CV19 - The Anti Vaxxers Are Back

[Gadgetmac]

Up to a third of Brits polled won't take the vaccine if and when it's produced.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-up-to-a-thi...

WTF is wrong with some people???

Extract:

A third of Britons have said they are either unsure or definitely wouldn't use a vaccine for coronavirus, a poll suggests.

The survey, conducted on behalf of the Centre for Countering Digital Hate (CCDH), coincides with the release of a report by the same group into the spread of anti-vaccine misinformation online.

Members of the public who relied on social media more than traditional platforms for information were less likely to say they would get vaccinated, the poll suggests.

[toasty]

There's a big difference between MMR vaccine that has been used successfully for years and a CV19 vaccine that's brand new with no long term testing.

I'm not saying I wouldn't have it but it's not the no-brainer that MMR is.

[DeWar]

Gadgetmac said:

WTF is wrong with some people???

With respect to anti-vaxx in general, choose one or more from:

- Inability to critically evaluate information
- Scientific illiteracy
- A talent for tolerating cognitive dissonance
- Paranoia
- The cult of “celebrity”
- A lack of understanding of how truly horrific some diseases now rare or eradicated by vaccines actually are/were
- Contrarianism
- Being thick as mince

[Gadgetmac]

With the amount of research and testing that goes on before a drug is released to the public today I'd argue it petty much is a no brainer considering the implications of not taking it for both you, your loved ones and those you might randomly encounter including the old and those with existing medical conditions.

[Zirconia]

How many platforms are not coming down hard enough on this and profit from the anti vaxers?

[ant1973]

I'm fine with taking a conventional vaccine. It's some of the new fancy mRNA variants that I would want to know more about first!

[rxe]

Rather depends on the testing and timeline. If phases have been skipped to get it out there, I would be wary. If it has been through the full testing regime, sure, but I wouldn’t want to be at the front of the queue.

[steveo3002]

not like nothings ever gone wrong before is it

[Zirconia]

rxe said:

Rather depends on the testing and timeline. If phases have been skipped to get it out there, I would be wary. If it has been through the full testing regime, sure, but I wouldn’t want to be at the front of the queue.

Same here. I get the flu jab, have done for 20 odd years, as long as a few are at the front of the queue for this I am happy being down the line a tad. I never get the flu jab as soon as it is out that year either, let it go a few first.

[s2art]

rxe said:

Rather depends on the testing and timeline. If phases have been skipped to get it out there, I would be wary. If it has been through the full testing regime, sure, but I wouldn’t want to be at the front of the queue.

Which phase do you think get skipped? For example the Oxford vac has passed its phase 1&2 trials. Its established safe, but not necessarily effective. Thats for the phase 3 trial to test. It may be worth vaccinating the most vulnerable with it now, its safe and whats to lose?

[AllyBassman]

I'm no anti-vaxer - but I will not be at the front of the line for the Covid-19 vaccination (if there is one)

There are reasons why these things take years to be approved...

Has anyone seen I am Legend?

[Dont Panic]

Anti Vaxxers, why?
What has this poor machine ever done to them other than clean their carpets effectively?

[NerveAgent]

s2art said:

rxe said:

Rather depends on the testing and timeline. If phases have been skipped to get it out there, I would be wary. If it has been through the full testing regime, sure, but I wouldn’t want to be at the front of the queue.

Which phase do you think get skipped? For example the Oxford vac has passed its phase 1&2 trials. Its established safe, but not necessarily effective. Thats for the phase 3 trial to test. It may be worth vaccinating the most vulnerable with it now, its safe and whats to lose?

Phase 3 also tests for safety, side effects etc. Typically over a larger group and longer timescales.

[rxe]

s2art said:

Which phase do you think get skipped? For example the Oxford vac has passed its phase 1&2 trials. Its established safe, but not necessarily effective. Thats for the phase 3 trial to test. It may be worth vaccinating the most vulnerable with it now, its safe and whats to lose?

It might well be worth vaccinating the most vulnerable. I'm not in that group.

[Biker 1]

If, & its a huge if, a workable vaccine is found in the coming months, what will the long term side effects be? Will it last a lifetime, or is a top-up required? Given that I've probably got a higher chance of drowning than dying from bat-death-flu, even though I don't live near sea/river, I'm not going to be first in the queue...........

[mx5nut]

Gadgetmac said:

Up to a third of Brits polled won't take the vaccine if and when it's produced.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-up-to-a-thi...

WTF is wrong with some people???

I'm surprised it's that low. We know how easily people in this country are convinced to act against their own interests because of things they read on social media.

[durbster]

toasty said:

There's a big difference between MMR vaccine that has been used successfully for years and a CV19 vaccine that's brand new with no long term testing.

I'm not saying I wouldn't have it but it's not the no-brainer that MMR is.

That implies the MMR was dangerous but was refined over time to become less so and that's absolutely not true. The process a vaccine has to go through in order to make it to public is rigorous. Once it's approved, it's safe.

[feef]

toasty said:

There's a big difference between MMR vaccine that has been used successfully for years and a CV19 vaccine that's brand new with no long term testing.

I'm not saying I wouldn't have it but it's not the no-brainer that MMR is.

I don't think the majority would evaluate it with that much depth

[mx5nut]

durbster said:

toasty said:

There's a big difference between MMR vaccine that has been used successfully for years and a CV19 vaccine that's brand new with no long term testing.

I'm not saying I wouldn't have it but it's not the no-brainer that MMR is.

That implies the MMR was dangerous but was refined over time to become less so and that's absolutely not true. The process a vaccine has to go through in order to make it to public is rigorous. Once it's approved, it's safe.

But *checks notes* Bill Gates and George Soros weren't going to put a microchip in that one to *checks notes* track all your movements. I know about it because somebody warned me on social media from their smartphone that they carry everywhere with them.

[Matt_N]

I won’t be having it.

But then I’m in an age group that barely needs to worry about it.

I’m young’ish fit and healthy.