The Pfizer trial involved over 45000 people but be aware. We don’t know their ages or gender. The trials are less than six months old. At my age , I will still gladly have either Pfizer or Astra but if a female in your family , pregnant now or soon I say no.
Cannot read the article without signing up. I gave up the DT some years ago. Too far right even by my standards 😱This article may well put all your minds at rest subject to your own GP agreeing you are a suitable candidate. There will be some who should not rush to have it as I said earlier.
Note Pfizer are charging ten times more for their vaccine than Astra Zeneca.
The vaccines use a different scientific approach but that should not affect the end result.
How close is a Covid-19 vaccine after the Pfizer breakthrough - and who will get it first?
A vaccine against coronavirus could help beat lockdown and help life get back to normal - pharmaceutical giant Pfizer believes it's close
The Pfizer trial involved over 45000 people but be aware. We don’t know their ages or gender. The trials are less than six months old. At my age , I will still gladly have either Pfizer or Astra but if a female in your family , pregnant now or soon I say no.
Parksy
Moderator
This is a very extreme point of view.
No NHS doctor could refuse treatment to any patient, the Hippocratic oath obliges them to treat those who need treatment.
It's way too soon for any of us to start getting excited about the prospects of a vaccine, it's yet to be properly tested.
Nobody has the right to decide who gets NHS care and who doesn't, it's there to treat all of us regardless.
Not as bad as the Sun Clive. It should open because it is not a subscription page. It is well worth a read and brings a lot of technical data to this thread. I can ask Parksy to pm you a hard copy from me
Thanks I saw the sign up for free trial and assumed that they would want details etc to register. It is a very useful and interesting article 👍👍👍
Being involved with someone who has worked in the NHS as a nurse has a wide experience of vaccines and side effects. Before having this with my medical issues and the medication needed to remain stable then adding another element to this should be considered. Speaking with my own doctor will be a necessity so that reassurance can be given there will be no contraindications with this, having both had necessary vaccines in the past working in this public area we have had to have for safety reasons and being grateful for them.
In addition, if you are undergoing certain treatments you cannot have the injection anyway whether you want it or not!
I wholly concur with what has been said by each: Buckman, the Prof and Parksy; I do stand by my thoughts ref a "passport / membership card" or "exemption card" for those who may be at greater risk of further issues induced by uncertainty around vaccination, if not proven safe in comorbidities or for drug on drug interactions. The whole and only purpose of the vaccine is to reduce opportunity for acquiring the virus and further transmission, thus: to preserve health and protect life. One would hope that if the vast majority of people who can safely take the vaccine up without augmented risk do so, then those who have factors precluding them who have sacrificed much to stay safe, would also be protected.
I have great respect for Prof. JVT & found his words around wishing his elderly mother having the vaccine asap reassuring, BUT we don’t know her medical situation. Medical Professionals (the overwhelming majority being heroes) abide by the “First do no harm” philosophy that we’re all aware of but also principles of: protecting life, preventing deterioration and promoting recovery. I’m sure that decisions on vaccination safety will be carefully evaluated. If those who can confidently and safely be administered it get it, then those who cannot should be protected by default. Hutch referenced his validated immunisation card, in my former life on Emergency Ambulances I had to be up to date with Hep jabs – to protect others as well as myself, in many professions CRB checks are rightly a requisite: is this any different or less important? I see no reason why individuals who are safely able should not (or would not want to) be vaccinated to protect themselves and to reduce the risk to the greater population, or if they choose otherwise to face being excluded (not from from NHS care) but the will of proprietors to permit access to premises to protect other patrons.
Cheers, Wayne
I have great respect for Prof. JVT & found his words around wishing his elderly mother having the vaccine asap reassuring, BUT we don’t know her medical situation. Medical Professionals (the overwhelming majority being heroes) abide by the “First do no harm” philosophy that we’re all aware of but also principles of: protecting life, preventing deterioration and promoting recovery. I’m sure that decisions on vaccination safety will be carefully evaluated. If those who can confidently and safely be administered it get it, then those who cannot should be protected by default. Hutch referenced his validated immunisation card, in my former life on Emergency Ambulances I had to be up to date with Hep jabs – to protect others as well as myself, in many professions CRB checks are rightly a requisite: is this any different or less important? I see no reason why individuals who are safely able should not (or would not want to) be vaccinated to protect themselves and to reduce the risk to the greater population, or if they choose otherwise to face being excluded (not from from NHS care) but the will of proprietors to permit access to premises to protect other patrons.
Cheers, Wayne
Last edited:
Mel
Moderator
Presumably this logic would also advocate refusal of treatment to anyone who smokes, drinks alcohol, is overweight, never exercises, doesn’t eat enough vegetables, breaks a limb whilst engaging in risky sports such as ski-ing, gets knocked down because they were texting, electrocutes themselves because they were doing diy that they were not qualified to do, or engages in any behaviour or lifestyle choices that are known to be a risk to health.
mel
You forgot drives a car, rides a motorbike, cycles or even walks as they are all risky these days with potholes everywhere.
People who do various pastimes that endanger their own lives is in no way the same as someone who knowingly spreads a disease that will kill others, I never at any point said that everyone should have the vaccine regardless of whether it will have adverse effects, it’s the idiots who think COVID is a government conspiracy, these are the idiots who will pedal their fake news, and will ignore all the social distancing etc, these are the type of person who will spread COVID knowingly who should be stopped, I’m all for people with underlying reasons that could react to vaccine not having it, but the idiots who happily spread the virus are not just harming themselves, there’s been prosecutions in the past when people have knowingly passed HIV, no difference if someone passes on covid knowing they could be infected, each to their own point of view, I did say it would never be accepted by the do gooders.
BP
BP
Facebook
Twitter