Does anyone know an Anti Covid vaxxer?
Discussion
Prof Prolapse said:
Genuine question, to those who don't see the point in younger people taking the vaccine.
What do you make of the huge increased in cases in the 25-44 age bracket this past week or so?
Also, what about the compounding fact that the majority of hospitalisations in the UK are also now in that age group?
Do you not think, on balance of probability, given the low risk presented by the vaccine in light of the above, it would be in your personal interests to take it?
On balance of probability, no. What's the rate of probability? What do you make of the huge increased in cases in the 25-44 age bracket this past week or so?
Also, what about the compounding fact that the majority of hospitalisations in the UK are also now in that age group?
Do you not think, on balance of probability, given the low risk presented by the vaccine in light of the above, it would be in your personal interests to take it?
MYOB said:
Prof Prolapse said:
Genuine question, to those who don't see the point in younger people taking the vaccine.
What do you make of the huge increased in cases in the 25-44 age bracket this past week or so?
Also, what about the compounding fact that the majority of hospitalisations in the UK are also now in that age group?
Do you not think, on balance of probability, given the low risk presented by the vaccine in light of the above, it would be in your personal interests to take it?
On balance of probability, no. What's the rate of probability? What do you make of the huge increased in cases in the 25-44 age bracket this past week or so?
Also, what about the compounding fact that the majority of hospitalisations in the UK are also now in that age group?
Do you not think, on balance of probability, given the low risk presented by the vaccine in light of the above, it would be in your personal interests to take it?
If you really honestly cant see that this will therefore extend lockdown there's no hope for you.
Prof Prolapse said:
Genuine question, to those who don't see the point in younger people taking the vaccine.
What do you make of the huge increased in cases in the 25-44 age bracket this past week or so?
Also, what about the compounding fact that the majority of hospitalisations in the UK are also now in that age group?
Do you not think, on balance of probability, given the low risk presented by the vaccine in light of the above, it would be in your personal interests to take it?
A healthy/fit young person is at miniscule risk of Covid.What do you make of the huge increased in cases in the 25-44 age bracket this past week or so?
Also, what about the compounding fact that the majority of hospitalisations in the UK are also now in that age group?
Do you not think, on balance of probability, given the low risk presented by the vaccine in light of the above, it would be in your personal interests to take it?
There is a miniscule risk of something going wrong with the vaccine in the short term, and an unknown but miniscule risk in the long term.
Once you have had the vaccine you cannot reverse that action. Anyone delaying having the vaccine can reverse their decision at any point (their risk from Covid is not going to change except over a long period of time)
I say the above hoping that my delay decision proves to be the wrong one for societies sake but there is no addional risk personally in delaying. If I was in old/frail/vulnerable category I would already have had the vaccine.
Ashfordian said:
A healthy/fit young person is at miniscule risk of Covid.
There is a miniscule risk of something going wrong with the vaccine in the short term, and an unknown but miniscule risk in the long term.
Once you have had the vaccine you cannot reverse that action. Anyone delaying having the vaccine can reverse their decision at any point (their risk from Covid is not going to change except over a long period of time)
I say the above hoping that my delay decision proves to be the wrong one for societies sake but there is no addional risk personally in delaying. If I was in old/frail/vulnerable category I would already have had the vaccine.
Not really.There is a miniscule risk of something going wrong with the vaccine in the short term, and an unknown but miniscule risk in the long term.
Once you have had the vaccine you cannot reverse that action. Anyone delaying having the vaccine can reverse their decision at any point (their risk from Covid is not going to change except over a long period of time)
I say the above hoping that my delay decision proves to be the wrong one for societies sake but there is no addional risk personally in delaying. If I was in old/frail/vulnerable category I would already have had the vaccine.
The risk is not "miniscule", as I say it's spreading like wildfire amongst the unvaccinated and hospitalisations are now disproportionately high in that group. We are seeing first hand that those aged 25-44 are not as resistant as implied previously, so mild-moderate seems most fair, especially if we bring in economic factors due to time lost to work etc.
There is also known long term hazard of "long covid", in that group. We don't know it's prevalence yet, but it is a recognised sequalae. Post viral fatigue is well recognised and can be devastating. If you aren't willing to take a vaccine to avoid it, you've never had it.
By contrast, there is a miniscule risk of short term vaccination in that group (your words), and no identified hazard in long term. Our best scientists in their respective fields have assured us there's no reason to suspect there would be.
We would seem to agree then, at best, by declining a vaccine on the grounds you say, that you are trading a mild-moderate short term risk, and known long term hazard of unknown risk, for a miniscule short term risk, and no known long term risk.
Do you not see how many would regard that as irrational?
Edited by Prof Prolapse on Friday 18th June 14:16
Ashfordian said:
and an unknown but miniscule risk in the long term.
I would just say that i agree with most of what you said and we're on the same page 'and an unknown but miniscule risk in the long term.' how do you know this? how can something both be unknown and quantifiable? Vaccine is a personal choice. If an individual gets a serious adverse effect, that person then can look towards the GP/friend/family member that pushed them to get it and say 'this is your fault'
Its a risk to get covid, its a risk to take the mrna vaccine - allow consenting adults to make up their own minds. If one feel that they are safer with the vaccine, great. To which they can increase their safety by continuing to wear a mask, social distance and limiting public interaction reducing the risk of coming into contact with those not wishing to be part of medicine trials.
Ashfordian said:
Prof Prolapse said:
Genuine question, to those who don't see the point in younger people taking the vaccine.
What do you make of the huge increased in cases in the 25-44 age bracket this past week or so?
Also, what about the compounding fact that the majority of hospitalisations in the UK are also now in that age group?
Do you not think, on balance of probability, given the low risk presented by the vaccine in light of the above, it would be in your personal interests to take it?
A healthy/fit young person is at miniscule risk of Covid.What do you make of the huge increased in cases in the 25-44 age bracket this past week or so?
Also, what about the compounding fact that the majority of hospitalisations in the UK are also now in that age group?
Do you not think, on balance of probability, given the low risk presented by the vaccine in light of the above, it would be in your personal interests to take it?
Prof Prolapse said:
Ashfordian said:
A healthy/fit young person is at miniscule risk of Covid.
There is a miniscule risk of something going wrong with the vaccine in the short term, and an unknown but miniscule risk in the long term.
Once you have had the vaccine you cannot reverse that action. Anyone delaying having the vaccine can reverse their decision at any point (their risk from Covid is not going to change except over a long period of time)
I say the above hoping that my delay decision proves to be the wrong one for societies sake but there is no addional risk personally in delaying. If I was in old/frail/vulnerable category I would already have had the vaccine.
Not really.There is a miniscule risk of something going wrong with the vaccine in the short term, and an unknown but miniscule risk in the long term.
Once you have had the vaccine you cannot reverse that action. Anyone delaying having the vaccine can reverse their decision at any point (their risk from Covid is not going to change except over a long period of time)
I say the above hoping that my delay decision proves to be the wrong one for societies sake but there is no addional risk personally in delaying. If I was in old/frail/vulnerable category I would already have had the vaccine.
The risk is not "miniscule", as I say it's spreading like wildfire amongst the unvaccinated and hospitalisations are now disproportionately high in that group. We are seeing first hand that those aged 25-44 are not as resistance as implied previously, so mild-moderate seems most fair, especially if we bring in economic factors due to time lost to work etc.
There is also known long term hazard of "long covid", in that group. We don't know it's prevalence yet, but it is a recognised sequalae. Post viral fatigue is well recognised and can be devastating. If you aren't willing to take a vaccine to avoid it, you've never had it.
By contrast, we agree, there is a miniscule risk of short term vaccination in that group, and no identified hazard in long term. Our best scientists in their respective fields have assured us there's no reason to suspect there would be.
You are therefore we would seem to agree, at best, trading a mild-moderate short term risk, and known long term hazard of unknown risk, for a miniscule short term risk, and no known long term risk.
Do you not see how many would regard that as irrational?
Ronaldo, another Covid survivor is playing football this month in the European Championships
One of the worlds best golfers was 6 shots ahead of the best golfers in the world despite being infected with Covid.
A number of the worlds best cyclists who have had Covid have either just ridden the 3 week Tour of Italy or about to ride the Tour de France. In this list includes one of the most high profile hemophiliacs.
I could add many more...
If Covid was not a miniscule risk it would have shown up in the thousands of infections of world class athletes.
So, you can continue to play your scaremongering, I'll look at the reality from real world examples where even a tiny percentage performance difference would take them out of the top level of their respective sports
Ashfordian said:
A Covid survivor just won his second major tennis title this year, with the two latter matches being 4 hour efforts.
Ronaldo, another Covid survivor is playing football this month in the European Championships
One of the worlds best golfers was 6 shots ahead of the best golfers in the world despite being infected with Covid.
A number of the worlds best cyclists who have had Covid have either just ridden the 3 week Tour of Italy or about to ride the Tour de France. In this list includes one of the most high profile hemophiliacs.
I could add many more...
If Covid was not a miniscule risk it would have shown up in the thousands of infections of world class athletes.
So, you can continue to play your scaremongering, I'll look at the reality from real world examples where even a tiny percentage performance difference would take them out of the top level of their respective sports
Lewis had it too. Guess they’re all the lucky ones Ronaldo, another Covid survivor is playing football this month in the European Championships
One of the worlds best golfers was 6 shots ahead of the best golfers in the world despite being infected with Covid.
A number of the worlds best cyclists who have had Covid have either just ridden the 3 week Tour of Italy or about to ride the Tour de France. In this list includes one of the most high profile hemophiliacs.
I could add many more...
If Covid was not a miniscule risk it would have shown up in the thousands of infections of world class athletes.
So, you can continue to play your scaremongering, I'll look at the reality from real world examples where even a tiny percentage performance difference would take them out of the top level of their respective sports
Prof Prolapse said:
Do you not see how many would regard that as irrational?
Irrational? Perhaps. however people are allowed to do a lot of what would seem to be irrational things. We are allowed to smoke, eat all manner of unhealthy food and do various high risk sports - none of which might be considered to be rational.As I have posted multiple times, it's almost certain that above a certain age (I'd use 30 as a broad cutoff here for illustrative purposes) it's entirely in the balance of probabilities it is sensible to take a vaccine (well perhaps not the AZN one). It's a question of whether people should be compelled to do so. I believe in letting people have personal responsibility for making their own decisions rather than compelling or coercing them into doing so 'for the greater good'.
Prof Prolapse said:
Not really.
The risk is not "miniscule", as I say it's spreading like wildfire amongst the unvaccinated and hospitalisations are now disproportionately high in that group. We are seeing first hand that those aged 25-44 are not as resistant as implied previously, so mild-moderate seems most fair, especially if we bring in economic factors due to time lost to work etc.
There is also known long term hazard of "long covid", in that group. We don't know it's prevalence yet, but it is a recognised sequalae. Post viral fatigue is well recognised and can be devastating. If you aren't willing to take a vaccine to avoid it, you've never had it.
By contrast, there is a miniscule risk of short term vaccination in that group (your words), and no identified hazard in long term. Our best scientists in their respective fields have assured us there's no reason to suspect there would be.
We would seem to agree then, at best, by declining a vaccine on the grounds you say, that you are trading a mild-moderate short term risk, and known long term hazard of unknown risk, for a miniscule short term risk, and no known long term risk.
Do you not see how many would regard that as irrational?
In your penultimate paragraph, so say there is no known risk. Which is nice way of saying its an unknown risk.The risk is not "miniscule", as I say it's spreading like wildfire amongst the unvaccinated and hospitalisations are now disproportionately high in that group. We are seeing first hand that those aged 25-44 are not as resistant as implied previously, so mild-moderate seems most fair, especially if we bring in economic factors due to time lost to work etc.
There is also known long term hazard of "long covid", in that group. We don't know it's prevalence yet, but it is a recognised sequalae. Post viral fatigue is well recognised and can be devastating. If you aren't willing to take a vaccine to avoid it, you've never had it.
By contrast, there is a miniscule risk of short term vaccination in that group (your words), and no identified hazard in long term. Our best scientists in their respective fields have assured us there's no reason to suspect there would be.
We would seem to agree then, at best, by declining a vaccine on the grounds you say, that you are trading a mild-moderate short term risk, and known long term hazard of unknown risk, for a miniscule short term risk, and no known long term risk.
Do you not see how many would regard that as irrational?
Edited by Prof Prolapse on Friday 18th June 14:16
Why not just say its unknown, as indeed, you know?
One cannot make a fully informed decision when one aspect is unknown. Which is of course the reason it doesnt have full market approval, and the manufacturers are absolved of all and any claims.
monkfish1 said:
In your penultimate paragraph, so say there is no known risk. Which is nice way of saying its an unknown risk.
Why not just say its unknown, as indeed, you know?
One cannot make a fully informed decision when one aspect is unknown. Which is of course the reason it doesnt have full market approval, and the manufacturers are absolved of all and any claims.
Again, specious reasoning. You can't be sure there's not a tiger outside your front door right now, will you not bother going outside just in case? What you are proposing makes no sense.Why not just say its unknown, as indeed, you know?
One cannot make a fully informed decision when one aspect is unknown. Which is of course the reason it doesnt have full market approval, and the manufacturers are absolved of all and any claims.
And again, this is categorically untrue. Yes, if a government released your product ahead of licencing your liabilities are reduced. This actually makes perfect sense, as otherwise you would refuse to release your life saving product to market. But manufacturers are not completely immune from civil liabilities. That is to say everything they have produced must be correct, and the product must meet all the safety standards. Here;
https://fullfact.org/health/unlicensed-vaccine-man...
MYOB said:
Prof Prolapse said:
Genuine question, to those who don't see the point in younger people taking the vaccine.
What do you make of the huge increased in cases in the 25-44 age bracket this past week or so?
Also, what about the compounding fact that the majority of hospitalisations in the UK are also now in that age group?
Do you not think, on balance of probability, given the low risk presented by the vaccine in light of the above, it would be in your personal interests to take it?
On balance of probability, no. What's the rate of probability? What do you make of the huge increased in cases in the 25-44 age bracket this past week or so?
Also, what about the compounding fact that the majority of hospitalisations in the UK are also now in that age group?
Do you not think, on balance of probability, given the low risk presented by the vaccine in light of the above, it would be in your personal interests to take it?
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff