30 somethings - are you going to vax?
Discussion
popeyewhite said:
Eh? Of course it matters - the vax doesn't give 100% immunity. I hope to God no feckless 30 something thinks that's a reasonable argument for dodging the vaccine.
I think it is a perfect argument personally. If most aren't immune the vaccine is a pointless anyway. I assume they are. In that case don't take it to protect others. Don't take it to look after the NHS. Matt Hancock has had a year to get the NHS in a position to deal with it. I'd suggest take it only if your are worried about covid yourself.
I worry about people who always try to "SAVE" other people. Do most people want to be saved?
superlightr said:
and when the govt ask you to jab your baby what will you say?
Perhaps they will have the tri/tri mix version ready in a few months? - MMR/flu/covid
and then a year later for their booster jab
and the year after
etc
they jabbed him with TB on day 1. Mrs RJWR is Romanian and TB is pretty rife there, so he got the jab. Perhaps they will have the tri/tri mix version ready in a few months? - MMR/flu/covid
and then a year later for their booster jab
and the year after
etc
Edited by superlightr on Thursday 27th May 19:29
Edited by superlightr on Thursday 27th May 19:30
I'm not against vaccinations, the military injected me with god knows what. I'm not sure about the covid one. Neither is Mrs RJWR.
It seems there are others like us and probably quite a few more. I'll probably have the jab if my work make me. If not, ill see what happens and I'll post a response if I do/Dont
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
Elatino1 said:
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
I'm 32. I figured the risk of anything bad happening with the vaccine very low.
Have you seen any long term results of this say circa 5-10years. Just wondering what people base that sort of reasoning on.Also regarding your assumption in your last sentence, I would assume nothing of the sort as this has been thrown together quicker and with less initial testing than any other vaccine in history, with absolutely no long term testing and the companies involved absolved of any potential legal repercussions from illness of death caused by their vaccines. It is a very different beast to your common flu vaccine in pretty much every way bar the means of administering.
TyrannosauRoss Lex said:
Can you give me an example of a vaccine which has still undergone the same testing and research protocols that this vaccine has done which has shown very few side effects after 1 year (people in the original trials) yet HAVE then gone on to develop side effects (ie no side effects after 1 year but side effects after, say, 5 years?
Surely you're joking? You also seem to have totally ignored my points that disagree with yours.Funnily enough this is something that has never been done before so of course there aren't any comparable examples.
If you are so certain they have got it right (although clearly with very little knowledge or research of it at all) then good for you, fill yer boots but I'll give it at least a few years first thanks.
Glosphil said:
Only know one person who has refused to have the 'jab' - my daughter's partner (47). Seriously considering saying he can't visit us until he has a change of view & is 'jabbed'.
All our friends' off-spring have been jabbed - ages from around 30 to 50.
Not just for the individual; it's for the common good.
that you know of. All our friends' off-spring have been jabbed - ages from around 30 to 50.
Not just for the individual; it's for the common good.
Simple, yes I've had the jab. Are you checking their certificates?
The midwife gave me the impression 30 somethings were not going in their masses for vaccinations.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mIPb0AtEvAE
Worth a watch? From 7 mins is the worrying part for me
Worth a watch? From 7 mins is the worrying part for me
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 27th May 21:44
Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 27th May 21:48
There are a number of people in this thread who really don’t understand that the vaccine cuts the risk of serious illness and cuts the rate of transmission.
If Grandma is vaccinated she is much safer.
If Grandma is vaccinated and the young family who visit her are also vaccinated, she is even more protected.
This is the whole point of getting as many vaccinated as possible.
If Grandma is vaccinated she is much safer.
If Grandma is vaccinated and the young family who visit her are also vaccinated, she is even more protected.
This is the whole point of getting as many vaccinated as possible.
djc206 said:
Again that’s mostly true but also completely separate and therefore not really relevant to vaccination. And no she isn’t as protected as she can get if the people in regular contact with her aren’t vaccinated. It’s why there’s such a push to get care home workers vaccinated to reduce the risk of them bringing covid to work and offing those in their care.
It's all relevant to the original question. Some people are getting the vaccine for those reasons... Help the NHS, Get our Freedoms back. Stop the spread. Help someone's nan you will never meetLord Marylebone said:
There are a number of people in this thread who really don’t understand that the vaccine cuts the risk of serious illness and cuts the rate of transmission.
If Grandma is vaccinated she is much safer.
If Grandma is vaccinated and the young family who visit her are also vaccinated, she is even more protected.
This is the whole point of getting as many vaccinated as possible.
I don't want someone taking the vaccine to protect my Grandma (nan) though. She has had the vaccine and if she is still worried she has to avoid people. Same as the flu.If Grandma is vaccinated she is much safer.
If Grandma is vaccinated and the young family who visit her are also vaccinated, she is even more protected.
This is the whole point of getting as many vaccinated as possible.
BTW My grandparents (91 and 92) are caravaning in Scotland ATM. Freedom and socialising is more important than waiting for this to blow over. You won't protect them, they won't let you
jameswills said:
Captain Conrod said:
Indeed. You won’t find the converted say anything about it.Captain Conrod said:
It's all relevant to the original question. Some people are getting the vaccine for those reasons... Help the NHS, Get our Freedoms back. Stop the spread. Help someone's nan you will never meet
They are all relevant reasons though.If we didn’t have this vaccination program, then our hospitals would be continually clogged up with people receiving treatment for Covid and the situation would likely not improve for years.
If the vaccine program works, as it seems to be, then yes we will be back to normal because covid cases and hospital numbers will fall as they are doing, and restrictions to try to slow the spread will no longer be necessary.
The laughable part is that we have a tiny hardcore of people who will enjoy all the benefits of a vaccinated society, whilst screaming at everyone else and telling them they are idiots for getting vaccinated.
And no, you can’t just do your own thing and sod everyone else. It’s called living in a society and we all have certain responsibilities to each other.
Imagine if everyone refused the vaccine. We would never get out of this.
Lord Marylebone said:
They are all relevant reasons though.
If we didn’t have this vaccination program, then our hospitals would be continually clogged up with people receiving treatment for Covid and the situation would likely not improve for years.
If the vaccine program works, as it seems to be, then yes we will be back to normal because covid cases and hospital numbers will fall as they are doing, and restrictions to try to slow the spread will no longer be necessary.
The laughable part is that we have a tiny hardcore of people who will enjoy all the benefits of a vaccinated society, whilst screaming at everyone else and telling them they are idiots for getting vaccinated.
And no, you can’t just do your own thing and sod everyone else. It’s called living in a society and we all have certain responsibilities to each other.
Imagine if everyone refused the vaccine. We would never get out of this.
We don't know for sure how bad this would be without Lockdowns or vaccines. It maybe manageable. The NHS for whatever reason won't go to a war time style effort to let society live their lives. I'm against taking the vaccine but if the NHS went all out I'd have been more inclined to take it.If we didn’t have this vaccination program, then our hospitals would be continually clogged up with people receiving treatment for Covid and the situation would likely not improve for years.
If the vaccine program works, as it seems to be, then yes we will be back to normal because covid cases and hospital numbers will fall as they are doing, and restrictions to try to slow the spread will no longer be necessary.
The laughable part is that we have a tiny hardcore of people who will enjoy all the benefits of a vaccinated society, whilst screaming at everyone else and telling them they are idiots for getting vaccinated.
And no, you can’t just do your own thing and sod everyone else. It’s called living in a society and we all have certain responsibilities to each other.
Imagine if everyone refused the vaccine. We would never get out of this.
ATG said:
We've got a pretty good idea what would happen. There are several countries doing the experiment for us. It isn't pretty in India and Nepal at the moment.
I have no idea what you think "NHS on a war time footing" means. You might want to talk to someone who worked in the NHS over the last year and a half. Their ability to deliver emergency care for covid patients was at breaking point on several occasions. There was no more capacity. There was no way of achieving greater capacity quickly enough for it to be of any use.
More hospitals, possibly covid specific. Paid staff and volunteers. Cut the red tape and train them in this illness specifically. Like the Nightingale hospital idea but actually implement it and on a mass scale. war time effort meaning like a emergency. I have no idea what you think "NHS on a war time footing" means. You might want to talk to someone who worked in the NHS over the last year and a half. Their ability to deliver emergency care for covid patients was at breaking point on several occasions. There was no more capacity. There was no way of achieving greater capacity quickly enough for it to be of any use.
What have india and Nepal done? I'm not aware.
For the record my mam works in the local Hospital. Treat like s
t and rarely got a break before covid. I'm not blind to the NHS style of running like a businessATG said:
The NHS was going flat out. It was treating covid as an emergency. Intensive care treatment was not being limited by red tape. It was limited by available trained staff. You can't just magic more staff out of thin air. You can't train them in a couple of weeks. It takes years. The fundamental problem with the Nightingale hospital idea was that there was no one to staff them.
India and Nepal have very significantly less medical capacity than we have and limited welfare support. For large swathes of the population, if they can't work, they can't eat, so "lockdowns" aren't an option. As a result covid is sweeping through the population and medical services have been overwhelmed. Patients who would recover if they had access to a hospital bed and oxygen are dying because the hospitals are full and have run out of oxygen. I've IT teammates in India and Nepal who can at least keep working and by local standards have a lot of spending power, so they're in a much better position than most of their compatriots, but they're nonetheless all losing family members to the disease and have all hunkered down with their immediate family hoping they can avoid the disease until it has burned itself out in the wider population. They're a stoic bunch, but after chatting for a few minutes it becomes very obvious that what they're living through as a nation is far, far worse than what we've suffered in the UK.
I disagree with the training staff bit. I'm pretty sure people could be trained in this respiratory illness relatively quickly. Not ideal I know. If we suddenly got invaded by a foreign country and needed extra support for causalities we would manage. We'd train civilians in no time. People can do amazing things when they try. India and Nepal have very significantly less medical capacity than we have and limited welfare support. For large swathes of the population, if they can't work, they can't eat, so "lockdowns" aren't an option. As a result covid is sweeping through the population and medical services have been overwhelmed. Patients who would recover if they had access to a hospital bed and oxygen are dying because the hospitals are full and have run out of oxygen. I've IT teammates in India and Nepal who can at least keep working and by local standards have a lot of spending power, so they're in a much better position than most of their compatriots, but they're nonetheless all losing family members to the disease and have all hunkered down with their immediate family hoping they can avoid the disease until it has burned itself out in the wider population. They're a stoic bunch, but after chatting for a few minutes it becomes very obvious that what they're living through as a nation is far, far worse than what we've suffered in the UK.
India and Nepal I'm certainly no expert in. I think the numbers are pretty low considering their population. I also see they had very low infection until recently. High insight is a wonderful thing but considering they had a year of watching us struggle. Maybe they should have built hospitals and staffed them.
Gassing Station | Health Matters | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff