30 somethings - are you going to vax?

[WonkeyDonkey]

captain_cynic said:

Fixed that for you.

Why don't we round up all the people who don't want to get a perfectly safe vaccine and have them live in isolation?

If anyone should be rounded up, it should be the people who refuse to fit into society, not those who are unfortunate enough to have a manageable illness.

Fortunately for you... I'm not an idiot or a selfish tt who proposes such things.

BTW... You need to be told that you do not represent the majority of society. You are an absolute nutter who seems to think rounding up people who have an illness so you can be irresponsible is a good idea... Aktion T4 immediately came to mind when I read your nonsense.

Very few people agree with you. You need to stop deluding yourself otherwise.

Edited by captain_cynic on Saturday 19th June 10:57

[Harrison Bergeron]

popeyewhite said:

Harrison Bergeron said:

You’re calling those who don’t want the vaccine selfish yet you want 65 million(and by extension 8 billion) people to take a vaccine that isn’t really needed for 50% of them.

Good basis for an ethical argument.

PH gets more like the twitter-sewer every day.

Really you think is virus is a problem to most people?

Why is the average age of death skewed towards the old, why aren't the 30 somethings who are out and about dropping down like flies?

Why do you only need the top 2 bands of this chart to outnumber the rest?

[Colonel Cupcake]

captain_cynic said:

Colonel Cupcake said:

Why don't we round up all the people like your sister and have them living in an isolated, sealed compound and let the rest of society carry on as normal?

Why should I, and the vast majority of society be punished because some woman wants to force everyone else, including kids into taking a vaccine, unproven at that, that they don't need and don't derive any benefit from.

I'm an absolute selfish tt.

Fixed that for you.

Why don't we round up all the people who don't want to get a perfectly safe vaccine and have them live in isolation?

If anyone should be rounded up, it should be the people who refuse to fit into society, not those who are unfortunate enough to have a manageable illness.

Fortunately for you... I'm not an idiot or a selfish tt who proposes such things.

BTW... You need to be told that you do not represent the majority of society. You are an absolute nutter who seems to think rounding up people who have an illness so you can be irresponsible is a good idea... Aktion T4 immediately came to mind when I read your nonsense.

No, you fixed it for you.

Your sisters illness is clearly NOT manageable, is it, if it is dependent on everyone else having a vaccine that they may not want or even need. I do feel sorry for your sister. However, I don't know your sister and I don't care about her. I would never take a vaccine that is experimental and has an unproven long-term safety record that has no benefit for me, just to suit her (or you). Before you start foaming at the mouth and reaching for the 'report' button, my son falls into a similar demographic. However, he is pragmatic with his situation and he does not feel that society has to revolve around him.

You claim that you have not proposed any 'rounding up' of anyone and yet you have identified two different groups you would be happy to see 'rounded up'. Those that don't want an experimental, unproven vaccine and those that 'refuse to fit in to society'. The second one is rather a broad brush.

I suspect that you support things like vaccine passports and 'no jab no job'. It seems that you are happy to segregate, isolate and yes, punish, those that don't fit into your mindset. Unless such policies impact upon someone close to you, it seems.

Am I selfish? I am on this issue. Just as selfish as you and/or your sister.

[coffeebreath]

Won't be getting it for a while. Some of the adverse reactions seem like they should have easily surfaced during initial testing, will let all the long term data come out before I make a decision. Seems common sense, I'm happy to be called "selfish" by people who want 100% vaccination rate just so they can fly on holiday as soon as possible.

[jinkster]

I’m 38 and had both AZ vaccinations. Partner is 37 and she hasn’t due to pregnancy. As soon as child is born she’ll be off to the doctors for the jab.

[sevensfun]

coffeebreath said:

Won't be getting it for a while. Some of the adverse reactions seem like they should have easily surfaced during initial testing, will let all the long term data come out before I make a decision. Seems common sense, I'm happy to be called "selfish" by people who want 100% vaccination rate just so they can fly on holiday as soon as possible.

Same
The rules around travel and testing may sway me though

[davey83]

I'm 37 with no underlying health concerns that I know about. Pretty sure I'd had CV19 around Christmas time 2019. I won't be getting the vaccine as I don't wish to supplement my immune system synthetically.

I'll be sticking to my Wim Hof Method which has been proven to fight infection, disease and inflation naturally.

[ORD]

davey83 said:

I'm 37 with no underlying health concerns that I know about. Pretty sure I'd had CV19 around Christmas time 2019. I won't be getting the vaccine as I don't wish to supplement my immune system synthetically.

I'll be sticking to my Wim Hof Method which has been proven to fight infection, disease and inflation naturally.

Inflation? That’s brilliant. We’ll need that over the next couple of years.

[davey83]

ORD said:

Inflation? That’s brilliant. We’ll need that over the next couple of years.

Inflammation*

Well done mate, attack someone's grammar error rather than the point being made.

[Polite M135 driver]

dmahon said:

Im 38 and wouldn’t take one.

Feel like there is a comparable amount of risk with the vaccine than Covid.

Just popped into this thread…

This is just stupid.

What regulatory body would approve a vaccine that has a similar likelihood of harm to the patient as contracting the disease concerned?

The fact is the data about outcomes from COVID and from the vaccines are very readily available. You don’t need to ‘feel’ anything. You can go and look at it. Hint: the vaccine is much, much, much, much less risky than catching the disease.

Edited by Polite M135 driver on Saturday 19th June 15:18

[sevensfun]

Polite M135 driver said:

Just popped into this thread…

This is just stupid.

What regulatory body would approve a vaccine that has a similar likelihood of harm to the patient as contracting the disease concerned?

The fact is the data about outcomes from COVID and from the vaccines are very readily available. You don’t need to ‘feel’ anything. You can go and look at it. Hint: the vaccine is much, much, much, much less risky than catching the disease.

Edited by Polite M135 driver on Saturday 19th June 15:18

What body would want void of all liability?

[ORD]

davey83 said:

Inflammation*

Well done mate, attack someone's grammar error rather than the point being made.

It’s not grammar. It’s a typo. Relax!

[MrBrightSi]

captain_cynic said:

it should be the people who refuse to fit into society,

Edited by captain_cynic on Saturday 19th June 10:57

Whew lad.

C.S. Lewis had moral busybodies like you clocked years ago and it still remains my go-to quote for all of this absolute stupidity.

Tell me how we had a society that wasn't some schizophrenic mess pre-covid when a couple of good examples being the 50/50 split on brexit and then parts of the UK desperate to gain independence. I just don't see this idea of "Society" being anything other than rules made by others, taxes and petty judgements all round.

[MrBarry123]

jinkster said:

I’m 38 and had both AZ vaccinations. Partner is 37 and she hasn’t due to pregnancy. As soon as child is born she’ll be off to the doctors for the jab.

This is interesting jinkster.

My wife and I are ten years your junior and now have a 6-month old daughter. My wife was pregnant during the first 8 months of the pandemic although she was fortunate in that she could work from home and we were able to isolate ourselves pretty effectively.

I’m assuming the reason your wife has decided against vaccination now is in case anything were to happen with the pregnancy following the jab?

My wife and I were discussing what we would have done in a situation similar to yours and we couldn’t decide.

[anonymous-user]

So I had the jab. I turned up at 8am and the queue was huge, but it went in a few minutes.

Left arm has a little soreness at the moment.

Feedback from the jab, the doctor zipped through the questions about blood clots, allergies etc. I answered no to all as I'm generally not allergic etc, but can't always be sure.

Feel fairly tired. If I lift my left arm, it's difficult to get full movement.

[deeen]

Had 2nd jab today. No issues after first one, so not really expecting anything of note this time.

This thread seems a bit toxic, seems to me the point of vaccination is to cover the popuation, not the individual.

[ATG]

Colonel Cupcake said:

Why don't we round up all the people like your sister and have them living in an isolated, sealed compound and let the rest of society carry on as normal?

Why should I, and the vast majority of society be punished because some woman wants to force everyone else, including kids into taking a vaccine, unproven at that, that they don't need and don't derive any benefit from.

Absolute selfish tt.

If you think this suggestion is in any way equivalent to the post you were responding to, then god help you. Seriously, stop and think.

[Polite M135 driver]

I guess there is little point trying to engage in rational argument with people who are acting irrationally,

[Colonel Cupcake]

ATG said:

Colonel Cupcake said:

Why don't we round up all the people like your sister and have them living in an isolated, sealed compound and let the rest of society carry on as normal?

Why should I, and the vast majority of society be punished because some woman wants to force everyone else, including kids into taking a vaccine, unproven at that, that they don't need and don't derive any benefit from.

Absolute selfish tt.

If you think this suggestion is in any way equivalent to the post you were responding to, then god help you. Seriously, stop and think.

Are you one of those that support the segregation of the unvaccinated, or the autonomy of individuals deciding what they do and do not put into thier own bodies?

You must be, seeing as you didn't include the quote I was responding to.

This is what you said in the 'No Masks, No Entry, No Exceptions thread'

ATG said:

You keep spouting "none of your business", but the reality is that when your health condition affects other people then it becomes their business.

If Captain Cynic feels its OK to demand that everyone take a vaccine, even if they don't need or want it, just to protect his sister, then her health condition affects everyone else and, in your words, becomes everyone elses business.

If the Captain thinks that is OK, it seems a little hypocritical when he (and you) get all het up when someone suggests something similar but has a impact on someone close to him.

Just for the record, I am totally against the 'rounding up' of any group and of the idea of forced vaccinations.

[davey83]

^ 100% agreed. Give consenting adults the choice to have a medication or not. They will then only be a threat to themselves and other consenting adults who also have opt'd out of taking the vaccine. Those that have taken the vaccine are protected. I really don't see the point or drive for everyone taking the vaccine.

Either the vaccine protects you from corona viruses or they don't.