Anti vaxxers need to do some research.

[mealiejimmy]

I am double vaccinated but will not go the route of boosters.

Correct me if I'm wrong but despite your concerns about the level of authorisation given to the current vaccines, you went ahead and got double jabbed.
Sir, I unreservedly applaud you for that.
But what is your objection to a booster jab?
IMHO the medical authorities in this country, in particular JVCI , MHRA and NHS have, thus far, done an excellent job in getting safe and effective vaccines into the arms of people in the appropriate risk groups in a timely manner.
Given their success, I'm happy to trust their judgement on boosters and will definitely take it if offered

Cheers

Bruce

 

[Shabz]

I've had both of mine. It's the anti-vaxxer that doesn't care about the consequences and is standing with one foot in my grave that worries me.

Who says they don’t care about the consequences? The folk I know that haven’t had it have assessed the risk and put in control measures to deal with it.
They pretty much live like they’re in Lockdown still. They have shopping delivered and don’t meet anyone and when they’re forced to meet people, they stay more than 2m from them.

Are you telling me that the ‘anti vaxxers’ that I know are more of a risk to your well-being than double injected people who have abandoned all protocols because they’re now safe? Even though it’s a known fact that they can still contract and pass on the virus to you?

 

[mealiejimmy]

I’ve had two vaccines and the infection. The argument isn’t wether we should have it or not, it’s wether or not we should be forced to have it.

No it isn't, the name of this thread is :

Anti vaxxers need to do some research​

No-one is being forced to be vaccinated and I would not support making vaccine refusal a crime.
However, people who are opposed to vaccines on entirely specious grounds (aka antivaxxers) are influencing people into not being vaccinated by spreading false information about vaccine safety and efficacy and about the dangers (or lack of them) of covid in general
If spreading such misinformation became a crime, I for one would not object.

Cheers

Bruce

 

[mealiejimmy]

Who says they don’t care about the consequences? The folk I know that haven’t had it have assessed the risk and put in control measures to deal with it.
They pretty much live like they’re in Lockdown still. They have shopping delivered and don’t meet anyone and when they’re forced to meet people, they stay more than 2m from them.

Are you telling me that the ‘anti vaxxers’ that I know are more of a risk to your well-being than double injected people who have abandoned all protocols because they’re now safe? Even though it’s a known fact that they can still contract and pass on the virus to you?

Well done to your non vaccinated friends who are still living in lockdown.
However, I fear your friends are very much in the minority.
Most antivaxxers are "Loud and Proud" in proclaiming their disdain for vaccines and science and medicine in general

Cheers

Bruce

 

[howa243]

Correct me if I'm wrong but despite your concerns about the level of authorisation given to the current vaccines, you went ahead and got double jabbed.
Sir, I unreservedly applaud you for that.
But what is your objection to a booster jab?
IMHO the medical authorities in this country, in particular JVCI , MHRA and NHS have, thus far, done an excellent job in getting safe and effective vaccines into the arms of people in the appropriate risk groups in a timely manner.
Given their success, I'm happy to trust their judgement on boosters and will definitely take it if offered

Cheers

Bruce

My kids were concerned that they may bring covid to my doorstep, and I didn't want to put anything in the way of them visiting.

I personally know four people who have covid and are double vaxed. One of these caught covid, then had her vaccinations and then caught it again. I have a tenant living in a small cottage with his girlfriend, he has had it and she did not get it from him. My son ( who is a Doctor) travelled to London for one day, taking all the necessary precautions, caught it.

So a year and a half in, and my experience is that your faith in the system is heart warming.

However, there are people like me who think that injecting something into my body which is approved but, that 'it is not possible to provide comprehensive data on the efficacy and safety under normal conditions of use', seems slightly odd.

So if there are alternatives I will look at them. Perfectly happy that others choose the guinea pig route. I am not insisting that you do what I do.

 

[howa243]

If spreading such misinformation became a crime, I for one would not object.

Cheers

Bruce

We are in the shlt!

 

[mealiejimmy]

Define Vaccine, please, I would not wish to confuse it with, say, ‘Experimental gene therapy’….

From the Cambridge Dictionary:
Vaccine: a substance that is put into the body of a person or animal to protect them from a disease by causing them to produce antibodies (=proteins that fight diseases):

Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, Moderna, jansen et al clearly fit that definition
and they are NOT gene therapies

Why mRNA vaccines aren't gene therapies - Genomics Education Programme

We bust another Covid-19 myth – this time about how mRNA vaccines work – in our latest blog post

www.genomicseducation.hee.nhs.uk

Cheers

Bruce

 

[Shabz]

They came up with a vaccine in 18 months for a virus they knew little about when vaccinations usually take years to properly test and approve. It’s completely understandable that folk don’t want to take the injections. I’m not sure I would have if I hadn’t had the infection before a vaccine was available.

The same as any other polarised debate in this day and age, any time anyone questions the ‘science’, they’re berated and belittled. Nobody listens to their worries and their position hardens. All that you can do is tell them the possible outcomes that their decision can have and hope that they are prepared for the consequences.

If you’re not trying to insist that other people get injected then why do you give a hoot if other people are or not?

 

[mealiejimmy]

They came up with a vaccine in 18 months for a virus they knew little about when vaccinations usually take years to properly test and approve. It’s completely understandable that folk don’t want to take the injections. I’m not sure I would have if I hadn’t had the infection before a vaccine was available.

The same as any other polarised debate in this day and age, any time anyone questions the ‘science’, they’re berated and belittled. Nobody listens to their worries and their position hardens. All that you can do is tell them the possible outcomes that their decision can have and hope that they are prepared for the consequences.

If you’re not trying to insist that other people get injected then why do you give a hoot if other people are or not?

Typically, new medicines take many years before they are licensed, but if you look at the timeline for these products, there are long periods where no actual testing is being done. Much time is spent gaining approvals for each stage of the trials, finding sufficient numbers of suitable volunteers willing to take part, analysing the results of each trial stage and very importantly, obtaining funding so that development can continue
In the case of covid,virtually all of that "dead time" was removed - there was no problem finding suitable volunteers and there was no shortage of funding
So, rather than being a very much stop/go process, development of covid vaccines was very much a go/go process.
In addition, in the UK, the JVCI was continually monitoring the trials and had ongoing results, This meant that they did not have to spend a large amount of time analaysing all of the trial results at the end of the process and thus cause further delays before the vaccines were given a temporary licence.
Covid is a SARS virus and that helped the fast developement of the Astra Zeneca vaccine because they already had a "tool kit" of basic vaccines already developed and only had to fit the "right sized spanner" into the tool box to make an effective vaccine.
In fact the structure of the Astra Zeneca vaccine was figured out over a single weekend and the chemicals required to make ordered on the Monday morning
This makes interesting reading

Oxford vaccine: How did they make it so quickly?

Good fortune and scientific brilliance were behind the Covid-19 vaccine being developed so quickly.

www.bbc.co.uk

Science should always be questioned, and scientists question it more than anyone else - coz that's how science works
Science denial is another thing altogether.

As I said, I would not support mandatory vaccination, but if private companies decide that they will not allow wilfully non vaccinated people to use their facilities and services such as shops, trains, boats and planes - I would have no problem with that.


Cheers

Bruce

 

[Fair Hill]

Like many others, he's probably got you on the ignore list

Nah, he couldn't take the plunge but he did promise himself not to reply to me.

Then he broke his promise.

The sinner.

 

[Shabz]

Typically, new medicines take many years before they are licensed, but if you look at the timeline for these products, there are long periods where no actual testing is being done. Much time is spent gaining approvals for each stage of the trials, finding sufficient numbers of suitable volunteers willing to take part, analysing the results of each trial stage and very importantly, obtaining funding so that development can continue
In the case of covid,virtually all of that "dead time" was removed - there was no problem finding suitable volunteers and there was no shortage of funding
So, rather than being a very much stop/go process, development of covid vaccines was very much a go/go process.
In addition, in the UK, the JVCI was continually monitoring the trials and had ongoing results, This meant that they did not have to spend a large amount of time analaysing all of the trial results at the end of the process and thus cause further delays before the vaccines were given a temporary licence.
Covid is a SARS virus and that helped the fast developement of the Astra Zeneca vaccine because they already had a "tool kit" of basic vaccines already developed and only had to fit the "right sized spanner" into the tool box to make an effective vaccine.
In fact the structure of the Astra Zeneca vaccine was figured out over a single weekend and the chemicals required to make ordered on the Monday morning
This makes interesting reading

Oxford vaccine: How did they make it so quickly?

Good fortune and scientific brilliance were behind the Covid-19 vaccine being developed so quickly.

www.bbc.co.uk

Science should always be questioned, and scientists question it more than anyone else - coz that's how science works
Science denial is another thing altogether.

Cheers

Bruce

I know why and how the vaccine was produced and approved so quickly. I read about it before I made the decision to take it. I took responsibility for myself.

Unfortunately, most people don’t look beyond the headline and the headline is that they made a vaccine in a year when other vaccines take 5or more years. If folk want to not take a vaccine because they can’t be arsed to read about it, then that’s up to them.
As it turns out, they’re half right (in my opinion). I also know people who have had covid, two vaccines and then covid again. I don’t think the messaging is right at all. The vaccine only gives some protection to stay out of hospitals, does not guarantee that you won’t catch (and pass on) covid, was linked to blood clots and it wears off pretty quickly too, by the sounds of it. It’s hardly bolstering the case that it’s a properly developed and tested medicine is it?

You should be telling people to get the vaccine but for gods sake act like they haven’t had it. That’s what I do.

 

[Lloyd90]

Who said anything about foreign holidays?
I believe it was my moral obligation to get vaccinated so that:
a. My chances of contracting covid were dramatically reduced
b. The chances of me contracting covid and infecting family members and anyone I come into contact with are dramatically reduced.
c. By reducing the chances of being hospitalised, making it easier for the NHS to cope with the pandemic
That did not take any moral fibre - it was simply the right thing to do for me, my family and society as a whole.
The antivaxxer attitude seems to be: "it's all about me and only me and my freedom to do whatever I want and screw the rest of society"

Cheers

Bruce

eh? I wasn’t replying to you …

If you look at the bloke I quoted. He said he only got vaccinated so he can go abroad…

 

[foxdropper]

Probably more moral fibre than 3/4 of this board put together mate but that’s another story .My reasons are clearly laid out why I’ve had the jab .I’m not advocating either ,what I’m standing up for is the freedom to choose .What the country now needs is forget this **** and move on .Enough time wasted and lives ruined .

You don’t think people should get the jab, but your double jabbed yourself because you want to go on foreign holidays?

Real moral fiber that

 

[mealiejimmy]

I know why and how the vaccine was produced and approved so quickly. I read about it before I made the decision to take it. I took responsibility for myself.

Unfortunately, most people don’t look beyond the headline and the headline is that they made a vaccine in a year when other vaccines take 5or more years. If folk want to not take a vaccine because they can’t be arsed to read about it, then that’s up to them.
As it turns out, they’re half right (in my opinion). I also know people who have had covid, two vaccines and then covid again. I don’t think the messaging is right at all. The vaccine only gives some protection to stay out of hospitals, does not guarantee that you won’t catch (and pass on) covid, was linked to blood clots and it wears off pretty quickly too, by the sounds of it. It’s hardly bolstering the case that it’s a properly developed and tested medicine is it?

You should be telling people to get the vaccine but for gods sake act like they haven’t had it. That’s what I do.

The alternative to no vaccine was the most restrictive level of lock down for longer, plus more infections and deaths
The Pfizer and Astra Zeneca vaccines are around 60-70% effective in preventing covid infection and around 80% effective in preventing hospitalisation

Effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech and Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccines on covid-19 related symptoms, hospital admissions, and mortality in older adults in England: test negative case-control study

Objective To estimate the real world effectiveness of the Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 and Oxford-AstraZeneca ChAdOx1-S vaccines against confirmed covid-19 symptoms (including the UK variant of concern B.1.1.7), admissions to hospital, and deaths. Design Test negative case-control study. Setting...

www.bmj.com

With those levels of effectiveness there are obviously going to be people who have been jabbed, but still get covid, but there are a helluva lot more who aren't.
We're not going to eliminate covid - we are learning to live with it - and part of that process is vaccination and, if necessary, booster vaccinations.
In the same way as the flu jab is non controversial, a covid booster will become the norm for those deemed at higher risk.

Cheers

Bruce

 

[foxdropper]

No we are not. Our freedoms are limited in many ways to protect society as a whole. Firearms licensing is one obvious example.

Choosing not to have a vaccine raised the risk for the rest of society both from prolonged elevation on virus levels and the denial of hospital facilities to people with other serious illness.

The spill over of this level of ignorance is parents choosing not to vaccinate their children against highly dangerous viruses such as mumps. Being too stupid to protect themselves is one thing but failing to protect a child, given we have been doing it for what the last 60 years, makes them unfit parents in my mind and the state should intervene to protect the child's health and welfare.

Top line with standing ,all the rest just goes to show we are a free nation and long may it be so .
Good or bad choices are still choices and I’ll stand up for that right in front of anyone .
Should non vaxxers stop paying taxes if they don’t warrant beds then or keep paying to prop up others not so fortunate .
It is what it is ,we need to move on and forget the past two years totally .

 

[Fair Hill]

Probably more moral fibre than 3/4 of this board put together mate but that’s another story .My reasons are clearly laid out why I’ve had the jab .I’m not advocating either ,what I’m standing up for is the freedom to choose .What the country now needs is forget this **** and move on .Enough time wasted and lives ruined .

 

[foxdropper]

Tell me what moral fibre is then mate and where you excel in that virtue ,lol.
From what I’ve read your no more than a mouth piece who rarely has anything meaningful to say ,rather try belittle those with a view which is fine broad shoulders and all that but when it comes to role reversal I’d say you’d be the first to squeal

 

[Freeforester]

They came up with a vaccine in 18 months for a virus they knew little about when vaccinations usually take years to properly test and approve. It’s completely understandable that folk don’t want to take the injections. I’m not sure I would have if I hadn’t had the infection before a vaccine was available.

The same as any other polarised debate in this day and age, any time anyone questions the ‘science’, they’re berated and belittled. Nobody listens to their worries and their position hardens. All that you can do is tell them the possible outcomes that their decision can have and hope that they are prepared for the consequences.

If you’re not trying to insist that other people get injected then why do you give a hoot if other people are or not?

It’s not so much that, Shabz, I’d for sure be going for it if a) I thought it was safe, and b) if I thought it would be effective.

Thing is, a) ivermectin is safe, effective and I’m already taking it, and

b) having researched into the alternatives being proffered, and taking into consideration the negligible risk for ivermectin takers (like Zero percent if you take it weekly, I don’t by the way, once a month is sufficient given how few people I meet out with those who I know are also taking Ivm (our postie, neighbours, the delivery driver we mostly see), and weigh this against the risk associated with the delta variant, which is the only likely variant any UK citizen is likely to encounter, the same delta variant which Ivm cleared up some 97% of daily cases in Delhi, India, where it originated, and

c) given that the longer term effects of the ‘jabs’ are unknown, whereas the long term (over 35 years) record of Ivm is a safety profile superior to that of Aspirin, it seems like a no-brainier to me. I would no more buy a leaky bucket from the politicos, much less a leaky ‘vaccine’!

I won’t bore you with the stats on deaths post vaccine in Europe as a whole, as in any event all life is 100% fatal eventually, nor the prospects for girls of conceiving age given the already known (if little publicised) ambulatory nature of the toxic spike proteins, but I am concerned about the ‘known unknowns’, particularly as described by professors Sukhardit Bahkdi, Mike Yeadon, Geert Vanden Bossche and others who have rather more skin in the game and expertise than most of the SD armchair pundits, let alone the unknown ones concerning the jabs. Some of these are examined here, by the chappie who just happened to invent the technology of mRNA vaccine development, prof Robert Malone, I’d personally be inclined to think he knows a bit more than most, so when he and his likes are sounding the alarm bells, who am I to argue?

Watch 1-Hour Version of Censored Interview with Inventor of mRNA Vaccine Technology

Watch this 1-hour version of the original “Dark Horse Podcast” featuring an interview with Dr. Robert Malone, inventor of the mRNA vaccine technology. YouTube and other platforms censored the video.

childrenshealthdefense.org

 

[foxdropper]

So money and sour grapes never came into that paper lol.

 

[zambezi]

The OP and many respondents to this thread conflate the rational and fact-based scepticism about the covid-vaccine with a less rational aversion to all vaccines.


Put simply, a rational position is:

• Most vaccines are proven good and effective
• Most vaccines are neccesary
• Covid vaccines have too many unknowns [#58 above covers it]
• Covid has a 99.98% survival rate , even in the absence of vaccines [UK govt ONS data]