NO JAB NO JOB

[A500leroy]

Legally do you have to give your employer access to your medical records?

[Oakey]

Blue62 said:

Not sure that’s the case JL, I believe there’s evidence from Israel that the Pfizer jab is sterilising and further evidence that the vaccine is reducing transmission rates. We should know the impact here any day now.

They don't care if it's sterilising or not, it's just the argument they're using at the moment. If Pfizer et al come out and say that the results show sterilising immunity from their vaccines then these people will just find some other argument to latch on to justify their position.

[JagLover]

Oakey said:

Blue62 said:

Not sure that’s the case JL, I believe there’s evidence from Israel that the Pfizer jab is sterilising and further evidence that the vaccine is reducing transmission rates. We should know the impact here any day now.

They don't care if it's sterilising or not, it's just the argument they're using at the moment. If Pfizer et al come out and say that the results show sterilising immunity from their vaccines then these people will just find some other argument to latch on to justify their position.

err I will take the vaccine when my time comes.

I am just pointing out that the various studies before the vaccines were approved didn't look at preventing transmission in the wider community, just the health outcomes in those receiving it. As vaccines are rolled out more data will become available of course. Claiming at this stage that those who don't wish to take the vaccine are "killing granny" has no medical basis at the current time.

Until I see evidence to the contrary I will believe that vaccination is a way for us to live with the virus rather than eradicate it. I think the "zero covid" believers will likely cause great harm if they are listened to.

[Oakey]

Right, that's what they said, that they hadn't tested for that but were hopeful their vaccines would prevent the spreading of the virus and they'd be monitoring for this.

This was instantly translated to "doesn't even stop the spread of the virus, FACT" by the divs in the anti-vaxxer thread.

[A500leroy]

Id just prefer to wait to have mine until im 100% sure of the long term effects/non effects of it.

[abzmike]

A500leroy said:

Id just prefer to wait to have mine until im 100% sure of the long term effects/non effects of it.

How long do you think you'd like to wait for that 100% proof?

[Rivenink]

I think this would be the wrong way to go about convincing those who are hesitent about the vaccine to get it. I think it would be an effective way, but not the right way.

[V1nce Fox]

abzmike said:

A500leroy said:

Id just prefer to wait to have mine until im 100% sure of the long term effects/non effects of it.

How long do you think you'd like to wait for that 100% proof?

I seem to recall 2023 being a date when the emergency legislation authorising it will be replaced by standard practices, but I may be wrong on this.

[A500leroy]

abzmike said:

A500leroy said:

Id just prefer to wait to have mine until im 100% sure of the long term effects/non effects of it.

How long do you think you'd like to wait for that 100% proof?

Does anyone know what the long term effects of it are yet? No cause it hasnt even been out a year yet. Look at the pill they got people taking in the 1950s and then there kids started to be born with limbs missing. Im not saying anything like that will happen but id just prefer to be cautious

[JuanCarlosFandango]

Didn't need this for polio or small pox but we need it for Covid

Absolutely no point in arguing about the science or even ethics of this. Those who want to believe will believe, those who smell a big fat dirty rat won't unsmell it.

[TellYaWhatItIs]

JuanCarlosFandango said:

Didn't need this for polio or small pox but we need it for Covid

Absolutely no point in arguing about the science or even ethics of this. Those who want to believe will believe, those who smell a big fat dirty rat won't unsmell it.

Well said.

[SlickSwissToni]

TellYaWhatItIs said:

JuanCarlosFandango said:

Didn't need this for polio or small pox but we need it for Covid

Absolutely no point in arguing about the science or even ethics of this. Those who want to believe will believe, those who smell a big fat dirty rat won't unsmell it.

Well said.

Yep, can't argue with stupid!

[Rivenink]

V1nce Fox said:

abzmike said:

A500leroy said:

Id just prefer to wait to have mine until im 100% sure of the long term effects/non effects of it.

How long do you think you'd like to wait for that 100% proof?

I seem to recall 2023 being a date when the emergency legislation authorising it will be replaced by standard practices, but I may be wrong on this.

Everytime I got on a plane, I was trusting the highly trained pilots to fly it right. I was trusting the highly trained mechanics to maintain the plane properly. I trusted in the cabin crew to look after us passengers. The ground security to ensure nothing and no-one dangerous got on board, and the plane manufacturer to build the plane right.

I'm not able to build, maintain or check the plane myself. I'm not able to review and select the pilots to fly me. I had to trust in those people I didn't know to ensure my safety.

And I still got on the flights.

I see it the same for these vaccines. I trust in the experts I don't know, because its the most practical thing to do both to prevent illness in myself, and to help society as a whole.

[abzmike]

A500leroy said:

Does anyone know what the long term effects of it are yet? No cause it hasnt even been out a year yet. Look at the pill they got people taking in the 1950s and then there kids started to be born with limbs missing. Im not saying anything like that will happen but id just prefer to be cautious

Thalidomide was a different scenario in a different time, and a tragedy of mismanagement and maladministration. Becasue of it, the testing and certification requirements for drugs are now far more rigorous than they were 70 years ago.

I am obliged to take vaccines such as yellow fever, as well as malaria tablets which are known to have some side effects for some people, as a condition of my job related to travel - I could quit, but I choose not to do that.

Making the choice you are making, and relying on those that are accepting of the vaccine, to get your life back to normal does not sit easily for me. Up to you I guess - that is the freedom you have - I think it will be hard for a government to legally mandate vaccination. However, it creates another division in society, which we don't need. Good luck.

[A500leroy]

abzmike said:

A500leroy said:

Does anyone know what the long term effects of it are yet? No cause it hasnt even been out a year yet. Look at the pill they got people taking in the 1950s and then there kids started to be born with limbs missing. Im not saying anything like that will happen but id just prefer to be cautious

Thalidomide was a different scenario in a different time, and a tragedy of mismanagement and maladministration. Becasue of it, the testing and certification requirements for drugs are now far more rigorous than they were 70 years ago.

.

Exactly, in normal times it takes 10 years to get drugs registered because of the cock up years ago doing it to quickly. The vaccine was approved within 10 months..

[IroningMan]

The job in question is one which involves being sent into people's houses - shouldn't those people have the right not to invite in anyone who hasn't been jabbed?

Particularly if a member of the household is vulnerable?

[wiggy001]

Chimune said:

wiggy001 said:

Chimune said:

Good. I don't want to sit next to some anti vaxxer moron while trying to do my job.

And yet others have to sit next to you.

Only if they are very, very lucky...
We already have draconian and oppressive restrictions who we employ.
No dbs check, no job.

Sorry that should be
NO DBS CHECK, NO JOB

Presumably you think the same about those that haven’t had the MMR? Or the flu jab every year?

I do hope you call everyone you know that hasn’t had a flu jab in the last 12 months an “anti vaxxer moron”? How is that generally received?

[A500leroy]

wiggy001 said:

Chimune said:

wiggy001 said:

Chimune said:

Good. I don't want to sit next to some anti vaxxer moron while trying to do my job.

And yet others have to sit next to you.

Only if they are very, very lucky...
We already have draconian and oppressive restrictions who we employ.
No dbs check, no job.

Sorry that should be
NO DBS CHECK, NO JOB

Presumably you think the same about those that haven’t had the MMR? Or the flu jab every year?

I do hope you call everyone you know that hasn’t had a flu jab in the last 12 months an “anti vaxxer moron”? How is that generally received?

And a DBS check isnt going to affect your health or give you side effects

[Ntv]

Iminquarantine said:

Ntv said:

I regard the long covid "risk" as only slightly greater than the risk of being attacked by a deranged blue whale while walking to shops

Well then you would be incorrect as nobody get attacked by whales on the way to theshop, but many people including young people report long Covid.

On the ‘MSM not reporting the risk of long covid on virus challenge volunteers’. I watched ‘MSM’ - the TV - yesterday and there was a discussion on the risk of long Covid to trials participants.

There was no discussion of it on the lengthy BBC reports I saw and heard, including a whole feature on PM for example, this despite the BBC having harped on about about the "long-covid" risk for the best part of a year.

A few quid and people are willing to risk this dreadful long covid risk ... why? Because it's a tiny risk

[Rivenink]

JuanCarlosFandango said:

Didn't need this for polio or small pox but we need it for Covid

Absolutely no point in arguing about the science or even ethics of this. Those who want to believe will believe, those who smell a big fat dirty rat won't unsmell it.

But we did need vaccines to wipeout small pox and polio?