Will you take an approved COVID-19 vaccine?

runawaybishop

polesheep wrote: »

You insert the concept of fear where there was none

I believe there is a large amount of fear involved in any anti-vaccination talk. I would prefer people approached this logically and objectively, not from a position of ignorance and fear. I believe the media has a lot of responsibility for this.

polesheep

robinph wrote: »

Try reading the article, and learn the meaning of the word "most".

It clearly mentions that there were 3 in 1000 reports of any reaction to the vaccines, and 1 in 100,000 allergic reactions.

Even adding in the list of extremely mild reactions from the bottom of the article, it's still only 1 in 10 who have a sore arm for example, and they have just had a needle stuck in their arms. I have experience of sticking needles into myself up to 6+ times a day, sometimes it hurts, most of the time it doesn't.

It's pointless us debating mild side-effects. They are, after all, mild and as far as I'm concerned not an issue.

I genuinely hope that the vaccines prove to prevent transmission and that everyone can be protected. But I reserve the right to wait and see.

polesheep

robinph wrote: »

What thread?

The article that I linked to was based on data from 7million people who had been vaccinated by 24th January in the UK. Does the thread you mention have a better scientific basis behind it?

First doses. As I said the side-effects increase after the second dose, but as I have stated they are mild and not an issue.


If there is no risk to you, then why do you need higher than 67% reduction in transmission before offering up your arm in order to help reduce that transmission to the rest of your community?

First doses. As I said the side-effects increase after the second dose, but as I have stated they are mild and not an issue.

Again, I don't medicate unless I have to. For that reason the vaccine would have to basically eliminate transmission for me to consider it worth taking.

robinph

polesheep wrote: »

It's pointless us debating mild side-effects. They are, after all, mild and as far as I'm concerned not an issue.

I genuinely hope that the vaccines prove to prevent transmission and that everyone can be protected. But I reserve the right to wait and see.

That's great that you believe the side effects are not an issue.

Now based on that, why do you need to see a higher number for the reduction in transmission? If there is zero downside to you, other than half an hour out of your day to head to a vaccination centre, why would you not take a vaccine that reduces transmission by 67%?

polesheep

runawaybishop wrote: »

I believe there is a large amount of fear involved in any anti-vaccination talk. I would prefer people approached this logically and objectively, not from a position of ignorance and fear. I believe the media has a lot of responsibility for this.

I agree with all of that, but I have not been talking about anti-vaccination. I took vaccines as recently as 2018 because I felt that it was in my best interest to take them. I think vaccines are wonderful life-savers. I reserve the right, however, to decide whether or not I need and want one at any given time. The exception I make, on a personal level, is that I will take any vaccine that will eliminate transmission and protect those who cannot vaccinate, even if I don't believe I need it.

robinph

polesheep wrote: »

First doses. As I said the side-effects increase after the second dose, but as I have stated they are mild and not an issue.

Again, I don't medicate unless I have to. For that reason the vaccine would have to basically eliminate transmission for me to consider it worth taking.

Do you live alone? Do you work alone? Do you ever go to the pub? Do you ever go to the shops? Do you ever go to get your hair cut? Do you have any family or friends that you ever visit?

Why would you not take something that is of zero risk to you, but can reduce the chances of any of those other people in your life catching covid by 67%? Why do you want to see 90-100% before you take that step?

polesheep

robinph wrote: »

That's great that you believe the side effects are not an issue.

Now based on that, why do you need to see a higher number for the reduction in transmission? If there is zero downside to you, other than half an hour out of your day to head to a vaccination centre, why would you not take a vaccine that reduces transmission by 67%?

For the last time, I don't medicate unless I have to. Not even paracetamol. A lower percentage is not enough to sway me from that unless it is close to 100%.

polesheep

robinph wrote: »

Do you live alone? Do you work alone? Do you ever go to the pub? Do you ever go to the shops? Do you ever go to get your hair cut? Do you have any family or friends that you ever visit?

Why would you not take something that is of zero risk to you, but can reduce the chances of any of those other people in your life catching covid by 67%? Why do you want to see 90-100% before you take that step?

See my post above.

Shane Driscoll

runawaybishop wrote: »

That's great, but irrelevant.

I'll ask again, you are more afraid of a vaccine transparently developed to help you than you are of a disease that's goal is to make you sick. How does that logic get squared away for you?

I don't want to take a rushed vaccine, especially since I don't need it. It's my right to decide what I put into my body.

Why should I have to justify that to anyone?

robinph

polesheep wrote: »

For the last time, I don't medicate unless I have to. Not even paracetamol. A lower percentage is not enough to sway me from that unless it is close to 100%.

That's still not really an answer, it's just avoiding one.

A 67% reduction in transmission across the population will make this whole covid thing disappear. Then next year and the year after it would just be me and a bunch of old codgers who need to queue up each autumn to get our combination flu and covid booster shots.

Why would you who are young and healthy and presumably go out socialising at times, not do the absolute minimum of having a shot that has zero negative effect on you, but could massively reduce the chances of someone else getting ill?

A 67% reduction in transmission is massive. Anyone who is vaccinated and then breaks that link in the chain of transmission through the community makes a huge difference.

Your only justification so far is essentially "I can't be bothered". At least if you admitted that it would be more honest.

monkeybutter

Has medicine had a negative effect on evolution?

runawaybishop

Shane Driscoll wrote: »

I don't want to take a rushed vaccine, especially since I don't need it. It's my right to decide what I put into my body.

Why should I have to justify that to anyone?

You brought it up here. If you don't want a discussion why post?

The 'rushed' vaccine argument has been debunked widely. What makes you think a designed vaccine is more dangerous to you than covid?

And since we are here, given the vaccine lowers transmission rates, that increases the personal responsibility for people to take it so as to lower the risk of infecting those vulnerable people that cannot be vaccinated.

robinph

Shane Driscoll wrote: »

I don't want to take a rushed vaccine, especially since I don't need it. It's my right to decide what I put into my body.

Why should I have to justify that to anyone?

The vaccines have not been rushed. They have all been in development for years, that is why they could be created so quickly once the virus had been identified.

Shane Driscoll

runawaybishop wrote: »

You brought it up here. If you don't want a discussion why post?

The 'rushed' vaccine argument has been debunked widely. What makes you think a designed vaccine is more dangerous to you than covid?

And since we are here, given the vaccine lowers transmission rates, that increases the personal responsibility for people to take it so as to lower the risk of infecting those vulnerable people that cannot be vaccinated.

What is there to discuss? I won't be taking it.

robinph

Shane Driscoll wrote: »

What is there to discuss? I won't be taking it.

The reasons for why you won't be taking it would be a good thing to discus maybe?

You've said about it being rushed as a reason. You've been told that's not true. Are there other things that have you concerned about the vaccines?

trixi001

robinph wrote: »

Most people are not experiencing side effects. 3 out of every 1000 people reported mild side effects, mostly sore arms.

Only 1 out of 100,000 reports of any allergic reactions.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55946912

That is a long way from "most".

The bbc report is complete nonsense.

Of the people i know that had the vaccine, about half of them very fatigued and had flu like symptoms, others had just a sore arm, and others mild symptom, but none of them reported these side effects..

In fact the vaccination centre didn't even tell people that they should report side effects or how to report them..

robinph

trixi001 wrote: »

The bbc report is complete nonsense.

Of the people i know that had the vaccine, about half of them very fatigued and had flu like symptoms, others had just a sore arm, and others mild symptom, but none of them reported these side effects..

In fact the vaccination centre didn't even tell people that they should report side effects or how to report them..

So your analysis of a couple of friends is more robust science than a national survey looking at the data from 7 million people who have been vaccinated and official reports they had been asked to file in the event of any symptoms?

trixi001

robinph wrote: »

So your analysis of a couple of friends is more robust science than a national survey looking at the data from 7 million people who have been vaccinated and official reports they had been asked to file in the event of any symptoms?

No one reports symptoms unless severe enough to need to go the doctor, people are delighted to get the vaccine and don't mind the side effects, so have interest in reporting them

I asked my mum and brother if they were asked to report side effects and both said no - but on further reading it is actually in the leaflet that mum was given that they should. So she is one of the 7 million vaccinated and asked to report to side effects, as are many of her friends - and none have reported symptoms, but all had them, and all make up some of the 7 million...various facebook groups people all complaining of symptoms, and no one reporting them.

22,000 out of 7m is completely ludicrous given the number of side effects reported in the trials, where 63% reported fatigue..

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/what-we-know-about-the-side-effects-of-pfizers-covid-19-vaccine#Fatigue,-headache,-muscle-pain

robinph

How about the results of a survey that requires no further effort in the patients reporting than to click a couple of buttons on their phone whilst eating their breakfast each morning.

https://covid.joinzoe.com/post/covid-vaccine-pfizer-effects

Is 275000 responding enough for you? Shows about the same rates as reported from the study in the BBC article with 10% having fatigue after the second dose.

allaboutt

robinph wrote: »

That's great that you believe the side effects are not an issue.

Now based on that, why do you need to see a higher number for the reduction in transmission? If there is zero downside to you, other than half an hour out of your day to head to a vaccination centre, why would you not take a vaccine that reduces transmission by 67%?

Where do you get the "Zero Downside to you"

As the VAERS (for CDC And FDA) Website for reporting Adverse Side Affects says otherwise from total vaccinated so far with the covid 19 vaccine and remember the VAERS database is very innacurate. Based on previous vaccinates for every 1 case reported there is many not reported! I know you will say well we dont know if it was due to Covid Vaccine there could be other factors and that is true but for every case..




https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=CAT&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19



Event OutcomeCountPercent
Death501
Permanent Disability156
Office Visit1,4461
Emergency Room18
Emergency Doctor/Room2,425
Hospitalized1,066
Recovered4,2923
Birth Defect12
Life Threatening383
Not Serious4,1063
TOTAL† 14,405†

https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=CAT&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19



Found 501 cases where Vaccine is COVID19 and Patient Died

AgeCountPercent
< 3 Years1
17-44 Years10
#44-65 Years74
65-75 Years78
75+ Years27
Unknown68
TOTAL50110

https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=AGE&EVENTS=ON&VAX[]=COVID19&DIED=Yes

gmisk

allaboutt wrote: »

Where do you get the "Zero Downside to you"

As the VAERS (for CDC And FDA) Website for reporting Adverse Side Affects says otherwise from total vaccinated so far with the covid 19 vaccine and remember the VAERS database is very innacurate. Based on previous vaccinates for every 1 case reported there is many not reported! I know you will say well we dont know if it was due to Covid Vaccine there could be other factors and that is true but for every case..




https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=CAT&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19



Event OutcomeCountPercent
Death501
Permanent Disability156
Office Visit1,4461
Emergency Room18
Emergency Doctor/Room2,425
Hospitalized1,066
Recovered4,2923
Birth Defect12
Life Threatening383
Not Serious4,1063
TOTAL† 14,405†

https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=CAT&EVENTS=ON&VAX=COVID19



Found 501 cases where Vaccine is COVID19 and Patient Died

AgeCountPercent
< 3 Years1
17-44 Years10
#44-65 Years74
65-75 Years78
75+ Years27
Unknown68
TOTAL50110

https://medalerts.org/vaersdb/findfield.php?TABLE=ON&GROUP1=AGE&EVENTS=ON&VAX[]=COVID19&DIED=Yes

Maybe have a quick look into whether the information you are posting is from a reliable source before dumping it?

I will give you a clue...that site is definitely not.
It is the definition of biased.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Vaccine_Information_Center

NVIC - promotes false and misleading information including the discredited claim that vaccines cause autism, and its campaigns portray vaccination as risky, encouraging people to consider "alternatives."
It is also using VAERS data in this case which is not reliable.

robinph

allaboutt wrote: »

Where do you get the "Zero Downside to you"

I get that because that was how I set the question based on the previous several pages of discussion. The poster was saying nothing about any concerns regarding side effects, only that they wanted to see greater that 60% effectiveness in the transmission of the virus to other people. They hadn't stated any other concerns regarding the virus.

So the question was about why they needed to see 90% reduction in virus transmission before they would take the vaccine.

There has been radio silence since so we're still none the wiser about that posters reasons.



Now you've popped up talking about something different.

Ted_YNWA

Mod

Allaboutt - Don't post in this thread again.

alibab

trixi001 wrote: »

The bbc report is complete nonsense.

Of the people i know that had the vaccine, about half of them very fatigued and had flu like symptoms, others had just a sore arm, and others mild symptom, but none of them reported these side effects..

In fact the vaccination centre didn't even tell people that they should report side effects or how to report them..

Lot of Mis information on this thread . I am pro Vacination absolutely and I have had both doses of Pfizer vaccine. The clinic I went to had 130 people . Of that 15 per cent are on sick leave a week or more now . Some had mild side effects but they are the minority. Next group had to spend 24 hours to 48 hours in bed with a large chunk of staff rostered on duty unable to make it to work the next day . Majority had symptoms they are not considered mild at all and majority still had a headache which required medication to get through the day six days later . The fatigue and headaches are the thing most complaining of .

I am on day 6 today . Day 1 mild arm pain and felt off . Day 2 much the same diarrhea both days where could not leave house . Day 3 nausea and headaches started made it through work till came home vomiting and took to bed slept 12 hours . Day 5 massive sinus headache plus sinusitis symptoms which still have . Low grade temperature also . Day 5 nausea settled and rash appeared on lower leg but I had this also after first dose . Day 6 rash and energy levels still very low making it to work and crashing in evening with fatigue. This morning temp up again and sinus symptoms still there ,

The above account mirrors my co workers many making it through with massive fatigue in evening . Some remain on sick leave and 1 hospitalized .

The minority perfect after 24 to 48 hours . All retested for covid all negative just side effects of vaccine.

Am I glad I got it yes . Would I still get it yes as I worked directly with covid and have seen the consequences. But I do think people should be more informed re side effects of second dose so can book time off or have medicine ready etc or meal prepared . It was unexpected to most and yes I do think some would have backed out of it .

Albertie

Yes, in the time ahead it will be clearer and more sure as results will be based on more number of available details of people getting Covid vaccine, but agree that not taking vaccine may put the people on riskier than to take it and keep your far less to the risky side. The overall schedule of an individual will also play a crucial role as respect to health wise which includes well-balanced diet which could help in making the immune system stronger and a good defender to some extent to fight with an intruder, exercise specifically breathing exercise can see some yoga tips, balanced sleep and good rest will make us strong as well. Rest vaccine will definitely be more effective to keep us in the good side as based on the coming results and with time it’s will keep improving a lot of hard work is being done to make it more effective against Covid while keeping us safe as well, hope time will be good soon as now we are more aware of the precautions and steps to take and on a daily basis we are getting equipped with more updated knowledge with regard to this.

Red Silurian

Yes absolutely because I've done my research and have concluded that they are safe

schmoo2k

My mum is getting her first jab this morning! Light at the end of the tunnel finally.

allaboutt

gmisk wrote: »

Maybe have a quick look into whether the information you are posting is from a reliable source before dumping it?

I will give you a clue...that site is definitely not.
It is the definition of biased.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Vaccine_Information_Center

NVIC - promotes false and misleading information including the discredited claim that vaccines cause autism, and its campaigns portray vaccination as risky, encouraging people to consider "alternatives."
It is also using VAERS data in this case which is not reliable.

that is a very valid point!
So I re-ran it under the offical VAERS Website
https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8;jsessionid=0BCEEAE64248CF975F6511EA7991


499 Deaths where Covid 19 was adminstered.
So the difference is 2 deaths between the Vaeers and the NVIC.

allaboutt

I will rerun for other adverse side affects later and post back..

So the NVIC is as nearly accurate as the VAERS but the difference can be due to the time when the reports were executed.

allaboutt

alibab wrote: »

Lot of Mis information on this thread . I am pro Vacination absolutely and I have had both doses of Pfizer vaccine. The clinic I went to had 130 people . Of that 15 per cent are on sick leave a week or more now . Some had mild side effects but they are the minority. Next group had to spend 24 hours to 48 hours in bed with a large chunk of staff rostered on duty unable to make it to work the next day . Majority had symptoms they are not considered mild at all and majority still had a headache which required medication to get through the day six days later . The fatigue and headaches are the thing most complaining of .

I am on day 6 today . Day 1 mild arm pain and felt off . Day 2 much the same diarrhea both days where could not leave house . Day 3 nausea and headaches started made it through work till came home vomiting and took to bed slept 12 hours . Day 5 massive sinus headache plus sinusitis symptoms which still have . Low grade temperature also . Day 5 nausea settled and rash appeared on lower leg but I had this also after first dose . Day 6 rash and energy levels still very low making it to work and crashing in evening with fatigue. This morning temp up again and sinus symptoms still there ,

The above account mirrors my co workers many making it through with massive fatigue in evening . Some remain on sick leave and 1 hospitalized .

The minority perfect after 24 to 48 hours . All retested for covid all negative just side effects of vaccine.

Am I glad I got it yes . Would I still get it yes as I worked directly with covid and have seen the consequences. But I do think people should be more informed re side effects of second dose so can book time off or have medicine ready etc or meal prepared . It was unexpected to most and yes I do think some would have backed out of it .

great summary thank you!