'Alternative' doctor has turned my mum off Covid vaccine

eleventh

plodder wrote: »

Yes. 95% efficacy means there is still a 5% chance of catching it .

How could that possibly be determined? 95% - of what?

You don't know that. The evidence emerging is suggesting that spreading is vastly reduced. They just didn't have the data before.

Define "efficacy" in the context of this vaccine.
Does it mean immunity... what?
Be specific if you are replying.
Quote from where you are getting your data & link to sources.

monkeybutter

eleventh wrote: »

How could that possibly be determined? 95% - of what?
Define "efficacy" in the context of this vaccine.
Does it mean immunity... what?
Be specific if you are replying.
Quote from where you are getting your data & link to sources.

it means it prevented covid symtoms in 95% of those tested versus a control group


so it stopped them getting sick


that is how the immune system works


you get infected by anti vaxxers and you fight it off with your immune system

oisinog

monkeybutter wrote: »

you get infected by anti vaxxers and you fight it off with your immune system

If only!

Bambi

Bambi wrote: »

He probably told her that the vaccines have been rushed through to such a degree that the makers would not ship them unless governments granted them indemnity from prosecution if anything goes wrong.

Non

Sense.


COVID vaccine is not the first vaccine to be indemnified and it won't be the last.

I'm pro-vaccine and could make a better argument against vaccination than you lot.

lemush

oisinog wrote: »

So 60 cases out of 6 million so the side effects were affected less than 0.00001% of people vaccinated I would think that is a very low risk.

I have absolutely no idea where you are getting the figure 60 from considering at least 800 known cases were confirmed pretty early mainly in Scandinavia and the increased risk of narcolepsy due to vaccination was around 1 incident per 18,400 doses. Pretty ironic considering your "suit the narrative" comment earlier.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1087079217300011

johnnyskeleton

Hunchback wrote: »

I on the other hand think that at her age (74) she should be left to believe what she believes in and to do with her money as she sees fit. (He also sells his homeopathic remedies to his clients once he has seen them).

Your instinct is correct. You cannot change the parent child dynamic, all you can do is state your view and hope for the best. Likewise there is no point telling her that it's completely harmless and nothing can go wrong. But the potential side effects are significantly less bad than actually getting covid

Hunchback wrote: »

My mum does believe this stuff. She believes in homeopathy. She purchases this products from this practitioner who she goes to see of her own volition. Nobody is coaxing her to go there. Nobody is pressuring her to go there. I have visited the guys website and there are no claims to be a medical doctor. I think that my mum may have in error referred to him as a doctor. There is absolutely no way that I am going to reveal the identity of the person on this forum because I am all too aware of the potential for litigation that would arise. So I am steadfast and resolute in that position and there was no way I will disclose this person's details by private message or otherwise.

Maybe show her the mitchell and webb skit on homeopathic medicine:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMGIbOGu8q0

Might make her realise how ridiculous homeopathy is.

Aegir wrote: »

there are also myths that the vaccines contain pork/beef/alcohol depending on who is being targeted.

That makes the vaccine sound even more delicious, to be honest.

eleventh

monkeybutter wrote: »

it means it prevented covid symtoms in 95% of those tested versus a control group

The vast VAST majority who get a positive result are asymptomatic anyway... that has always been the case.

Post a link to your studies anyway so we can see
a) the sample size tested
b) the length of time the study lasted - was it months, years, or more like days, hours
c) conclusions of the tests

Dyr

Deleted User wrote: »

Non

Sense.


COVID vaccine is not the first vaccine to be indemnified and it won't be the last.

I'm pro-vaccine and could make a better argument against vaccination than you lot.

I never said it was the first vaccine that the manufacturers demanded indemnity on

Is there anything else you'd like to be corrected on?

plodder

eleventh wrote: »

How could that possibly be determined? 95% - of what?
Define "efficacy" in the context of this vaccine.
Does it mean immunity... what?
Be specific if you are replying.
Quote from where you are getting your data & link to sources.

At the end of the trial they take all the information relating to the people who caught the disease (according to whatever criteria they defined up front, which were I believe "symptomatic infection") and they find out which of them got the vaccine and which got the placebo. 95% got the placebo and 5% got the vaccine. So, that implies a 5% chance of getting symptomatic disease despite being vaccinated.

But, I'm sure you know this already. So, I'm not going to go chasing links for you.

paw patrol

Hunchback wrote: »

It does. But the anti vaxx position is widely discredited. And she is 74, so very susceptible to Covid 19.

All vaccines are not the same - this pro and anti vaccine stance by anybody is utter lunacy.

That said I won't be taking covid19 one cos I think they are rushed and mRNA is a new one. Im in no rush and not fearful of covid , it clearly doesn't want me. Maybe later in the future not foreseeable

Back on topic, I feel your pain OP. It does hurt seeing loved ones make poor decisions.
But unless she is being coerced she does have the right to refuse and of course consent matters not just for #metoo
Unless you can convince her then she has the right to make poor decision just as you do. How would you feel if she started dictating what you could do with your life? You'd probably say that you are an adult and capable of your own decisions.

BiggJim

The man has spent years studying medicine and also knows your mother very well if he has being treating her for so long. Perhaps he has weighed up the pros and cons and feel it best your mother doesn't get vaccinated ?

BiggJim

BiggJim wrote: »

The man has spent years studying medicine and also knows your mother very well if he has being treating her for so long. Perhaps he has weighed up the pros and cons and feel it best your mother doesn't get vaccinated ?

A homeopath spent years studying medicine? That's like saying a fat person spent years studying the culinary arts.

plodder

BiggJim wrote: »

The man has spent years studying medicine and also knows your mother very well if he has being treating her for so long. Perhaps he has weighed up the pros and cons and feel it best your mother doesn't get vaccinated ?

Apparently not. The 'doctor' is a quack.

is_that_so

BiggJim wrote: »

The man has spent years studying medicine and also knows your mother very well if he has being treating her for so long. Perhaps he has weighed up the pros and cons and feel it best your mother doesn't get vaccinated ?

Or he could be an alternative medicine kook. Andrew Wakefield too was a man who had spent years studying medicine and it didn't stop him making claims that got him struck off. At the very least the doctor needs to explain to the family what he's up to and why.

she may have asked him if he's taking the vaccine, to which he replied no.
She may have asked him, why ever not, to which he gave his opinion, weird or not. End of story as I see it. Old people hand their pensions over the the clergy every month in the same sort of Confidence arrangement. It happens, find someone she trusts to explain the holes in his rationale as you see them.

dam099

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Maybe show her the mitchell and webb skit on homeopathic medicine:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HMGIbOGu8q0

Might make her realise how ridiculous homeopathy is.

The sketch is moderately funny but some great comments down below it.

I dunno, but I use homeopathy everyday to heal mild dehydration

listermint

BiggJim wrote: »

The man has spent years studying medicine and also knows your mother very well if he has being treating her for so long. Perhaps he has weighed up the pros and cons and feel it best your mother doesn't get vaccinated ?

Spent years grifting and feeding off people to sell them back their own personal 'medicines' there's no difference between these people and Alex Jones selling life changing pills on YouTube. We he can't do anymore.

It's all grifting it's been around forever.


The trick is to recognise it.

eleventh

plodder wrote: »

At the end of the trial they take all the information relating to the people who caught the disease (according to whatever criteria they defined up front, which were I believe "symptomatic infection") and they find out which of them got the vaccine and which got the placebo. 95% got the placebo and 5% got the vaccine. So, that implies a 5% chance of getting symptomatic disease despite being vaccinated.

But, I'm sure you know this already. So, I'm not going to go chasing links for you.

Even if they did such a study, it would have to be a sample size of several thousand to conclude what you're getting at.

If you have time to write posts, you have time to find 1 link to a study to support what you're saying about studies done... Unless of course all you have is regurgitated media spin, which is the standard here in this forum - in that case, don't worry about it.

Read a great book at Xmas and this Hadacol was in it, so funny...

https://www.pennlive.com/opinion/2016/08/america_has_survived_much_wors.html

This was legitimate by the way...

HillCloudHop

'Doctor' in itself isn't a protected title in Ireland. Any quack can call themselves a doctor without any legal repercussions.
It's illegal however to present yourself as a medical practitioner without registration with the Irish Medical Council.

Hunchback

plodder wrote: »

Apparently not. The 'doctor' is a quack.

At this point I am expressing regret at using that term. It doesn't add to the discussion. I disagree with his assessment, I don't particularly believe in homeopathy and I fear for the effect his statements have had on my mother (who of course like me is an adult who possesses free will and an independent mind), but name-calling is not usually my gig. Prolly can't withdraw that remark at this stage, but if I could, I prolly would.

fits

It’s very simple really.

If you were 74 which would you take your chances with ?

Sars-cov-2 viral infection( deaths 2000++) or a vaccine ( deaths 0)

JoChervil

Hunchback wrote: »

Seems like a good summary. His advice to her was don't get it done because it messes with your genes. I don't claim to understand what this is about, but presumably he is implying that the negtative effects of the vaccine will be felt long term rather than immediately.

Actually viruses are in our DNA. Around 8% of our DNA consists of parts of old viruses. But it is for our good. When they tried to remove them, it messed up immune system totally.

More:
https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2016/03/16/1602336113

Another article:
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/09/ancient-virus-responsible-some-cases-lou-gehrig-s-disease

But these viruses learned our immune system to fight diseases.

So I think there is a bigger risk to contract the the whole virus than to get part of it in the vaccine. Especially that it might work for our good.

HillCloudHop

Homeopathy is based on the principle that a medicine becomes more powerful the more diluted it gets. You're basically paying for water.

eleventh

The thread was posted in the Covid forum, so views on homeopathy are not the issue.

The issue is freedom of choice of adults to take or decline a vaccine, and specifically this *first wave* of vaccines around which there are many unknowns, admitted by the vaccine makers themselves as well as the HSE on their website if you read it.

is_that_so

eleventh wrote: »

The thread was posted in the Covid forum, so views on homeopathy are not the issue.

The issue is freedom of choice of adults to take or decline a vaccine, and specifically this *first wave* of vaccines around which there are many unknowns, admitted by the vaccine makers themselves as well as the HSE on their website if you read it.

There is nothing wrong with declining but one needs to have enough information to make that choice. Whether that is the case seems to be at the heart of the thread.

pwurple

Frankly, I wouldn't worry too much about it. Let your mother not get the vaccine if she believes this fella. You can make your position clear on him not being qualified to make recommendations, and them not being based in fact, but once you've stated your piece, you're done. Maybe it won't be the worst thing in the world as the numbers in general are dropping, so risk is lowering as everyone else gets the jab. She probably has no real ailments and is healthy as a horse anyway, as these fellas are great at selling perfectly healthy people placebos for imaginary or self-limiting conditions. If she is happy to take the risk, then she's a grown up.

For me, I'd be concerned about her future ability to travel, or maybe see her friends / family. She may be ostracized for example, excluded from her peer group. But those might not be important to her either.

eleventh

is_that_so wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with declining but one needs to have enough information to make that choice. Whether that is the case seems to be at the heart of the thread.

People make their decisions in different ways, depending on who or what they trust.
It won't be the same for everyone, nor should it be.

The heart of it is adults freedom to choose, no matter how they arrive at their decision. Everyone decides based on their own life experience, beliefs, and what they trust as reliable.

There is no shortage of information.

OP's parent is 70+, has "decades" of experience with her chosen health care.
Assuming she's in good health in her mid-70s (OP didn't state otherwise), there doesn't seem to be an issue.

Mimon

Hunchback wrote: »

Okay,

I don't have too much time to type this because I am on my lunch break at work. But, as per the title to the thread, an alternative/homeopathic doctor has turned my mum agsainst the idea of getting vaccinated against the Covid 19 virus. She is 74 years old.

At the very least, he has confused her and now she does not know what to do.

I am both angry, and in shock, because I did not think that she would be susceptible to something that an anti-vaxxer would say to her.

She has been a client of this 'Dr' for decades. I have a brother who thinks that the guy is a quack and has said this to my mum on a number of occasions. I on the other hand think that at her age (74) she should be left to believe what she believes in and to do with her money as she sees fit. (He also sells his homeopathic remedies to his clients once he has seen them).

However, I think a line is crossed when these practitioners warn against things like cancer treatments, or in this case against Covid 19 vaccination.

He has told her that the vaccine messes with a person's genes. He has said that a lot of the reason why people succumbed to the Covid 19 virus is because they have previously taken vaccines which have weakened their resistance. In short, he is an anti vaxxer.

I am not sure how to talk to my mum because I am so frustrated. Obviously when she told me last night I was in shock and I told her that I couldn't believe she was even confused momentarily. I was a little bit angry at her (well frustrated as a better word) but I was really angry at the alternative Dr that she went to see.

I believe that the best way to be is 'don't tell them that they are stupid / don't ridicule their beliefs' when you are dealing with people who don't believe in the benefits of the vaccine, or are confused.

I guess I am here today to ask for advice on how to change her mind back to the way it was the day before yesterday. I suggested off the bat that she should go and talk to her regular GP, who can act as a counterpoint to the quack she saw yesterday. I also advised, or requested, that she talked to my other two brothers. The reason for this is that I don't think she should internalise her thought process, but as the stakes are so high, she really should discuss the issues with the people closest to her, and also discuss them with the doctor.

Incidentally, I wonder how many other people he has also convinced that the Covid 19 vaccine is potentially injurious to their health. I asked my mum who was he public about his views in relation to the Covid 19 vaccine. She said that he is. To which I said 'how many respected voices do you hear in the media coming out against the Covid 19 vaccine? All the science points to very high efficacy of the vaccine. People who tend to comment against it seemed to withdraw their remarks within days. There is no credible evidence to suggest that not taking the vaccine as a preferable approach'.

Anyway, interested to see if anybody has any views on this.

TLDR: I have an elderly mum who was convinced by a quack doctor not take the Covid vaccine and I don't know what to do.

Your brother probably had the right idea in trying to nip this nonsense in the bud. These types of people are manipulative as anything.

jpharvey

It's a tough one OP and I'm sure it's a discussion that's going to come up in a lot of households in the comings months. I'm all for anything that'll stop all the madness and will accept a vaccine when it's offered, which looking at the news will be 2022 at this stage!
I think the lockdowns and lack of open, reasoned and reasonable discourse surrounding Covid has left a lot of people feeling scared and vulnerable no matter what age they are. Practitioners of alternative therapies were widely acceptable as a form of 'top up' to established medicine before all this but to take on the mantle of a doctor when you're not qualified shouldn't be allowed to happen now and reeks of narcissism to me.
Did your mother vaccinate ye as kids for mumps, measles etc.? If she did I'd slowly try to bring her round that way. My mam is uneasy about it too and seems to change her mind from day to day but I reminded her of me speckled and roaring in pain for over a week as a young one (the MMR only became available in the late 70's I think) and something clicked with her.
Anyway. That's all the advice I have such as it is. I wish you and yours well