Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Virus |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The point scoring needs to end. We all want to get through this with our health and that of our loved ones, in tact. " agreed. It's useful to share updates so we can make better decisions. But there is a risk we entrench people into their positions if we make it personal. Noone wants that  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For up to 28 days? Wow what a comprehensive study." A considerably more comprehensive study than those claiming that the vaccines are going to kill everyone. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc." You do realise that most anti vaxxers don't know the facts and spread nonsense. The facts are above. They are clear, peer reviewed, and should therefore eliminate fears of the trepidatious. I doubt though that those who are worried about the vaccine will go and get it now that the research has been clearly delineated for them by the smartest minds in the land | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For up to 28 days? Wow what a comprehensive study." So the reasons for this are that vaccine injuries and severe reactions are almost exclusively documented in the first days and weeks after a vaccine. This means that the incidents outside of this time frame are so statistically negligible that they would have no impact on thenrest of the data and to wait 3-6 months would be counterproductive when the safety of the vaccines is being questioned by the great unwashed | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I would be inclined to be bothered with the content if this didn't have a Sun-like headline of "checkmate anti-vaxxers". Just stokes the existing divisions and point scoring from playground name calling. " Sadly it's part of modern tribalism. He's showing his tribal markings as an allegiance to the tribe he wants to be taken in by. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc." How dare you try and come here and make sense You're a granny killing conspiracy theorist and that's the end of it There's no space for nuance here | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. You do realise that most anti vaxxers don't know the facts and spread nonsense. The facts are above. They are clear, peer reviewed, and should therefore eliminate fears of the trepidatious. I doubt though that those who are worried about the vaccine will go and get it now that the research has been clearly delineated for them by the smartest minds in the land" Not even the smartest minds in the land can see 10 years (and beyond) into the future and the "shut up and drink the Kool Aid" approach is hardly going to win hearts and minds of those as yet undecided. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oxford University study published in the BMJ (quoted from bbc news): "The research team looked at records from more than 29 million people who received a first dose of a Covid vaccine between December and April, as well as nearly 1.8 million who were infected with the virus. The study, published in the British Medical Journal, looked for complications up to 28 days after being jabbed or infected. It found that for every 10 million people vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine: an extra 107 would be hospitalised or die from thrombocytopenia, which can cause internal bleeding and haemorrhages, but that was nearly nine times lower than the risk of the same condition following an infectionan extra 66 would be hospitalised or die from blood clots in the veins, but that was nearly 200 times lower than the risk following an infection For every 10 million people vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine, it found: 143 extra strokes would be seen, but that was nearly 12 times lower than the risk following an infection" " Checkmate for antivaxxers for sure if the government actually has signed stamped and approve government documentation that Sara cov2 causes covid 19. Signed my eight the PM or the head of health or PHE. But they dont. Why wont they produce it? And shut up the anti vaxxers? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oxford University study published in the BMJ (quoted from bbc news): "The research team looked at records from more than 29 million people who received a first dose of a Covid vaccine between December and April, as well as nearly 1.8 million who were infected with the virus. The study, published in the British Medical Journal, looked for complications up to 28 days after being jabbed or infected. It found that for every 10 million people vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine: an extra 107 would be hospitalised or die from thrombocytopenia, which can cause internal bleeding and haemorrhages, but that was nearly nine times lower than the risk of the same condition following an infectionan extra 66 would be hospitalised or die from blood clots in the veins, but that was nearly 200 times lower than the risk following an infection For every 10 million people vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine, it found: 143 extra strokes would be seen, but that was nearly 12 times lower than the risk following an infection" " Did that feel parrot. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Earlier this year a pfizer product called champix (also marketed as chantix) was withdrawn from production. It was a commonly prescribed stop smoking aid available worldwide, and has been on the market of about 15 years. The reason for the withdrawal was that it has been found to be carcinogenic. So how wasn't this picked up sooner? In short, long term studies give more accurate results and richer data. The results of the Oxford studies are indeed welcome, but give only a short term indication of vaccine effects. Studies will continue, and more results will be available over time. Indeed, vaccines will also evolve as a result of these studies and in response to covid mutations. "  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Earlier this year a pfizer product called champix (also marketed as chantix) was withdrawn from production. It was a commonly prescribed stop smoking aid available worldwide, and has been on the market of about 15 years. The reason for the withdrawal was that it has been found to be carcinogenic. So how wasn't this picked up sooner? In short, long term studies give more accurate results and richer data. The results of the Oxford studies are indeed welcome, but give only a short term indication of vaccine effects. Studies will continue, and more results will be available over time. Indeed, vaccines will also evolve as a result of these studies and in response to covid mutations. " It doesn't matter how many times and how many ways you will ever try to explain that long term data on side effects of a new drug is important, there will always be that little annoying crowd screaming "sHut UP yOu StUpiD ConsPIRacy tHeoRist AntI VaXer. GivE yOuR heAd A woBBle. TakE oFf tHe TiN FoiL hAT! I bEliEve iN SCIENCE" | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Earlier this year a pfizer product called champix (also marketed as chantix) was withdrawn from production. It was a commonly prescribed stop smoking aid available worldwide, and has been on the market of about 15 years. The reason for the withdrawal was that it has been found to be carcinogenic. So how wasn't this picked up sooner? In short, long term studies give more accurate results and richer data. The results of the Oxford studies are indeed welcome, but give only a short term indication of vaccine effects. Studies will continue, and more results will be available over time. Indeed, vaccines will also evolve as a result of these studies and in response to covid mutations. It doesn't matter how many times and how many ways you will ever try to explain that long term data on side effects of a new drug is important, there will always be that little annoying crowd screaming "sHut UP yOu StUpiD ConsPIRacy tHeoRist AntI VaXer. GivE yOuR heAd A woBBle. TakE oFf tHe TiN FoiL hAT! I bEliEve iN SCIENCE" " And what long term data would satisfy you? A year? 10 years? A hundred? We might be struggling with Covid a tiny bit more by that stage... Or would the long term data always be longer than whatever info we have? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’ve suffered with the effects of the vaccine. It has caused neurological damage in my brain and spine. I had a mini stroke from it." Sorry to hear that, hope you are recovering well.x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Earlier this year a pfizer product called champix (also marketed as chantix) was withdrawn from production. It was a commonly prescribed stop smoking aid available worldwide, and has been on the market of about 15 years. The reason for the withdrawal was that it has been found to be carcinogenic. So how wasn't this picked up sooner? In short, long term studies give more accurate results and richer data. The results of the Oxford studies are indeed welcome, but give only a short term indication of vaccine effects. Studies will continue, and more results will be available over time. Indeed, vaccines will also evolve as a result of these studies and in response to covid mutations. It doesn't matter how many times and how many ways you will ever try to explain that long term data on side effects of a new drug is important, there will always be that little annoying crowd screaming "sHut UP yOu StUpiD ConsPIRacy tHeoRist AntI VaXer. GivE yOuR heAd A woBBle. TakE oFf tHe TiN FoiL hAT! I bEliEve iN SCIENCE" And what long term data would satisfy you? A year? 10 years? A hundred? We might be struggling with Covid a tiny bit more by that stage... Or would the long term data always be longer than whatever info we have?" Like a drug mentioned above- it took 15 years to find out it was more harmful than good. I already had covid and it hasn't been a major problem to me. There is no way of knowing weather the vaccine will turn into a problem to me down the line. Now these vaccines are saving millions who are vulnerable for any reason and I'm very proud and happy that they are. But I'm also cautious as people who are considered completely healthy, especially children might develop adverse reactions in 1, 3 or 5 years time. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Earlier this year a pfizer product called champix (also marketed as chantix) was withdrawn from production. It was a commonly prescribed stop smoking aid available worldwide, and has been on the market of about 15 years. The reason for the withdrawal was that it has been found to be carcinogenic. So how wasn't this picked up sooner? In short, long term studies give more accurate results and richer data. The results of the Oxford studies are indeed welcome, but give only a short term indication of vaccine effects. Studies will continue, and more results will be available over time. Indeed, vaccines will also evolve as a result of these studies and in response to covid mutations. It doesn't matter how many times and how many ways you will ever try to explain that long term data on side effects of a new drug is important, there will always be that little annoying crowd screaming "sHut UP yOu StUpiD ConsPIRacy tHeoRist AntI VaXer. GivE yOuR heAd A woBBle. TakE oFf tHe TiN FoiL hAT! I bEliEve iN SCIENCE" And what long term data would satisfy you? A year? 10 years? A hundred? We might be struggling with Covid a tiny bit more by that stage... Or would the long term data always be longer than whatever info we have? Like a drug mentioned above- it took 15 years to find out it was more harmful than good. I already had covid and it hasn't been a major problem to me. There is no way of knowing weather the vaccine will turn into a problem to me down the line. Now these vaccines are saving millions who are vulnerable for any reason and I'm very proud and happy that they are. But I'm also cautious as people who are considered completely healthy, especially children might develop adverse reactions in 1, 3 or 5 years time. " So you'd want to wait 15 years before using the vaccines? Do you think that might be a bit tricky for the world? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’ve suffered with the effects of the vaccine. It has caused neurological damage in my brain and spine. I had a mini stroke from it. Sorry to hear that, hope you are recovering well.x" Thanks, tbh it’s affecting my whole life. I had to give up my job which I loved. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’ve suffered with the effects of the vaccine. It has caused neurological damage in my brain and spine. I had a mini stroke from it. Sorry to hear that, hope you are recovering well.x Thanks, tbh it’s affecting my whole life. I had to give up my job which I loved." Sounds awful for you. Hope you get better in time x | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Earlier this year a pfizer product called champix (also marketed as chantix) was withdrawn from production. It was a commonly prescribed stop smoking aid available worldwide, and has been on the market of about 15 years. The reason for the withdrawal was that it has been found to be carcinogenic. So how wasn't this picked up sooner? In short, long term studies give more accurate results and richer data. The results of the Oxford studies are indeed welcome, but give only a short term indication of vaccine effects. Studies will continue, and more results will be available over time. Indeed, vaccines will also evolve as a result of these studies and in response to covid mutations. " Has it been pulled ? I can see some batches were pulled for having too much of an ingredient linked to cancer (a chemical also found in grilled foods). Doesn't quite feel the same. But there is a point in the long term effects are unknown. My issue is people are being inconsistent with this fear. Almost all of us take in chemicals which haven't had ten years of scientific review. Most don't have a track benefit either. Secondly, noone knows the ten year risk of having covid. So why not be worried about this fear? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Earlier this year a pfizer product called champix (also marketed as chantix) was withdrawn from production. It was a commonly prescribed stop smoking aid available worldwide, and has been on the market of about 15 years. The reason for the withdrawal was that it has been found to be carcinogenic. So how wasn't this picked up sooner? In short, long term studies give more accurate results and richer data. The results of the Oxford studies are indeed welcome, but give only a short term indication of vaccine effects. Studies will continue, and more results will be available over time. Indeed, vaccines will also evolve as a result of these studies and in response to covid mutations. Has it been pulled ? I can see some batches were pulled for having too much of an ingredient linked to cancer (a chemical also found in grilled foods). Doesn't quite feel the same. But there is a point in the long term effects are unknown. My issue is people are being inconsistent with this fear. Almost all of us take in chemicals which haven't had ten years of scientific review. Most don't have a track benefit either. Secondly, noone knows the ten year risk of having covid. So why not be worried about this fear? " Japan just pulled 1.6 million doses | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Earlier this year a pfizer product called champix (also marketed as chantix) was withdrawn from production. It was a commonly prescribed stop smoking aid available worldwide, and has been on the market of about 15 years. The reason for the withdrawal was that it has been found to be carcinogenic. So how wasn't this picked up sooner? In short, long term studies give more accurate results and richer data. The results of the Oxford studies are indeed welcome, but give only a short term indication of vaccine effects. Studies will continue, and more results will be available over time. Indeed, vaccines will also evolve as a result of these studies and in response to covid mutations. It doesn't matter how many times and how many ways you will ever try to explain that long term data on side effects of a new drug is important, there will always be that little annoying crowd screaming "sHut UP yOu StUpiD ConsPIRacy tHeoRist AntI VaXer. GivE yOuR heAd A woBBle. TakE oFf tHe TiN FoiL hAT! I bEliEve iN SCIENCE" And what long term data would satisfy you? A year? 10 years? A hundred? We might be struggling with Covid a tiny bit more by that stage... Or would the long term data always be longer than whatever info we have? Like a drug mentioned above- it took 15 years to find out it was more harmful than good. I already had covid and it hasn't been a major problem to me. There is no way of knowing weather the vaccine will turn into a problem to me down the line. Now these vaccines are saving millions who are vulnerable for any reason and I'm very proud and happy that they are. But I'm also cautious as people who are considered completely healthy, especially children might develop adverse reactions in 1, 3 or 5 years time. So you'd want to wait 15 years before using the vaccines? Do you think that might be a bit tricky for the world?" You missed the point of my post. The drug I mentioned was being prescribed for 15 years then the carcinogenic properties were discovered. Covid vaccines have been administered for less than a year. Data is only therefore available for short term effects. No one yet knows if in the medium or long term the vaccines may prove to be harmful, or indeed be a wonder cure. Continuing data analysis is therefore vital in the short, medium and long term. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Earlier this year a pfizer product called champix (also marketed as chantix) was withdrawn from production. It was a commonly prescribed stop smoking aid available worldwide, and has been on the market of about 15 years. The reason for the withdrawal was that it has been found to be carcinogenic. So how wasn't this picked up sooner? In short, long term studies give more accurate results and richer data. The results of the Oxford studies are indeed welcome, but give only a short term indication of vaccine effects. Studies will continue, and more results will be available over time. Indeed, vaccines will also evolve as a result of these studies and in response to covid mutations. Has it been pulled ? I can see some batches were pulled for having too much of an ingredient linked to cancer (a chemical also found in grilled foods). Doesn't quite feel the same. But there is a point in the long term effects are unknown. My issue is people are being inconsistent with this fear. Almost all of us take in chemicals which haven't had ten years of scientific review. Most don't have a track benefit either. Secondly, noone knows the ten year risk of having covid. So why not be worried about this fear? Japan just pulled 1.6 million doses " For the same reason right? That the drug was found to have above the limit of a known cargeneic. It wasn't the drug itself per se, but impurities that had crept in. And that the cancer risk tends to be from accumlative exposure. Doesn't feel the right case to prove the point imo. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Earlier this year a pfizer product called champix (also marketed as chantix) was withdrawn from production. It was a commonly prescribed stop smoking aid available worldwide, and has been on the market of about 15 years. The reason for the withdrawal was that it has been found to be carcinogenic. So how wasn't this picked up sooner? In short, long term studies give more accurate results and richer data. The results of the Oxford studies are indeed welcome, but give only a short term indication of vaccine effects. Studies will continue, and more results will be available over time. Indeed, vaccines will also evolve as a result of these studies and in response to covid mutations. It doesn't matter how many times and how many ways you will ever try to explain that long term data on side effects of a new drug is important, there will always be that little annoying crowd screaming "sHut UP yOu StUpiD ConsPIRacy tHeoRist AntI VaXer. GivE yOuR heAd A woBBle. TakE oFf tHe TiN FoiL hAT! I bEliEve iN SCIENCE" And what long term data would satisfy you? A year? 10 years? A hundred? We might be struggling with Covid a tiny bit more by that stage... Or would the long term data always be longer than whatever info we have? Like a drug mentioned above- it took 15 years to find out it was more harmful than good. I already had covid and it hasn't been a major problem to me. There is no way of knowing weather the vaccine will turn into a problem to me down the line. Now these vaccines are saving millions who are vulnerable for any reason and I'm very proud and happy that they are. But I'm also cautious as people who are considered completely healthy, especially children might develop adverse reactions in 1, 3 or 5 years time. So you'd want to wait 15 years before using the vaccines? Do you think that might be a bit tricky for the world? You missed the point of my post. The drug I mentioned was being prescribed for 15 years then the carcinogenic properties were discovered. Covid vaccines have been administered for less than a year. Data is only therefore available for short term effects. No one yet knows if in the medium or long term the vaccines may prove to be harmful, or indeed be a wonder cure. Continuing data analysis is therefore vital in the short, medium and long term. " He's literally the textbook example of the type of people I made my original comment about. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc." People who are un vaccinated need to realise they are statistically more likely to die from Covid than any complications from the vaccine. It is that simple. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Earlier this year a pfizer product called champix (also marketed as chantix) was withdrawn from production. It was a commonly prescribed stop smoking aid available worldwide, and has been on the market of about 15 years. The reason for the withdrawal was that it has been found to be carcinogenic. So how wasn't this picked up sooner? In short, long term studies give more accurate results and richer data. The results of the Oxford studies are indeed welcome, but give only a short term indication of vaccine effects. Studies will continue, and more results will be available over time. Indeed, vaccines will also evolve as a result of these studies and in response to covid mutations. It doesn't matter how many times and how many ways you will ever try to explain that long term data on side effects of a new drug is important, there will always be that little annoying crowd screaming "sHut UP yOu StUpiD ConsPIRacy tHeoRist AntI VaXer. GivE yOuR heAd A woBBle. TakE oFf tHe TiN FoiL hAT! I bEliEve iN SCIENCE" And what long term data would satisfy you? A year? 10 years? A hundred? We might be struggling with Covid a tiny bit more by that stage... Or would the long term data always be longer than whatever info we have? Like a drug mentioned above- it took 15 years to find out it was more harmful than good. I already had covid and it hasn't been a major problem to me. There is no way of knowing weather the vaccine will turn into a problem to me down the line. Now these vaccines are saving millions who are vulnerable for any reason and I'm very proud and happy that they are. But I'm also cautious as people who are considered completely healthy, especially children might develop adverse reactions in 1, 3 or 5 years time. So you'd want to wait 15 years before using the vaccines? Do you think that might be a bit tricky for the world? You missed the point of my post. The drug I mentioned was being prescribed for 15 years then the carcinogenic properties were discovered. Covid vaccines have been administered for less than a year. Data is only therefore available for short term effects. No one yet knows if in the medium or long term the vaccines may prove to be harmful, or indeed be a wonder cure. Continuing data analysis is therefore vital in the short, medium and long term. " the carcegemic properties were known about by the looks of it. It's just the amount went too high in some batches. The same carcegens seem to be in grilled meat. www.wsj.com/amp/articles/pfizer-suspends-global-distribution-of-chantix-smoking-cessation-pill-on-contamination-concerns-11624633298 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Risks are ok as long as its not you and youre kids who are in a box Or do you enjoy russian roulett" Nicely put! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. People who are un vaccinated need to realise they are statistically more likely to die from Covid than any complications from the vaccine. It is that simple." People should mind their own and their loved ones business and not not worry so much about what others do with their bodies and what medicines they are or aren't taking. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. People who are un vaccinated need to realise they are statistically more likely to die from Covid than any complications from the vaccine. It is that simple." Im pretty sure they know there at risk,they have made there choice and thats that,dont think they need people to keep telling them | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. People who are un vaccinated need to realise they are statistically more likely to die from Covid than any complications from the vaccine. It is that simple. Im pretty sure they know there at risk,they have made there choice and thats that,dont think they need people to keep telling them" noone really knows all the risks. Or the probability not all the risks. So noone can do the sums. That's part of the issue (on both sides) as everyone is making short cuts and (probably) looking for evidence to support their gut feel. The best anyone can do is show their workings and be open to others suggesting they may have missed something in their short cuts. Again, on both sides. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. People who are un vaccinated need to realise they are statistically more likely to die from Covid than any complications from the vaccine. It is that simple." People who are vaccinated needs to realise that despite all the covid rules and guidance all government around the world have issued, none of them actually have any signed stamped and approved documentation that sarscov2 causes covid 19. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. People who are un vaccinated need to realise they are statistically more likely to die from Covid than any complications from the vaccine. It is that simple. Im pretty sure they know there at risk,they have made there choice and thats that,dont think they need people to keep telling themnoone really knows all the risks. Or the probability not all the risks. So noone can do the sums. That's part of the issue (on both sides) as everyone is making short cuts and (probably) looking for evidence to support their gut feel. The best anyone can do is show their workings and be open to others suggesting they may have missed something in their short cuts. Again, on both sides. " be honest with ya ive had both shots and couldnt give two hoots if others have it or dont,just makes me laugh when those who try to make out people who dont want the jab are some sort of nutters yea thats gona get them round to there way of thinking,if they insult them for long enough they will get jabbed...i dont think so | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. People who are un vaccinated need to realise they are statistically more likely to die from Covid than any complications from the vaccine. It is that simple. People who are vaccinated needs to realise that despite all the covid rules and guidance all government around the world have issued, none of them actually have any signed stamped and approved documentation that sarscov2 causes covid 19. " The Saudis sign, stamp and approve. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For up to 28 days? Wow what a comprehensive study. A considerably more comprehensive study than those claiming that the vaccines are going to kill everyone. " | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. People who are un vaccinated need to realise they are statistically more likely to die from Covid than any complications from the vaccine. It is that simple. People who are vaccinated needs to realise that despite all the covid rules and guidance all government around the world have issued, none of them actually have any signed stamped and approved documentation that sarscov2 causes covid 19. The Saudis sign, stamp and approve." Use FOI request act and write the uk government and PHE. They will respond that they do not have it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. People who are un vaccinated need to realise they are statistically more likely to die from Covid than any complications from the vaccine. It is that simple. People who are vaccinated needs to realise that despite all the covid rules and guidance all government around the world have issued, none of them actually have any signed stamped and approved documentation that sarscov2 causes covid 19. The Saudis sign, stamp and approve. Use FOI request act and write the uk government and PHE. They will respond that they do not have it." Why should I ask the UK government? I just replied to your comment that no government around the world do that. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. People who are un vaccinated need to realise they are statistically more likely to die from Covid than any complications from the vaccine. It is that simple. People who are vaccinated needs to realise that despite all the covid rules and guidance all government around the world have issued, none of them actually have any signed stamped and approved documentation that sarscov2 causes covid 19. " I'm not sure I understand the point of this comment. Are you suggesting there is another virus causing covid19? And if so, what does it matter if the vaccine is reducing the impact of covid19 by fluke, that's still good right ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You missed the point of my post. The drug I mentioned was being prescribed for 15 years then the carcinogenic properties were discovered. Covid vaccines have been administered for less than a year. Data is only therefore available for short term effects. No one yet knows if in the medium or long term the vaccines may prove to be harmful, or indeed be a wonder cure. Continuing data analysis is therefore vital in the short, medium and long term. " So someone is dying from a terminal condition, they have at best up to a year to live. How long should they wait before taking the newly discovered wonder drug that will save their life but its only just out of development? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oxford University study published in the BMJ (quoted from bbc news): "The research team looked at records from more than 29 million people who received a first dose of a Covid vaccine between December and April, as well as nearly 1.8 million who were infected with the virus. The study, published in the British Medical Journal, looked for complications up to 28 days after being jabbed or infected. It found that for every 10 million people vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine: an extra 107 would be hospitalised or die from thrombocytopenia, which can cause internal bleeding and haemorrhages, but that was nearly nine times lower than the risk of the same condition following an infectionan extra 66 would be hospitalised or die from blood clots in the veins, but that was nearly 200 times lower than the risk following an infection For every 10 million people vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine, it found: 143 extra strokes would be seen, but that was nearly 12 times lower than the risk following an infection" " Not sure if there are any statisticians on here? But surely you need to factor in: 1. You MIGHT catch Covid (but can take risk mitigating actions to reduce likelihood). 2. You ARE having the vaccine. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. People who are un vaccinated need to realise they are statistically more likely to die from Covid than any complications from the vaccine. It is that simple. People who are vaccinated needs to realise that despite all the covid rules and guidance all government around the world have issued, none of them actually have any signed stamped and approved documentation that sarscov2 causes covid 19. " But the risks remain higher from not having the vaccine. Ivermectin poisons you, tin hats fry your brain. Stop attacking the means of defence, attack the idiots with daft snake oil pretend solutions. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. People who are un vaccinated need to realise they are statistically more likely to die from Covid than any complications from the vaccine. It is that simple. People who are vaccinated needs to realise that despite all the covid rules and guidance all government around the world have issued, none of them actually have any signed stamped and approved documentation that sarscov2 causes covid 19. " They also don't have signed stamped and approved documentation that sticking your head in a bucketful of water causes drowning. It is not the job of the government to hold a vote and write a law saying that yes indeed, it is the SARS-Cov-2 virus that causes the disease commonly known as Covid-19. That would be the job of the millions of medical researchers across the globe that have looked into this over the last nearly two years. Researchers that studied relevant subjects at universities for minimum seven years, then gained experience for another 10 to 20 years, and have now taken advantage of hundreds of years of medical advances, in order to make determinations about the causes and progress of this disease. To the point that they can show the exact molecular structure of the so called "spike protein" of the virus that allows it to enter cells, they have a full map of the RNA that the virus injects into the human host, they can tell you the exact relationship between different strains of the virus. There has been more concerted study of the virus and the progress of the disease than pretty well any other scientific objective in the history of humanity. However, I suppose that none of this makes the slightest sense to the type of people that believe they have a hotline to secret truths unknown to the rest of mankind. Truths so secret that they can only be found by watching youtube videos made by lunatics that don't have the slightest idea what is real and what is not. Red pills, blue pills, pink pills - it was only a movie, fiction made to entertain. Not some great cosmic revelation granted only to the chosen few... | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oxford University study published in the BMJ (quoted from bbc news): "The research team looked at records from more than 29 million people who received a first dose of a Covid vaccine between December and April, as well as nearly 1.8 million who were infected with the virus. The study, published in the British Medical Journal, looked for complications up to 28 days after being jabbed or infected. It found that for every 10 million people vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine: an extra 107 would be hospitalised or die from thrombocytopenia, which can cause internal bleeding and haemorrhages, but that was nearly nine times lower than the risk of the same condition following an infectionan extra 66 would be hospitalised or die from blood clots in the veins, but that was nearly 200 times lower than the risk following an infection For every 10 million people vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine, it found: 143 extra strokes would be seen, but that was nearly 12 times lower than the risk following an infection" Not sure if there are any statisticians on here? But surely you need to factor in: 1. You MIGHT catch Covid (but can take risk mitigating actions to reduce likelihood). 2. You ARE having the vaccine." Oh I think that’s stats are pretty clear now, Cov19 is here to stay so you ARE going to catch Covid and you ARE very likely going to catch it more than once. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oxford University study published in the BMJ (quoted from bbc news): "The research team looked at records from more than 29 million people who received a first dose of a Covid vaccine between December and April, as well as nearly 1.8 million who were infected with the virus. The study, published in the British Medical Journal, looked for complications up to 28 days after being jabbed or infected. It found that for every 10 million people vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine: an extra 107 would be hospitalised or die from thrombocytopenia, which can cause internal bleeding and haemorrhages, but that was nearly nine times lower than the risk of the same condition following an infectionan extra 66 would be hospitalised or die from blood clots in the veins, but that was nearly 200 times lower than the risk following an infection For every 10 million people vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine, it found: 143 extra strokes would be seen, but that was nearly 12 times lower than the risk following an infection" Not sure if there are any statisticians on here? But surely you need to factor in: 1. You MIGHT catch Covid (but can take risk mitigating actions to reduce likelihood). 2. You ARE having the vaccine. Oh I think that’s stats are pretty clear now, Cov19 is here to stay so you ARE going to catch Covid and you ARE very likely going to catch it more than once." I don’t think it is possible to state that. Feel free to provide the evidence to support your claim. Happy to be proven wrong. It is quite clear (inarguable in fact) that if you catch covid you are statistically more at risk of serious illness than you are at risk of serious illness from the vaccine. But those stats don’t apply if you don’t catch covid. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. People who are un vaccinated need to realise they are statistically more likely to die from Covid than any complications from the vaccine. It is that simple. People who are vaccinated needs to realise that despite all the covid rules and guidance all government around the world have issued, none of them actually have any signed stamped and approved documentation that sarscov2 causes covid 19. They also don't have signed stamped and approved documentation that sticking your head in a bucketful of water causes drowning. It is not the job of the government to hold a vote and write a law saying that yes indeed, it is the SARS-Cov-2 virus that causes the disease commonly known as Covid-19. That would be the job of the millions of medical researchers across the globe that have looked into this over the last nearly two years. Researchers that studied relevant subjects at universities for minimum seven years, then gained experience for another 10 to 20 years, and have now taken advantage of hundreds of years of medical advances, in order to make determinations about the causes and progress of this disease. To the point that they can show the exact molecular structure of the so called "spike protein" of the virus that allows it to enter cells, they have a full map of the RNA that the virus injects into the human host, they can tell you the exact relationship between different strains of the virus. There has been more concerted study of the virus and the progress of the disease than pretty well any other scientific objective in the history of humanity. However, I suppose that none of this makes the slightest sense to the type of people that believe they have a hotline to secret truths unknown to the rest of mankind. Truths so secret that they can only be found by watching youtube videos made by lunatics that don't have the slightest idea what is real and what is not. Red pills, blue pills, pink pills - it was only a movie, fiction made to entertain. Not some great cosmic revelation granted only to the chosen few..." Then somehow they came to the conclusion that even those that were asymptomatic (33%), still needed to be protected from a virus that wasn't going to adversly affect them. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Oxford University study published in the BMJ (quoted from bbc news): "The research team looked at records from more than 29 million people who received a first dose of a Covid vaccine between December and April, as well as nearly 1.8 million who were infected with the virus. The study, published in the British Medical Journal, looked for complications up to 28 days after being jabbed or infected. It found that for every 10 million people vaccinated with the AstraZeneca vaccine: an extra 107 would be hospitalised or die from thrombocytopenia, which can cause internal bleeding and haemorrhages, but that was nearly nine times lower than the risk of the same condition following an infectionan extra 66 would be hospitalised or die from blood clots in the veins, but that was nearly 200 times lower than the risk following an infection For every 10 million people vaccinated with the Pfizer vaccine, it found: 143 extra strokes would be seen, but that was nearly 12 times lower than the risk following an infection" Not sure if there are any statisticians on here? But surely you need to factor in: 1. You MIGHT catch Covid (but can take risk mitigating actions to reduce likelihood). 2. You ARE having the vaccine. Oh I think that’s stats are pretty clear now, Cov19 is here to stay so you ARE going to catch Covid and you ARE very likely going to catch it more than once. I don’t think it is possible to state that. Feel free to provide the evidence to support your claim. Happy to be proven wrong. It is quite clear (inarguable in fact) that if you catch covid you are statistically more at risk of serious illness than you are at risk of serious illness from the vaccine. But those stats don’t apply if you don’t catch covid." we are currently seeing 240k casea per week. So over six months that's 6m or c 10pc of population. Where a issue is 10x more likely with covid, that means over 12 months it is 2x more likely you will have the issue via covid than the vaccine. Of course you could be vaccinated and vathx covid and get the issue that way. But if we assume you are half as likely to have the issue with a vaccine (given it reduces symptons) that means where an issue is 10x more likely then you are equally as likely to have the issue if you are unvaccinated as vaccinated. Of course we are only looking at issues we've connected to the vaccine. Covidb has more issues on top of this which would suppory getting a vaccine. Now the probabilities are just averages. But there may be an argument that if you are more likely than most to have an issue with the vaccine, you may be more likely to get an issue with covid. Therefore the relative probabilities may hold up. The trouble is we hear about the issues with vaccines as it's news. We don't hear about the issue with a covid death as there are too many. Its just another stat. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. People who are un vaccinated need to realise they are statistically more likely to die from Covid than any complications from the vaccine. It is that simple. People who are vaccinated needs to realise that despite all the covid rules and guidance all government around the world have issued, none of them actually have any signed stamped and approved documentation that sarscov2 causes covid 19. They also don't have signed stamped and approved documentation that sticking your head in a bucketful of water causes drowning. It is not the job of the government to hold a vote and write a law saying that yes indeed, it is the SARS-Cov-2 virus that causes the disease commonly known as Covid-19. That would be the job of the millions of medical researchers across the globe that have looked into this over the last nearly two years. Researchers that studied relevant subjects at universities for minimum seven years, then gained experience for another 10 to 20 years, and have now taken advantage of hundreds of years of medical advances, in order to make determinations about the causes and progress of this disease. To the point that they can show the exact molecular structure of the so called "spike protein" of the virus that allows it to enter cells, they have a full map of the RNA that the virus injects into the human host, they can tell you the exact relationship between different strains of the virus. There has been more concerted study of the virus and the progress of the disease than pretty well any other scientific objective in the history of humanity. However, I suppose that none of this makes the slightest sense to the type of people that believe they have a hotline to secret truths unknown to the rest of mankind. Truths so secret that they can only be found by watching youtube videos made by lunatics that don't have the slightest idea what is real and what is not. Red pills, blue pills, pink pills - it was only a movie, fiction made to entertain. Not some great cosmic revelation granted only to the chosen few..." Considering they are making legislation and turning our livelihood upside down I would say that they should have the relevant documentation backing up it all up. To make the rules and guidelines they have over the last 18 months they must have seen some scientific experiements. You dont go closing business and quarantining people unless you have evidence to back up your claims. So boris must have seen these evidence. Why would it not be acceptable to ask for them? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not worried about side effects I'm not worried about covid, I'm not being vaccinated and couldn't care less "I completely understand this given your age you are very unlikely to see any complications from catching Covid. Q: Do you have any concerns about passing on Covid to an older relative, friend or stranger in the street / supermarket / work that might suffer much more from catching Covid? Given that taking the vaccine reduces the chances of passing on Covid should you subsequently catch Covid, is this not a reason to have it? The main reason the government wants to see a high take up of the vaccine is to slow the spread of Covid. A side-effect of that is to reduce the chance of new variants (which of course could turn out be a danger to you). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For up to 28 days? Wow what a comprehensive study." How long would you look? The problem is the longer the time period the more chance that the CVT was caused by some other external cause making the whole study worthless. All studies have limits to try to remove the uncertainties. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not worried about side effects I'm not worried about covid, I'm not being vaccinated and couldn't care less
I completely understand this given your age you are very unlikely to see any complications from catching Covid.
Q: Do you have any concerns about passing on Covid to an older relative, friend or stranger in the street / supermarket / work that might suffer much more from catching Covid?
Given that taking the vaccine reduces the chances of passing on Covid should you subsequently catch Covid, is this not a reason to have it?
The main reason the government wants to see a high take up of the vaccine is to slow the spread of Covid.
A side-effect of that is to reduce the chance of new variants (which of course could turn out be a danger to you). "Sadly and worryingly the whole “vaccine protects others not just you” point is starting to look like it isn’t correct... https://www.itv.com/news/2021-08-19/double-jabbed-may-spread-covid-as-much-as-the-unvaccinated If it turns out that double jabbed are as likely to spread covid as unvaccinated, it is actually even more worrying as people are walking around thinking they are perfectly safe to others. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Risks are ok as long as its not you and youre kids who are in a box Or do you enjoy russian roulett" Not sure I understand this comment unless you are meaning that every person should not ever leave their home. There are risks in everyday life in everything we do. Driving a car has risks. Walking along pavements has risks (vehicles mounting the pavement (especially buses it seems), sink holes appearing). Being struck by lightning during storms is a risk. According to your statement, we are all playing Russian roulette in doing these everyday tasks and you or your kids could be in a box. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Earlier this year a pfizer product called champix (also marketed as chantix) was withdrawn from production. It was a commonly prescribed stop smoking aid available worldwide, and has been on the market of about 15 years. The reason for the withdrawal was that it has been found to be carcinogenic. So how wasn't this picked up sooner? In short, long term studies give more accurate results and richer data. The results of the Oxford studies are indeed welcome, but give only a short term indication of vaccine effects. Studies will continue, and more results will be available over time. Indeed, vaccines will also evolve as a result of these studies and in response to covid mutations. It doesn't matter how many times and how many ways you will ever try to explain that long term data on side effects of a new drug is important, there will always be that little annoying crowd screaming "sHut UP yOu StUpiD ConsPIRacy tHeoRist AntI VaXer. GivE yOuR heAd A woBBle. TakE oFf tHe TiN FoiL hAT! I bEliEve iN SCIENCE" And what long term data would satisfy you? A year? 10 years? A hundred? We might be struggling with Covid a tiny bit more by that stage... Or would the long term data always be longer than whatever info we have? Like a drug mentioned above- it took 15 years to find out it was more harmful than good. I already had covid and it hasn't been a major problem to me. There is no way of knowing weather the vaccine will turn into a problem to me down the line. Now these vaccines are saving millions who are vulnerable for any reason and I'm very proud and happy that they are. But I'm also cautious as people who are considered completely healthy, especially children might develop adverse reactions in 1, 3 or 5 years time. So you'd want to wait 15 years before using the vaccines? Do you think that might be a bit tricky for the world? You missed the point of my post. The drug I mentioned was being prescribed for 15 years then the carcinogenic properties were discovered. Covid vaccines have been administered for less than a year. Data is only therefore available for short term effects. No one yet knows if in the medium or long term the vaccines may prove to be harmful, or indeed be a wonder cure. Continuing data analysis is therefore vital in the short, medium and long term. the carcegemic properties were known about by the looks of it. It's just the amount went too high in some batches. The same carcegens seem to be in grilled meat. www.wsj.com/amp/articles/pfizer-suspends-global-distribution-of-chantix-smoking-cessation-pill-on-contamination-concerns-11624633298" People are ignoring your response because you actually looked into the ludicrous claims made. "It took 15 years to find out it was more harmful than good", this is how bad misinformation is getting. In reality, if you look any of this up, there was a manufacturing impurity affecting certain batches. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Not everyone who refuses this particular vaccine would be an 'anti-vaxxer' All of this 'I'm one one camp and if you don't agree you're fucking stupid' has to stop. We have seen over the last 10 years or so that it does nothing but alienate and divide groups of people. Be cool, look after yourself and your families first and foremost. Then after that you can look after your friends and others. If someone doesn't agree with you then thats also cool, everyone is entitled to their own thoughts and opinions. It doesn't make them or you any more superior." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
 | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Earlier this year a pfizer product called champix (also marketed as chantix) was withdrawn from production. It was a commonly prescribed stop smoking aid available worldwide, and has been on the market of about 15 years. The reason for the withdrawal was that it has been found to be carcinogenic. So how wasn't this picked up sooner? In short, long term studies give more accurate results and richer data. The results of the Oxford studies are indeed welcome, but give only a short term indication of vaccine effects. Studies will continue, and more results will be available over time. Indeed, vaccines will also evolve as a result of these studies and in response to covid mutations. It doesn't matter how many times and how many ways you will ever try to explain that long term data on side effects of a new drug is important, there will always be that little annoying crowd screaming "sHut UP yOu StUpiD ConsPIRacy tHeoRist AntI VaXer. GivE yOuR heAd A woBBle. TakE oFf tHe TiN FoiL hAT! I bEliEve iN SCIENCE" And what long term data would satisfy you? A year? 10 years? A hundred? We might be struggling with Covid a tiny bit more by that stage... Or would the long term data always be longer than whatever info we have? Like a drug mentioned above- it took 15 years to find out it was more harmful than good. I already had covid and it hasn't been a major problem to me. There is no way of knowing weather the vaccine will turn into a problem to me down the line. Now these vaccines are saving millions who are vulnerable for any reason and I'm very proud and happy that they are. But I'm also cautious as people who are considered completely healthy, especially children might develop adverse reactions in 1, 3 or 5 years time. So you'd want to wait 15 years before using the vaccines? Do you think that might be a bit tricky for the world? You missed the point of my post. The drug I mentioned was being prescribed for 15 years then the carcinogenic properties were discovered. Covid vaccines have been administered for less than a year. Data is only therefore available for short term effects. No one yet knows if in the medium or long term the vaccines may prove to be harmful, or indeed be a wonder cure. Continuing data analysis is therefore vital in the short, medium and long term. " Your understanding of your post is completely incorrect. The product was temporarily suspended and certain batches recalled due to an impurity (which is carcinogenic at high levels with prolonged use and is found in dairy products and grilled meats) being above an acceptable level. There were no carcinogenic concerns with the active ingredient in the product. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I dont believe in the covid narrative studies, everyone that doesnt want to get vaccinated are an anti vaxxer. I am pro choice and I belive that everyone should have the right to choose. " Arent an*. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I dont believe in the covid narrative studies, everyone that doesnt want to get vaccinated are an anti vaxxer. I am pro choice and I belive that everyone should have the right to choose. Arent an*." Aren’t an Sorry couldn’t resist  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Risks are ok as long as its not you and youre kids who are in a box Or do you enjoy russian roulett" Indeed! Hence why I had the vaccine rather than take the Russian roulette risk of the virus. -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not worried about side effects I'm not worried about covid, I'm not being vaccinated and couldn't care less
I completely understand this given your age you are very unlikely to see any complications from catching Covid.
Q: Do you have any concerns about passing on Covid to an older relative, friend or stranger in the street / supermarket / work that might suffer much more from catching Covid?
Given that taking the vaccine reduces the chances of passing on Covid should you subsequently catch Covid, is this not a reason to have it?
The main reason the government wants to see a high take up of the vaccine is to slow the spread of Covid.
A side-effect of that is to reduce the chance of new variants (which of course could turn out be a danger to you).
Sadly and worryingly the whole “vaccine protects others not just you” point is starting to look like it isn’t correct...
https://www.itv.com/news/2021-08-19/double-jabbed-may-spread-covid-as-much-as-the-unvaccinated
If it turns out that double jabbed are as likely to spread covid as unvaccinated, it is actually even more worrying as people are walking around thinking they are perfectly safe to others."Agreed that is worrying. I am amazed at some people's attitudes vaccine or not. This is the content of a message that we received from a Fabber (based in Blackpool) as a result of our post. I presume if I post their Fab name here we would get a ban. "Concerned about spreading covid, its just a lil virus. I had symptoms and still went out shopping loads of times with no mask or jab and im still alive" So there really comes a point where some idiots are so self centred it's pointless having any discussion at all. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not worried about side effects I'm not worried about covid, I'm not being vaccinated and couldn't care less
I completely understand this given your age you are very unlikely to see any complications from catching Covid.
Q: Do you have any concerns about passing on Covid to an older relative, friend or stranger in the street / supermarket / work that might suffer much more from catching Covid?
Given that taking the vaccine reduces the chances of passing on Covid should you subsequently catch Covid, is this not a reason to have it?
The main reason the government wants to see a high take up of the vaccine is to slow the spread of Covid.
A side-effect of that is to reduce the chance of new variants (which of course could turn out be a danger to you).
Sadly and worryingly the whole “vaccine protects others not just you” point is starting to look like it isn’t correct...
https://www.itv.com/news/2021-08-19/double-jabbed-may-spread-covid-as-much-as-the-unvaccinated
If it turns out that double jabbed are as likely to spread covid as unvaccinated, it is actually even more worrying as people are walking around thinking they are perfectly safe to others.
Agreed that is worrying. I am amazed at some people's attitudes vaccine or not.
This is the content of a message that we received from a Fabber (based in Blackpool) as a result of our post. I presume if I post their Fab name here we would get a ban.
"Concerned about spreading covid, its just a lil virus. I had symptoms and still went out shopping loads of times with no mask or jab and im still alive"
So there really comes a point where some idiots are so self centred it's pointless having any discussion at all. "Oh wow. Now that you mentioned this, I also got an unsolicited message from a guy from Blackpool. What a concidence! And he blocked me as well. His message: “ Ive never followed any of the rules, never wore a mask, never taking any of the bloodclot shots and i still go out to meet people and im still alive. I had symptoms last october, still went out shopping without a mask and im fine. I think the weak betas need to cower away from the lil cold while the real men get on with it.” A real man would not send unsolicited garbage and then block the recipient | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not worried about side effects I'm not worried about covid, I'm not being vaccinated and couldn't care less
I completely understand this given your age you are very unlikely to see any complications from catching Covid.
Q: Do you have any concerns about passing on Covid to an older relative, friend or stranger in the street / supermarket / work that might suffer much more from catching Covid?
Given that taking the vaccine reduces the chances of passing on Covid should you subsequently catch Covid, is this not a reason to have it?
The main reason the government wants to see a high take up of the vaccine is to slow the spread of Covid.
A side-effect of that is to reduce the chance of new variants (which of course could turn out be a danger to you).
Sadly and worryingly the whole “vaccine protects others not just you” point is starting to look like it isn’t correct...
https://www.itv.com/news/2021-08-19/double-jabbed-may-spread-covid-as-much-as-the-unvaccinated
If it turns out that double jabbed are as likely to spread covid as unvaccinated, it is actually even more worrying as people are walking around thinking they are perfectly safe to others.
Agreed that is worrying. I am amazed at some people's attitudes vaccine or not.
This is the content of a message that we received from a Fabber (based in Blackpool) as a result of our post. I presume if I post their Fab name here we would get a ban.
"Concerned about spreading covid, its just a lil virus. I had symptoms and still went out shopping loads of times with no mask or jab and im still alive"
So there really comes a point where some idiots are so self centred it's pointless having any discussion at all. "What amazes me is that people like that seem to somehow think that makes them someone you’d want to play with. They are so boastful about how little concern they have for other people and yet want to meet others on here for sex. -Matt | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not worried about side effects I'm not worried about covid, I'm not being vaccinated and couldn't care less
I completely understand this given your age you are very unlikely to see any complications from catching Covid.
Q: Do you have any concerns about passing on Covid to an older relative, friend or stranger in the street / supermarket / work that might suffer much more from catching Covid?
Given that taking the vaccine reduces the chances of passing on Covid should you subsequently catch Covid, is this not a reason to have it?
The main reason the government wants to see a high take up of the vaccine is to slow the spread of Covid.
A side-effect of that is to reduce the chance of new variants (which of course could turn out be a danger to you).
Sadly and worryingly the whole “vaccine protects others not just you” point is starting to look like it isn’t correct...
https://www.itv.com/news/2021-08-19/double-jabbed-may-spread-covid-as-much-as-the-unvaccinated
If it turns out that double jabbed are as likely to spread covid as unvaccinated, it is actually even more worrying as people are walking around thinking they are perfectly safe to others.
Agreed that is worrying. I am amazed at some people's attitudes vaccine or not.
This is the content of a message that we received from a Fabber (based in Blackpool) as a result of our post. I presume if I post their Fab name here we would get a ban.
"Concerned about spreading covid, its just a lil virus. I had symptoms and still went out shopping loads of times with no mask or jab and im still alive"
So there really comes a point where some idiots are so self centred it's pointless having any discussion at all.
What amazes me is that people like that seem to
somehow think that makes them someone you’d want to play with. They are so boastful about how little concern they have for other people and yet want to meet others on here for sex.
-Matt"well im sure those peeps will play with each other same way you will only play with vaxed and some of us will play with those who have and havent been jabbed,my self i wont play with anyone telling others not to get jabbed i also wont be meeting those who think that anyone not jabbed is some sort of granny killer | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I'm not worried about side effects I'm not worried about covid, I'm not being vaccinated and couldn't care less
I completely understand this given your age you are very unlikely to see any complications from catching Covid.
Q: Do you have any concerns about passing on Covid to an older relative, friend or stranger in the street / supermarket / work that might suffer much more from catching Covid?
Given that taking the vaccine reduces the chances of passing on Covid should you subsequently catch Covid, is this not a reason to have it?
The main reason the government wants to see a high take up of the vaccine is to slow the spread of Covid.
A side-effect of that is to reduce the chance of new variants (which of course could turn out be a danger to you).
Sadly and worryingly the whole “vaccine protects others not just you” point is starting to look like it isn’t correct...
https://www.itv.com/news/2021-08-19/double-jabbed-may-spread-covid-as-much-as-the-unvaccinated
If it turns out that double jabbed are as likely to spread covid as unvaccinated, it is actually even more worrying as people are walking around thinking they are perfectly safe to others.
Agreed that is worrying. I am amazed at some people's attitudes vaccine or not.
This is the content of a message that we received from a Fabber (based in Blackpool) as a result of our post. I presume if I post their Fab name here we would get a ban.
"Concerned about spreading covid, its just a lil virus. I had symptoms and still went out shopping loads of times with no mask or jab and im still alive"
So there really comes a point where some idiots are so self centred it's pointless having any discussion at all.
What amazes me is that people like that seem to
somehow think that makes them someone you’d want to play with. They are so boastful about how little concern they have for other people and yet want to meet others on here for sex.
-Mattwell im sure those peeps will play with each other same way you will only play with vaxed and some of us will play with those who have and havent been jabbed,my self i wont play with anyone telling others not to get jabbed i also wont be meeting those who think that anyone not jabbed is some sort of granny killer"Actually we dont have an issue with people choosing not to get jabbed. If you are beyond a certain age we think it's foolish choice unless you know you've already had Covid, but it's your choice and if you are unfortunate and find natural selection takes it's own course you can't say you weren't warned. We've both had Covid and subsequently both still had the jabs. That doesn't stop me wearing a mask in the supermarket though. Not because we are overly concerned with catching it, but because most people in there are just going about their daily shop and don't deserve to catch it from me in the event I have it without being aware. Its just about being concerned and courteous to others and taking precautions that neither fetter my freedom nor rights to making my own choices. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc." bravo thank you thats my reason for not getting jabbed i might me the poor chap in the percrntage of thoes who get stroke sometimes its fear of rushian roulet syndrome thank you | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc." Only if they are more qualified and better educated that the researchers and scientists developing the vaccine and studying the virus. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. Only if they are more qualified and better educated that the researchers and scientists developing the vaccine and studying the virus." Not even the best scientific minds can predict the future (or individuals reactions) with 100% certainty. It's perfectly natural that some will feel some hesitancy towards a treatment which has not had the benefit of time. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc. Only if they are more qualified and better educated that the researchers and scientists developing the vaccine and studying the virus. Not even the best scientific minds can predict the future (or individuals reactions) with 100% certainty. It's perfectly natural that some will feel some hesitancy towards a treatment which has not had the benefit of time." I do not think that scientists predict the future or reactions. They do not prediict. They base their expectations on science. They may say that a patient is terminally ill and give a rough estimate on how long the patient will live but sometimes may get this wrong. They may say that a routine surgery has a minimal risk based on what they know but they may get it wrong. They may say that a risky surgery may have a 60% success but this is besed on what they know. They may try an experimental treatment when other treatments do not seem to work and everyone hopes that it will work. Do you question all of the above? You may be hesitant even for all the above but who is better/ more qualified to assess a situation? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"We have to assess our own risk at times. Twice now I’ve had to self isolate due to close contact with people with covid. One of them being my eldest son who lives with me and twice I’ve tested negative. I’ve not been vaccinated but that’s because I have my own issues with the way in which the MHRA treat the information on the Yellow Card system and how the government ignores 1000’s of complaints against pelvic mesh. Everyone who has received the vaccine should be informed about the Yellow Card system to record side effects but I don’t think this is widely publicised. I have a friend who was hospitalised after receiving her second jag because her GP didn’t believe her symptoms were caused by the vaccine. Two weeks after her vaccination she was admitted to hospital with severe dehydration and on the verge of kidney failure. Her GP had finally agreed to give her a blood test and she was admitted to hospital the same day. Our GPs need to get back to seeing patients and recording the side effects properly. We aren’t getting the full picture due to under reporting of issues. " The nurse administering my vaccine discussed the yellow card reporting system and how and why to use it. I think it's been standard in England. I've been into the GP surgery here, as it's possible to get in person treatment, even if they are somewhat restrictive, to prevent staff getting infected or infecting vulnerable patients. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you pass away from being hit by a bus, car, meteor, Hart attach, old age, or any other reason but had a positive test within the 28 days is it still being logged as a death by covid? I don’t watch the news or read the papers. Just a question " Certainly not. This is one of the basic arguments that conspiracy theorists are using. If you do not watch the news and read the papers how would you know anyway that a meteor fell amd killed someone who was found covid positive? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you pass away from being hit by a bus, car, meteor, Hart attach, old age, or any other reason but had a positive test within the 28 days is it still being logged as a death by covid? I don’t watch the news or read the papers. Just a question " No. It was 1 of the old tropes last year. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) have a clear methodology for causes of deaths and they explain it on their site, especially in relation to how they are producing data on Covid. It's worth a read. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you pass away from being hit by a bus, car, meteor, Hart attach, old age, or any other reason but had a positive test within the 28 days is it still being logged as a death by covid? I don’t watch the news or read the papers. Just a question No. It was 1 of the old tropes last year. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) have a clear methodology for causes of deaths and they explain it on their site, especially in relation to how they are producing data on Covid. It's worth a read. " Have you got a link please? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you pass away from being hit by a bus, car, meteor, Hart attach, old age, or any other reason but had a positive test within the 28 days is it still being logged as a death by covid? I don’t watch the news or read the papers. Just a question No. It was 1 of the old tropes last year. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) have a clear methodology for causes of deaths and they explain it on their site, especially in relation to how they are producing data on Covid. It's worth a read. Have you got a link please? " https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/methodologies/coronavirusandmortalityinenglandandwalesmethodology#definition-of-covid-19-deaths | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"You do realise most people who aren't vaccinated aren't conspiracy theorists. It's perfectly reasonable for individuals to have concerns and doubts about the long term effects on both their health and immune systems as well as other unknowns which come with any new medicine or treatment etc." This. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you pass away from being hit by a bus, car, meteor, Hart attach, old age, or any other reason but had a positive test within the 28 days is it still being logged as a death by covid? I don’t watch the news or read the papers. Just a question No. It was 1 of the old tropes last year. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) have a clear methodology for causes of deaths and they explain it on their site, especially in relation to how they are producing data on Covid. It's worth a read. " It wasn't a trope. It was exactly how the daily statistics on covid deaths as published by the UK government on its Covid19 Dashboard, PHE figures, were calculated - death within 28 days of positive covid test. I don't think 'death by meteor within 28 days of positive covid test' accounted for many of the deaths though | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If you pass away from being hit by a bus, car, meteor, Hart attach, old age, or any other reason but had a positive test within the 28 days is it still being logged as a death by covid? I don’t watch the news or read the papers. Just a question No. It was 1 of the old tropes last year. The Office for National Statistics (ONS) have a clear methodology for causes of deaths and they explain it on their site, especially in relation to how they are producing data on Covid. It's worth a read. It wasn't a trope. It was exactly how the daily statistics on covid deaths as published by the UK government on its Covid19 Dashboard, PHE figures, were calculated - death within 28 days of positive covid test. I don't think 'death by meteor within 28 days of positive covid test' accounted for many of the deaths though" In fact, for the first six months it was calculated as death at any point after a covid positive test. You can't blame people for raising eyebrows at that [[https://publichealthmatters.blog.gov.uk/2020/08/12/behind-the-headlines-counting-covid-19-deaths/]] | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’ve suffered with the effects of the vaccine. It has caused neurological damage in my brain and spine. I had a mini stroke from it." how are you feeling now ? I hope you make a full recovery | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"For up to 28 days? Wow what a comprehensive study. So the reasons for this are that vaccine injuries and severe reactions are almost exclusively documented in the first days and weeks after a vaccine. This means that the incidents outside of this time frame are so statistically negligible that they would have no impact on thenrest of the data and to wait 3-6 months would be counterproductive when the safety of the vaccines is being questioned by the great unwashed" Great unwashed?!, really mature comment | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I’ve suffered with the effects of the vaccine. It has caused neurological damage in my brain and spine. I had a mini stroke from it." So sorry to read this, I hope your recovery is going well. I've not had the vaccine, I'm not an anti vax but reading your post has cemented my reasons for not taking the jab....yet. I had brain surgery four years ago to remove a benign tumour from my third ventricle. I had a ventriculostomy as a precaution should it grow back as the hydrocephalus it caused was life threatening. I am terrified of the vaccine affecting me. I had covid in June, luckily I was ok. Sending you healing  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
