Covid Vaccine

[eddoakley]

Ok, so my science and/or terminology is flawed but it doesn't negate all of my points.

Even if corona is only responsible for about 30% of common colds then why has a vaccine not been found in the last 50 years but one for this new strain of corona is found and approved in a few months? And yes I accept that there is more testing to come but the announcement has been made that it's tested etc.

 

Anyway, I'll not be having it. Best of luck to all those that do and of course you wont be bothered if I don't have it because you will be protected against the virus so I'll not pose any risk to you even if I did have it.

 

Edd

 

[Scully]

12 minutes ago, eddoakley said:

Ok, so my science and/or terminology is flawed but it doesn't negate all of my points.

Even if corona is only responsible for about 30% of common colds then why has a vaccine not been found in the last 50 years but one for this new strain of corona is found and approved in a few months? And yes I accept that there is more testing to come but the announcement has been made that it's tested etc.

 

Anyway, I'll not be having it. Best of luck to all those that do and of course you wont be bothered if I don't have it because you will be protected against the virus so I'll not pose any risk to you even if I did have it.

 

Edd

 

Your choice of course. 
This is how I see it, right or wrong.
I believe there are many different strains of cold viruses, none of which can be fatal as far as I’m aware. 
Covid 19 however, can be fatal as we all know. 

Despite the flu jab vaccine, flu can also be fatal under certain circumstances, and I’m assuming COVID 19 will become something similar, despite the vaccine. 
There are no guarantees, and although I was offered a flu jab I didn’t take it as there were others more in need than I and only a certain number available at the time. I may have it later. 
I’ll have the COVID 19 vaccine because unlike flu, it can and does kill those who not only get it, but those who care for them, and even if it doesn’t kill me, I don’t have time to get ill; there are too many things I want to be getting on with, living being the main one. 
I just want to get back to normal and get on with my life. 

[JohnfromUK]

7 minutes ago, eddoakley said:

then why has a vaccine not been found in the last 50 years

Because (in part anyway) the common cold is a whole range of different virusses (literally 100's) that cause similar symptoms.  There are over 100 rhinovirusses, a few coronavirusses, several influenza type virusses - all of which have similar symptoms that we lump under the collective name of 'having a cold'.

9 minutes ago, eddoakley said:

but the announcement has been made that it's tested

The announcement has been made that its effectiveness has been tested and results are in (and have shown very good levels of protection) .......... and that safety testing is ongoing, but to date have NOT shown any safety problems ........ and testing for how long the vaccine remains effective are still very much ongoing - with results a long way down the line.  However - with widespread health problems and severe economic impacts - it makes sense to bring the vaccine into operation as soon as reasonably possible.  This is done on the basis that it will reduce illnesses, save lives, reduce pressures overall on the NHS (helping ease capacity for other conditions) - and also provide a high level of confidence that the economy should be able to make some recovery early next year (and yesterday's stock market reaction round the world showed how people viewed that).

It is your choice whether you choose to have a vaccine or not.

[discobob]

Apparently Andrew Lloyd Webber has had the vaccine - if it makes you look like that then no thanks 😂

[team tractor]

2 hours ago, Scully said:

Your choice of course. 
This is how I see it, right or wrong.
I believe there are many different strains of cold viruses, none of which can be fatal as far as I’m aware. 
Covid 19 however, can be fatal as we all know. 

Despite the flu jab vaccine, flu can also be fatal under certain circumstances, and I’m assuming COVID 19 will become something similar, despite the vaccine. 
There are no guarantees, and although I was offered a flu jab I didn’t take it as there were others more in need than I and only a certain number available at the time. I may have it later. 
I’ll have the COVID 19 vaccine because unlike flu, it can and does kill those who not only get it, but those who care for them, and even if it doesn’t kill me, I don’t have time to get ill; there are too many things I want to be getting on with, living being the main one. 
I just want to get back to normal and get on with my life. 

Being self employed I’m the same . I lost a day last week being tested and it’s thrown me miles behind. 

[ordnance]

7 hours ago, eddoakley said:

Ok, so my science and/or terminology is flawed but it doesn't negate all of my points.

Even if corona is only responsible for about 30% of common colds then why has a vaccine not been found in the last 50 years but one for this new strain of corona is found and approved in a few months? And yes I accept that there is more testing to come but the announcement has been made that it's tested etc.

 

Anyway, I'll not be having it. Best of luck to all those that do and of course you wont be bothered if I don't have it because you will be protected against the virus so I'll not pose any risk to you even if I did have it.

 

Edd

 

 Not a good comparison, as said there are around 200 virus strains that can cause the common cold, it would be difficult to make a vaccine to cover them all.

[Zetter]

1 hour ago, ordnance said:

 Not a good comparison, as said there are around 200 virus strains that can cause the common cold, it would be difficult to make a vaccine to cover them all.

Also there is the issue of apart of the fact its a bit inconvenient it doesnt kill people except in rare cases so the drive isnt there when there are more important health causes to put research into such as Cancer treatment.

[Raja Clavata]

I believe the message should really be get the vaccine into enough people so we can all get back to a resemblance of normality. We still haven't seen the worse of the short term financial impact of COVID yet, let alone the longer term one.

I'm nowhere near the top of the priority but based on what I've seen I'll be taking the vaccine when available to do my part towards economic recovery.

[southeastpete]

I won’t have it, I don’t want my wife or daughter to either.

I don’t like how it’s been rushed through, and other vaccine for any other disease rushes through like that wouldn’t be allowed.

However, if my parents wanted to get it I wouldn’t be fussed as said above somewhere, if there are future health issues, they’d probably still have more life with it than without it.

Regarding making it compulsory, thats so far against human rights... I’m a massive needle phobic. I was once told I most likely had a blood clot in my leg and was told if it broke free I could die that night, the doctor said 50/50 odds. I didn’t have the injection. So if they tried to force an injection on me? I’d fight til my last!

 

[Newbie to this]

8 hours ago, Raja Clavata said:

I believe the message should really be get the vaccine into enough people so we can all get back to a resemblance of normality. We still haven't seen the worse of the short term financial impact of COVID yet, let alone the longer term one.

I'm nowhere near the top of the priority but based on what I've seen I'll be taking the vaccine when available to do my part towards economic recovery.

^^^This, anything that gets us back to some sort of normality and the economy moving has to be a good thing.

Already our kids, kids, kids will be paying back the debt.

[Scully]

9 hours ago, southeastpete said:

I won’t have it, I don’t want my wife or daughter to either.

I don’t like how it’s been rushed through, and other vaccine for any other disease rushes through like that wouldn’t be allowed.

However, if my parents wanted to get it I wouldn’t be fussed as said above somewhere, if there are future health issues, they’d probably still have more life with it than without it.

Regarding making it compulsory, thats so far against human rights... I’m a massive needle phobic. I was once told I most likely had a blood clot in my leg and was told if it broke free I could die that night, the doctor said 50/50 odds. I didn’t have the injection. So if they tried to force an injection on me? I’d fight til my last!

 

Your choice, which is how it should be. 
I can’t see it being made compulsory, not even in school children to prevent them passing it on to mam and dad, but you never know. 

[WalkedUp]

9 hours ago, southeastpete said:

Regarding making it compulsory, thats so far against human rights... I’m a massive needle phobic. I was once told I most likely had a blood clot in my leg and was told if it broke free I could die that night, the doctor said 50/50 odds. I didn’t have the injection. So if they tried to force an injection on me? I’d fight til my last!

 

It would be worth having some counselling on your needle phobia, an aversion to medical treatment is likely to shorten your life. 

When I was young I had phobias of passenger lifts and needles, I don’t know where the fear came from or at what age I lost them, but you can definitely overcome any phobia. When donating blood I still dislike the feeling of the needle scratching within the inside of the vein as I wriggle, but I try to just ignore it. 

Edited November 11, 2020 by WalkedUp

[JohnfromUK]

Vaccinations (not yet Covid) are becoming compulsory in many places.  https://www.euronews.com/2019/05/07/how-growing-numbers-of-eu-countries-are-making-vaccines-mandatory

[Capt Christopher Jones]

On 09/11/2020 at 16:58, Scully said:

If it means we can all resume our daily lives without having to wear masks and squirt sanitiser  like it’s going out of fashion, socialise normally, get all businesses operating normally without the threat of more lockdowns, then I’ll be getting it as soon as the opportunity arises. 
Great news as far as I’m concerned. 👍

 

[discobob]

You can make things compulsory - without them being compulsory.

Going on Holiday - your holiday insurance isn't valid without it (that is if your destination will allow you to travel there without the vaccination)

Applying for a Job - Have you had your CV Vaccination within the past 12 months - Yes/Bin

To list just 2 examples

[JohnfromUK]

4 minutes ago, discobob said:

You can make things compulsory - without them being compulsory.

Exactly.  When I was at school, the flu jab was compulsory - school rule.  To escape it - you needed a doctors letter explaining why you couldn't have it.

[Scully]

1 hour ago, Capt Christopher Jones said:

 

You really do need to learn to let go. 🙂

[Vince Green]

Interesting discussion on TV this morning. This vaccine may well be the first out of the starting blocks but it will not last long before another comes to eclipse it with a more convenient method of delivery.

The big problem with this one is that it is complicated to distribute so should be regarded as a stepping stone. In that respect Pfiser have a vested interest in getting as many out there as quickly as they can, while they can, before the rivals catch up. .

After that there will a league table of vaccines with different success rates and costs but all the big players will keep on developing better and better vaccines because the market will be huge

The answer to the other question now is yes, we are entering an era where we are going to have to carry a health certificate before we can travel, get mortgages, take up jobs, join gyms, go to Uni etc almost certainly after this

Edited November 11, 2020 by Vince Green

[steve_b_wales]

As a frontline worker (private healthcare) I'm happy to have the vaccine. If I get side effects in 20 years time (I'll be 83) then I'm not going to be too worried about it.

[JohnfromUK]

2 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

The big problem with this one is that it is complicated to distribute so should be regarded as a stepping stone.

I understand the Oxford one is likely to be next (all being well and trials report due next week, but those who seem to be 'in the know' making positive noises about trials).  This brings (as I understand it from what I have heard/read) two big advantages;

1. It is much easier to transport and distribute - being suitable for normal refrigeration as many currently distributed medicines.
2. I believe that they (Astra Zeneca) have already been producing in volume at risk (whose risk is a little less clear!) so should be available in quantity very quickly.

I also don't know if the Oxford one requires two injections; the Pfizer one seems to need two, three weeks apart.

8 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

The answer to the other question now is yes, we are entering an era where we are going to have to carry a health certificate before we can travel, get mortgages, take up jobs, go to Uni etc almost certainly after this

Agreed - in fact a 'national ID card' that gives status on such matters seems likely.  Personally - I have no objection to that.

1 minute ago, steve_b_wales said:

I'm happy to have the vaccine. If I get side effects in 20 years time (I'll be 83) then I'm not going to be too worried about it.

Same - and same age!

[oscarsdad]

I believe the concerns about the perceived “rush” are unfounded...these vaccines have been given absolute top priority with pretty much bottomless budgets - this is not something which has happened before. So they haven’t been rushed, they have been prioritised. 
 

Prof VT himself has said this morning he’d be at the front of the queue if he could be and I agree with him. The MHRA will not approve this if it isn’t safe. The vaccine mechanisms cannot be compared to disasters such as thalidomide etc, there is a big job to avoid pseudoscience misinformation nonsense like people spread about MMR which could reduce uptake. 
 

Once approved, personally my view would be it should be compulsory. You’re not going to school / work / university / holiday without being able to demonstrate that you’ve been vaccinated...by far the best way to protect the vulnerable. 
 

I have some scientific / medical knowledge and experience but we have to as lay people trust the medics and the science - Facebook epidemiologists or Dave down the pub or Sharon in the school playground are not the views to be listened to - go on the evidence, which at the moment looks very positive. (That said, Russia are today claiming their vaccine is >90% effective - I do not believe they can be trusted and I similarly wouldn’t be trusting anything Chinese.). 

[JohnfromUK]

2 minutes ago, oscarsdad said:

Once approved, personally my view would be it should be compulsory.

I am inclined to agree in principle - with some concerns that need to be addressed to fully get me on side.  Notable among these are

• what we do and how we control visitors, foreign lorry drivers, tourists etc.
• how we tackle "other incoming people" (our borders are like selves with tears in them)
• how it could be enforced (rules that are simply ignored just brings the whole process into disrepute)
• how you 'track and trace' assuming the vaccine needs periodic boosters/updates for mutations
• how you apply it to the whole group of (several million) people who are apparently 'below the radar' when we considered IDs needed for the ability to vote.

So - on that basis, whilst agreeing with the general idea, I don't think it could be introduced in a practical way - and on that basis - I can't see how it can really work in a meaningful way.

[Vince Green]

I think this would be the ideal opportunity to introduce a proper ID card, long overdue

[JohnfromUK]

7 minutes ago, Vince Green said:

I think this would be the ideal opportunity to introduce a proper ID card, long overdue

I have no objection and would do so ....... but my view is that it should be something 'useful' - which in effect means 'smart' I think.  For example, it might be 'readable' in such as way that the reader (carried by authorised persons such as police, customs, border force, HMRC, emergency services) can access multiple data and so you can have a card that covers (when used with the authorised reader);

• Driving license
• Nat Insurance no
• HMRC ref no
• Medical matters (vaccination status, and special conditions)
• Voting eligibility
• Other 'official' statuses (maybe even SGC/FAC?)

I don't want 'yet another' separate number/card/piece of paperwork.

I appreciate it can't easily cover passport (as other countries are involved).  A possible way would be for the card to have a chip with a unique reference that allowed a reader terminal to connect securely to the data held in a secure data centre (which must already exist for many of the applications anyway such as DVLC, DHSS, HMRC, NHS)

[Scully]

33 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I have no objection and would do so ....... but my view is that it should be something 'useful' - which in effect means 'smart' I think.  For example, it might be 'readable' in such as way that the reader (carried by authorised persons such as police, customs, border force, HMRC, emergency services) can access multiple data and so you can have a card that covers (when used with the authorised reader);

• Driving license
• Nat Insurance no
• HMRC ref no
• Medical matters (vaccination status, and special conditions)
• Voting eligibility
• Other 'official' statuses (maybe even SGC/FAC?)

I don't want 'yet another' separate number/card/piece of paperwork.

I appreciate it can't easily cover passport (as other countries are involved).  A possible way would be for the card to have a chip with a unique reference that allowed a reader terminal to connect securely to the data held in a secure data centre (which must already exist for many of the applications anyway such as DVLC, DHSS, HMRC, NHS)

Making it an offence not to carry it? Why don’t we just go the whole hog and chip everyone?