Any others cynical about a vaccine?

[Dunwaters]

Sorry but what percentage of people die 3 weeks later....??
And what do you know that I don’t about this amazing vaccine??? Please do tell?
More people have died of lots of other things than covid over the last few months, they just haven’t been reported on. You can believe what the media reports on or you can read between the lines, and look at the facts.

Oh no, tinfoil hat time again......
If you don’t want to get the vaccine then don’t.
I do so I will.
Did you hear that there’s going to be a Coronavirus passport for people who take the vaccine?
It’ll allow you to go to the pub and stand at the bar with your mates, use the jakes on an airplane , go to the shops without a mask and cough freely in public.
Can’t wait......

 

[deerstalker.308]

All I, wont to do is go back to my old life pre Covid . If that means me taking a vaccine so be it ,if you think its too much of a risk to you future health then don,t take it . The facts are there over a million people worldwide have died after contracting Covid and the facts are the numbers will continue to rise untill we have a vaccine . Once again your choice

Chill

Do you know how many people died worldwide during the same period of cancer? Or meningitis? Or diabetes? Or anything else that kills masses of folk every year? No, because the media doesn’t report on that, they have focussed all their efforts on reporting one stream of media.
our local news the other day reported 3 (shock horror) deaths within a 3 county radius, all from covid, no mention of how many people died of other causes during the same period?? Why?

 

[Ade8mm]

The second line doesn't follow from the first, and IMO isn't particularly accurate.

The industry does exist to make money - it will therefore produce that which will make it money whether that is to prevent illness (e.g. vaccine), 'cure' it (e.g. anticancer drugs, antibiotics), or to keep it in check long-term (e.g. statins, antipsychotics), Superficially, the last of those categories sounds as though it will make more money, but those things tend to be high-volume and lower margin in the long run - so it ain't neccessarily so, I don't think.

Ok. Let me re-phrase.
There is more profit in finding a treatment than a cure.
(Oh and your last sentence is a double negative)

 

[stubear]

Clearly the folks who have accelerated this vaccine through to wild critical acclaim stating that they have "cured covid" have never seen the film "I am Legend."

Good job we all have safes full of guns isn't it boys!

 

[gixer1]

Yes, pharmaceutical companies need to make money - but they also understand that if the vaccine makes people sick in the short or long term, the money and company in some cases will be taken away....it’s not quite as simple as them just “bangin’ out the money makers”....

the global economy dictates that more time will be invested in finding this vaccine than any others, the flu vaccine is very effective - for specific types of flu, but there are an extremely high number of strains...so no “cure all” exists.

EDIT - couldn’t remember the main one the flu vaccine is for - but it’s type A and B that tend to be the killers and the vaccine is about 40-60% effective.

regards,
Gixer

 

[gixer1]

Clearly the folks who have accelerated this vaccine through to wild critical acclaim stating that they have "cured covid" have never seen the film "I am Legend."

Good job we all have safes full of guns isn't it boys!

You may jest - but there are absolutely people that would relish this idea....having spent time living in the southern USA and watched people asking for the Hornady Zombie ammo and hearing it was sold out, and also observed a person burying ammo, I know for a fact they exist....so to assume there are a couple of them on this very forum would be fair.

it’s like the FAC holder that asks the question “if you saw a bank robbery in progress and someone taken hostage and you had your rifle in the car, would you have a pop”.....you can tell they are hoping for that situation to come to fruition!

regards,
Gixer

 

[Dalua]

Ok. Let me re-phrase.
There is more profit in finding a treatment than a cure.
(Oh and your last sentence is a double negative)

Last things first - context is all: the meaning is clear, I feel allowing for the Gershwin quotation and the 'understood' parts in brackets: 'so it is not neccessarily the case, (at least) I don't think (that it is neccessarily the case)'.

I continue to maintain that the idea that there's more profit in finding a treatment than a cure is somewhat simplistic. Given a choice, clearly yes - but in fact they'll research what they think will sell, and then make profit with it, whatever it is.

 

[Rasputin]

I find it depressing that a group of supposingly rational people are even discussing this. Perhaps the suggestion in this article should be adopted Spreading anti-vaxx myths 'should be made a criminal offence'

Sorry you find it depressing that people are raising legitimate concerns about the vaccine and its processes such as QA given its been produced in a short period of time?

I find it depressing that you would allow someone to inject you with a substance without a thought for its effectiveness or side effects. Let's be Frank here the moment you walk through that door to get an injection you are placing absolute faith in the vial being what it says it is because there's no way for us to know what it contains. As a result I don't think it's too much to ask for some solid data and results given its a "new" type of vaccine before you sign on the dotted line.

 

[deerstalker.308]

I find it depressing that a group of supposingly rational people are even discussing this. Perhaps the suggestion in this article should be adopted Spreading anti-vaxx myths 'should be made a criminal offence'

Sorry but what isn’t rational about questioning? Or do you always simply follow the herd? That’s irrational if you ask me.

 

[MattJ]

Sorry you find it depressing that people are raising legitimate concerns about the vaccine and its processes such as QA given its been produced in a short period of time?

I find it depressing that you would allow someone to inject you with a substance without a thought for its effectiveness or side effects. Let's be Frank here the moment you walk through that door to get an injection you are placing absolute faith in the vial being what it says it is because there's no way for us to know what it contains. As a result I don't think it's too much to ask for some solid data and results given its a "new" type of vaccine before you sign on the dotted line.

I have some experience of working in the pharmaceutical industry and I am confident that any vaccine will have been properly tested before being rolled out.
Those who refuse it are putting their own lives at risk (which does not bother me at all) but also the lives of others, as if they contract the virus and are asymptomatic they could pass it on to others.

 

[Rasputin]

I have some experience of working in the pharmaceutical industry and I am confident that any vaccine will have been properly tested before being rolled out.
Those who refuse it are putting their own lives at risk (which does not bother me at all) but also the lives of others, as if they contract the virus and are asymptomatic they could pass it on to others.

So you are in the possession of industry knowledge and have faith in the system which I understand but for many people blind faith is quite rightly not enough.

However I would just like to raise one question as you and Boris have raised this and I can't understand if this is possible or not. This vaccine will not stop the spread ie on hands ie if someone sneezes and had had the vaccine will they still be carrying the virus or will the virus just cease to exist being carried in a vaccinated host? Genuine question not looking a picking a fight as I just don't know. Maybe you know?

 

[zambezi]

We are are right to question a medicine that was rushed to market.

Questioning both the need and the substance of a vaccine is not tinfoil hat territory. It is accountancy cost/benefit analysis.


To be clear, we are being told that we need a vaccine that:

Uses mRNA to modify our body's cellular operation at a genetic level. Permanently.

For a disease with a very low global CFR.

For which REACH data already shows the human body develops its own defenses [T-cell]. Naturally. Permanently.



It simply does not add up. Risk/absence of benefit is far too great.

https://www.curevac.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/CureVac-Technology-Animation-EN.mp4?

 

[Tim.243]

Oh no, tinfoil hat time again......
If you don’t want to get the vaccine then don’t.
I do so I will.
Did you hear that there’s going to be a Coronavirus passport for people who take the vaccine?
It’ll allow you to go to the pub and stand at the bar with your mates, use the jakes on an airplane , go to the shops without a mask and cough freely in public.
Can’t wait......

 

[willie_gunn]

I find it depressing that a group of supposingly rational people are even discussing this. Perhaps the suggestion in this article should be adopted Spreading anti-vaxx myths 'should be made a criminal offence'

Rational is defined as "based on or in accordance with reason or logic."

I can't answer for you, but in my book accepting anything at face value simply because you are told it is so does not necessarily constitute reason or logic.

Do you consider this article from Nature "rational", or is it spreading anti-vaxx myths? Don’t rush to deploy COVID-19 vaccines and drugs without sufficient safety guarantees

Or how about this, from National Public Radio: NPR Choice page

As the lead author of the review in the very article you link to says:

"There are real knowledge voids. The public thinks it takes decades to make a vaccine, so it has to be communicated that it is safe. There are always going to be side-effects, and that has to be acknowledged too.

Everyone is concerned about this rushed vaccine, so let's talk about it. There needs to be a dialogue, and that will work better at a local level."

History is littered with examples of things that were at one point deemed "safe" and turned out not to be, from drugs to plastics.

Perhaps you might care to explain why this vaccine is somehow different?

 

[gixer1]

We are are right to question a medicine that was rushed to market.

Questioning both the need and the substance of a vaccine is not tinfoil hat territory. It is accountancy cost/benefit analysis.


To be clear, we are being told that we need a vaccine that:

Uses mRNA to modify our DNA. Permanently.

For a disease with a very low global CFR.

For which REACH data already shows the human body develops its own defenses [T-cell]. Naturally. Permanently.



It simply does not add up. Risk/absence of benefit is far too great.

https://www.curevac.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/CureVac-Technology-Animation-EN.mp4?

Redirect Notice

 

[gixer1]

Rational is defined as "based on or in accordance with reason or logic."

I can't answer for you, but in my book accepting anything at face value simply because you are told it is so does not necessarily constitute reason or logic.
Do you consider this article from Nature "rational", or is it spreading anti-vaxx myths? Don’t rush to deploy COVID-19 vaccines and drugs without sufficient safety guarantees

Or how about this, from National Public Radio: NPR Choice page

As the lead author of the review in the very article you link to says:

"There are real knowledge voids. The public thinks it takes decades to make a vaccine, so it has to be communicated that it is safe. There are always going to be side-effects, and that has to be acknowledged too.

Everyone is concerned about this rushed vaccine, so let's talk about it. There needs to be a dialogue, and that will work better at a local level."

History is littered with examples of things that were at one point deemed "safe" and turned out not to be, from drugs to plastics.

Perhaps you might care to explain why this vaccine is somehow different?

it’s no different in that there are risks, as with any vaccine, yet I’m sure you have had several over the years....why were you ok to take those? Some of them would have been fairly new to the market depending on your age.

regards,
Gixer

 

[zambezi]

as with any vaccine

There's the rub.

No vaccine has ever involved mRNA technology.

Injected mRNA "reprograms your protein factories at a cellular level".

Vaccines of yesteryear introduced inert signature molecules of a disease into our bodies and let our defenses develop (1) antibodies (2) disease specific T-cells (3) plasma cells [stored in bone marrow, long lived].

At worst, vaccines to date may have been ineffective. Or partially effective. But they never altered the way my body goverened its immune system.

 

[dartmoordog]

I don’t really do politics, apparently there has been an election over the pond that I have absolutely no interest in. I never read newspapers, a mixture of a load of garbage, lies and I simply cannot be arsed. I don’t know enough about Corona viruses, let alone Covid 19, I know nothing about vaccines apart from the fact my last lot, for a trip to Africa, stung a bit. I live in my eutopean bubble, let alone during lockdown, and it suits me just fine.

BUT, is 1 million deaths WORLDWIDE over a twelve month period from some kind of flu type bug, that serious?

I do know one thing though, a very tiny minority of high flyers will make an awful large amount of money from it.......Right, time for this Troglodyte to sweep out my cave. Toodles.

 

[willie_gunn]

....

 

[willie_gunn]

it’s no different in that there are risks, as with any vaccine, yet I’m sure you have had several over the years....why were you ok to take those? Some of them would have been fairly new to the market depending on your age.

regards,
Gixer

Which is why I said "At the end of the day we will each make our own choice".

I had the BCG jab at school, even though it was only "thought to protect up to 80% of people against the most severe forms of TB for at least 15 years, perhaps even up to 60 years." But my father had TB, so it was worth the risk. Whilst there were just over 5,000 cases of TB in the UK in 2017, we no longer do mass vaccinations. The risks are not seen as severe enough any more.

So it is all a question of balancing risks.

The risk of contracting a severe case of Covid is very small, particularly if you are not in a vulnerable group. Even if you are, the mortality rates are very low.

So if you feel the risk is worth it, take the vaccine. Others might feel different.