How many have been vaccinated so far?
Discussion
NRS said:
It's possibly the "vaccines are only amazing" dogma I think. We're in a weird place where the anti-vax groups are arguing there is now enough protection from the vaccines on the vulnerable so there's no need to have more, and the pro-vaxxers seem to be arguing we can't trust the high level of vaccines and we need to jab even more and keep jabbing them into the future. It's all a bit odd and shows it's just about sides, nothing really to do with the evidence.
The trouble with that is, the 'antivax' person ranges from the 'its got mind control chips in it' to 'I don't want it because its new and may harm me'.Gary C said:
The trouble with that is, the 'antivax' person ranges from the 'its got mind control chips in it' to 'I don't want it because its new and may harm me'.
Likewise the ‘pro-vax’ person ranges from “I must get this amazing vaccine otherwise we’ll all die” to “I have serious misgivings about these new vaccines and their potential side effects, but I feel I have no choice”The only opinion I’ve never personally encountered yet is the ‘5G / mind control’ one….
NRS said:
It's possibly the "vaccines are only amazing" dogma I think. We're in a weird place where the anti-vax groups are arguing there is now enough protection from the vaccines on the vulnerable so there's no need to have more, and the pro-vaxxers seem to be arguing we can't trust the high level of vaccines and we need to jab even more and keep jabbing them into the future. It's all a bit odd and shows it's just about sides, nothing really to do with the evidence.
What side is your doctor on?98elise said:
NRS said:
It's possibly the "vaccines are only amazing" dogma I think. We're in a weird place where the anti-vax groups are arguing there is now enough protection from the vaccines on the vulnerable so there's no need to have more, and the pro-vaxxers seem to be arguing we can't trust the high level of vaccines and we need to jab even more and keep jabbing them into the future. It's all a bit odd and shows it's just about sides, nothing really to do with the evidence.
What side is your doctor on?I'd hazard a guess it depends if they are just focused on covid deaths in the UK, or if they're more holistic thinking and considering the huge queue of people waiting for other treatments (got experience of family member who has had issues waiting for cancer treatment), as well as those doctors highlighting it'd be good to use the vaccines on people who are far more at risk outside the UK?
So this week every day we have had between 0&16 death per day, averaging at around 8.
Why on Earth are they bothering to continue vaccinating people here. Pump it into the arms of people in other countries where they have a large death rate. The infection rate is of little consequence if the death rate is very low.
This country should return to normality immediately. Far more people are being affected by other illnesses, mental health issues and job losses than bloody Covid.
Why on Earth are they bothering to continue vaccinating people here. Pump it into the arms of people in other countries where they have a large death rate. The infection rate is of little consequence if the death rate is very low.
This country should return to normality immediately. Far more people are being affected by other illnesses, mental health issues and job losses than bloody Covid.
Elatino1 said:
So this week every day we have had between 0&16 death per day, averaging at around 8.
Why on Earth are they bothering to continue vaccinating people here. Pump it into the arms of people in other countries where they have a large death rate. The infection rate is of little consequence if the death rate is very low.
This country should return to normality immediately. Far more people are being affected by other illnesses, mental health issues and job losses than bloody Covid.
Far too sensible a view! For both the government and those who appear to think that every man and his dog should be coerced to have the vaccine- evidenced by the support of “no jab, no job” narrative. Why on Earth are they bothering to continue vaccinating people here. Pump it into the arms of people in other countries where they have a large death rate. The infection rate is of little consequence if the death rate is very low.
This country should return to normality immediately. Far more people are being affected by other illnesses, mental health issues and job losses than bloody Covid.
We are far too polarized on this issue, whatever happened to “my body, my choice” or the concept that your medical history was private?
V88Dicky said:
Gary C said:
The trouble with that is, the 'antivax' person ranges from the 'its got mind control chips in it' to 'I don't want it because its new and may harm me'.
Likewise the ‘pro-vax’ person ranges from “I must get this amazing vaccine otherwise we’ll all die” to “I have serious misgivings about these new vaccines and their potential side effects, but I feel I have no choice”As well, I don't think those who point out that people shouldn't be coerced into getting the vaccines or that given the balance of risk under 30s can quite reasonably not be demanded to do so and for it to be left as a matter of personal choice are being anti-vax.
It seems to the most strident provaxxers anyone who dares question their belief that everyone, their kids and perhaps their cat should regularly jab up gets immediately branded as an anti vaxxer....
isaldiri said:
The second one isn't pro vax. The first is but isn't quite as bad as those saying everyone must get the vaccine or we'll all die and anyone who doesn't should be a societal outcast. It's the compulsion of other people that I find distasteful.
As well, I don't think those who point out that people shouldn't be coerced into getting the vaccines or that given the balance of risk under 30s can quite reasonably not be demanded to do so and for it to be left as a matter of personal choice are being anti-vax.
It seems to the most strident provaxxers anyone who dares question their belief that everyone, their kids and perhaps their cat should regularly jab up gets immediately branded as an anti vaxxer....
Agree - the term anti vaxxer is certainly being used in the wrong context in many instances. Is it because those using the term don’t have the nouse to put up an alternative argument so just resort to abuse? As well, I don't think those who point out that people shouldn't be coerced into getting the vaccines or that given the balance of risk under 30s can quite reasonably not be demanded to do so and for it to be left as a matter of personal choice are being anti-vax.
It seems to the most strident provaxxers anyone who dares question their belief that everyone, their kids and perhaps their cat should regularly jab up gets immediately branded as an anti vaxxer....
Boringvolvodriver said:
Far too sensible a view! For both the government and those who appear to think that every man and his dog should be coerced to have the vaccine- evidenced by the support of “no jab, no job” narrative.
We are far too polarized on this issue, whatever happened to “my body, my choice” or the concept that your medical history was private?
We have always had a collective approach to disease control, from your very early years you receive vaccines and other treatments that work via mass application. You just dont register it as its normal and not in your face the way this current pandemic has been.We are far too polarized on this issue, whatever happened to “my body, my choice” or the concept that your medical history was private?
Boringvolvodriver said:
isaldiri said:
The second one isn't pro vax. The first is but isn't quite as bad as those saying everyone must get the vaccine or we'll all die and anyone who doesn't should be a societal outcast. It's the compulsion of other people that I find distasteful.
As well, I don't think those who point out that people shouldn't be coerced into getting the vaccines or that given the balance of risk under 30s can quite reasonably not be demanded to do so and for it to be left as a matter of personal choice are being anti-vax.
It seems to the most strident provaxxers anyone who dares question their belief that everyone, their kids and perhaps their cat should regularly jab up gets immediately branded as an anti vaxxer....
Agree - the term anti vaxxer is certainly being used in the wrong context in many instances. Is it because those using the term don’t have the nouse to put up an alternative argument so just resort to abuse? As well, I don't think those who point out that people shouldn't be coerced into getting the vaccines or that given the balance of risk under 30s can quite reasonably not be demanded to do so and for it to be left as a matter of personal choice are being anti-vax.
It seems to the most strident provaxxers anyone who dares question their belief that everyone, their kids and perhaps their cat should regularly jab up gets immediately branded as an anti vaxxer....
but again its the same as an anti mmr-vaxer or an anti pox-vaxxer...
thing is its been shown the vaxx reduces the spread - isnt that a good thing ? isnt that something that we need to embrace ?
MX5Biologist said:
That calculation changes in the case of an oral vaccine.
While there isn't evidence for the "vaccine" (there are several) showing efficacy 12 months after completion of a course, neither is there evidence that it doesn't. The only evidence is from other vaccination campaigns, where protection varies from a few years to a lifetime ( or as much as we can measure in a person's lifetime). .
i have to disagree that other vaccination campaigns are a useful proxy to this one. While there isn't evidence for the "vaccine" (there are several) showing efficacy 12 months after completion of a course, neither is there evidence that it doesn't. The only evidence is from other vaccination campaigns, where protection varies from a few years to a lifetime ( or as much as we can measure in a person's lifetime). .
It's more relevant to compare to what immune system response does wrt to long term immunity surely? Vaccination campaigns for measles, mumps, polio etc have vaccination outcomes similar to infection recovery from those diseases ie very high levels of long term sterilising immunity (or as close to it as possible for polio).
Given infection cycle of hcovs is every few years and Sars1 that typically caused much more severe illness had IgG fade within a couple of years but maintained t cell memory much longer, and neutralising titers from sars-cov2 whether vaccine driven or infection recovery do fade from early very high levels, I don't really see why comparing a vaccine campaign for a virus from that same family group is better compared to vaccine rollout for other very different viruses than looking at what infection cycles in hcovs suggest.
P.S and sorry to see you leave PH. Have been grateful for a lot of your posts on the more technical side of things here even if we have had some disagreements wrt to sterilising immunity...
MX5Biologist said:
My posts won't exist for much longer, as I have requested my account to be deleted. At least one of the moderators has been banning people for reporting posts that contain objectionable content, ie a moderator is seeking to promote objectionable content. I cannot be part of that.
That's an incredible shame, both the loss of your content and the behaviour of any moderator if true.LaurasOtherHalf said:
MX5Biologist said:
My posts won't exist for much longer, as I have requested my account to be deleted. At least one of the moderators has been banning people for reporting posts that contain objectionable content, ie a moderator is seeking to promote objectionable content. I cannot be part of that.
That's an incredible shame, both the loss of your content and the behaviour of any moderator if true.MX5Biologist said:
isaldiri said:
Requiring the entire adult population to repeatedly vax up every year just to prevent infections whether or not otherwise required for protective immunity is an utterly daft idea.
That calculation changes in the case of an oral vaccine.While there isn't evidence for the "vaccine" (there are several) showing efficacy 12 months after completion of a course, neither is there evidence that it doesn't. The only evidence is from other vaccination campaigns, where protection varies from a few years to a lifetime ( or as much as we can measure in a person's lifetime). Its worth remembering when smallpox vaccination was introduced, no one thought "we better keep doing this until someone shows that we don't need to". The first studies into how long protection actually lasted for were conducted after the 911 attacks, when the question came up as to whether the population needed smallpox vaccinations (it was concluded it wasn't needed, due to a combination of residual vaccine protection in the population, and a consideration of the risks of a smallpox outbreak, the ability to control it, and the risks posed by the vaccine).
Something ese to be considered. The fidelity of RNA viruses is low; they're hopeless at maintaining their structure, in replicants. There is good evidence that variants are arising in people with an extended illness. The Alpha variant originated in Dartford, and is thought to be probably in a cancer patient or HIV sufferer, someone who couldn't sustain a strong immune response. A Boston patient (with cancer) had a 150 day long infection, before succumbing. During that time, he was assaulted by several variants that originatd in his boy. The virus replicates, the replicants contain many many errors, and by the law of averages, a replicant emerges with altered properties, giving, say, increased binding affinity for ACE2, or increased predeliction for certain ACE2-bearing cells (eg. the shift for the Delta virus from the nasal passages to oral cavity, hence loss of taste is less of a symptom with this variant, and a change in infectivity). There is a prospect that if people have a less sustained infection, besides the obvious benefits of decreased pressures on health services, this might drive the virus, insomuch as causing an illness that we take notice of, fizzles out.
My posts won't exist for much longer, as I have requested my account to be deleted. At least one of the moderators has been banning people for reporting posts that contain objectionable content, ie a moderator is seeking to promote objectionable content. I cannot be part of that.
sim72 said:
We had the "vaccine bus" parked up near my work yesterday.
No appointment required
No NHS number required
No proof of address required
Don't need to be registered with a GP
Only had to prove you were 18 if you look young, and bring your card if you'd already had the first one.
So how is the whole vaccine passport thing going to work for these people then?No appointment required
No NHS number required
No proof of address required
Don't need to be registered with a GP
Only had to prove you were 18 if you look young, and bring your card if you'd already had the first one.
It's things like this that give me hope that the more divisive govt suggestions are just "get ya jab" propaganda and won't come to pass.
Saweep said:
sim72 said:
We had the "vaccine bus" parked up near my work yesterday.
No appointment required
No NHS number required
No proof of address required
Don't need to be registered with a GP
Only had to prove you were 18 if you look young, and bring your card if you'd already had the first one.
So how is the whole vaccine passport thing going to work for these people then?No appointment required
No NHS number required
No proof of address required
Don't need to be registered with a GP
Only had to prove you were 18 if you look young, and bring your card if you'd already had the first one.
It's things like this that give me hope that the more divisive govt suggestions are just "get ya jab" propaganda and won't come to pass.
MX5Biologist said:
My posts won't exist for much longer, as I have requested my account to be deleted. At least one of the moderators has been banning people for reporting posts that contain objectionable content, ie a moderator is seeking to promote objectionable content. I cannot be part of that.
Have you posted your concerns in Website feedback?Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff