serrac Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 On 06/12/2020 at 21:28, oscarsdad said: Utter utter absolute tripe - again spreading misinformation with the danger that it may lead to people believing it and avoiding a vaccine for the wrong reasons. the mRNA in the vaccine instructs cells how to make a Covid spike protein. The mRNA is then broken down by enzymes. At no point does the mRNA go anywhere near the nucleus of the cell or the recipients genetic material. An mRNA vaccine absolutely does not alter the recipient’s genetic code. Is there a way to stop the cells making the Covid Spike proteins in the event they cause a catastrophic immune reaction in a susceptible individual? Would repeating what the FDA consider the possible range of adverse events be spreading misinformation? https://youtu.be/wVspnL_3Gko 13:27 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 Blimey, good old BBC News, now in overdrive over the first few vaccine doses being given out! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oscarsdad Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 2 hours ago, serrac said: Is there a way to stop the cells making the Covid Spike proteins in the event they cause a catastrophic immune reaction in a susceptible individual? Would repeating what the FDA consider the possible range of adverse events be spreading misinformation? https://youtu.be/wVspnL_3Gko 13:27 Read the leaflet that comes with a packet of paracetamol that you have in your bathroom cabinet - most of those will be listed as “possible”. I note you have failed to address your posting of non-scientific conspiracy theory ********? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 12 minutes ago, oscarsdad said: Read the leaflet that comes with a packet of paracetamol that you have in your bathroom cabinet - most of those will be listed as “possible”. /\ This. Every medication comes with a huge list of possible side effects - from mild to severe. I have very rarely experienced any of them despite having been prescribed a number over the years. One current prescription item I take - I do get a documented side effect - as a result of which my Dr. lowered the dosage and added an alternative to make up. I have just finished a course of 3 prescription medications - and the list of possible side effects is huge - and I've had none of them! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serrac Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 3 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said: /\ This. Every medication comes with a huge list of possible side effects - from mild to severe. I have very rarely experienced any of them despite having been prescribed a number over the years. One current prescription item I take - I do get a documented side effect - as a result of which my Dr. lowered the dosage and added an alternative to make up. I have just finished a course of 3 prescription medications - and the list of possible side effects is huge - and I've had none of them! Well considering that "Every medication comes with a huge list of possible side effects" isn't it interesting that the government determined the existing ADR reporting mechanism, presumably used for all current drugs and medical procedures, was not fit for purpose to deal with the volume of ADRs expected to be generated by this particular type of vaccine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serrac Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 28 minutes ago, oscarsdad said: Read the leaflet that comes with a packet of paracetamol that you have in your bathroom cabinet - most of those will be listed as “possible”. I note you have failed to address your posting of non-scientific conspiracy theory ********? Actually, thanks for the biology lesson, noted. I notice you did not respond to the issue concerning Transverse Myelitis apparently occurring at the rate of 1 in 4,500 in AstraZeneca vaccine test subjects (2 in 9000 assuming the 18,000 total cohort was spit evenly between vaccine and placebo) as opposed to 1 in 250,000 in the general population. And I'd still like an answer to my question whether the generation of spike proteins can be turned off if it turns out to be harmful in some individuals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 8 minutes ago, serrac said: Well considering that "Every medication comes with a huge list of possible side effects" isn't it interesting that the government determined the existing ADR reporting mechanism, presumably used for all current drugs and medical procedures, was not fit for purpose to deal with the volume of ADRs expected to be generated by this particular type of vaccine? See my answer written last Thursday at 12:48. No change from that position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serrac Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 1 minute ago, JohnfromUK said: See my answer written last Thursday at 12:48. No change from that position. Fair enough - time will tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferguson_tom Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 We all know medicines can have possible side effects, the difference between this one and the vast majority we take is that the others have been around for many years or their first use (not in a trail) is not on a national vaccination program and being used on millions of people. This is a new vaccine which is reportedly using new technology the fact people are hesitant to use it does not make them an anti-vaxxer in the typical sense of the word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loriusgarrulus Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 The best thing to do for every individual before having the vaccine is a risk assessment for yourself: The chance of getting covid. The chance of dying from covid if you catch it. The chance of having long term health problems from the after effects of covid. The chance of getting serious side effects from the vaccine. The chances are affected by the individuals age and also any ongoing health problems. How much you value the potential freedoms that vaccination will potentially supply. The rest is the luck of the draw. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mungler Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 I still reckon that the reason the over 80’s are getting it first is to see how they all get on with it first and before rolling it out to everyone else. It’s not a bad plan really, and by the time I get a slot in the queue we’ll know how the olds have got on 😆 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TIGHTCHOKE Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 Just now, Mungler said: I still reckon that the reason the over 80’s are getting it first is to see how they all get on with it first and before rolling it out to everyone else. It’s not a bad plan really, and by the time I get a slot in the queue we’ll know how the olds have got on 😆 Or you will have paid for your own doses! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serrac Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 16 hours ago, loriusgarrulus said: The best thing to do for every individual before having the vaccine is a risk assessment for yourself: The chance of getting covid. The chance of dying from covid if you catch it. The chance of having long term health problems from the after effects of covid. The chance of getting serious side effects from the vaccine. The chances are affected by the individuals age and also any ongoing health problems. How much you value the potential freedoms that vaccination will potentially supply. The rest is the luck of the draw. Personally I think a major factor for most will be the amount of coercion applied. Take away my right to travel, shop, work, access medical services and a multitude of other public scenarios and I will have no life anyway so I might as well take my chances with the vaccine, regardless of my own assessment of the risks vs benefits. https://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2020/11/09/medethics-2020-106821 "Mandatory vaccination, including for COVID-19, can be ethically justified if the threat to public health is grave, the confidence in safety and effectiveness is high, the expected utility of mandatory vaccination is greater than the alternatives, and the penalties or costs for non-compliance are proportionate. I describe an algorithm for justified mandatory vaccination. Penalties or costs could include withholding of benefits, imposition of fines, provision of community service or loss of freedoms." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferguson_tom Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 Whatever your view on corona virus and the vaccine, NO ONE should support or allow their government to introduce a mandatory vaccination program. People need to be very careful about giving away their civil liberties regardless of the threat. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
discobob Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 Just now, ferguson_tom said: Whatever your view on corona virus and the vaccine, NO ONE should support or allow their government to introduce a mandatory vaccination program. People need to be very careful about giving away their civil liberties regardless of the threat. too late - and it is all based on a piece of card that could so easily end up in the wash and while not being mandatory so many places will use it as a right of admission that it may as well be if you want to live any semblance of a normal life Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchman Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 the way i look at it ..(given my limited knowledge)....is that a vaccine is the safest way.....as all you are doing is putting a dead or deactivated ...or part of a virus into your body ...to prompt it to do what it would normally do anyway....so where is the problem ? my worry of "other medicines" that are chemical concoctions,....is you are putting something in your body....that is unatural...and that is where the problems start Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferguson_tom Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 So its taken just one day and a few hundred doses for new pretty serious advice to now be issued. Sorry but no matter what anyone says I will never agree that a national roll out of a new drug is a safe course of action! According to the article they would not have recruited people with a history of allergic reactions. Does that mean they would have only recruited "healthy people" as is the norm with most medical trials? Would diabetics have taken part in the trials? I only focus on that as it seems people with diabetes are at a higher risk of complications form the virus. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55244122 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amateur Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 What's the problem? It's being mass-tested on the least economically viable. If they survive in the short-term it will move down the age range. The risks to the working population should be slight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 19 minutes ago, ferguson_tom said: So its taken just one day and a few hundred doses for new pretty serious advice to now be issued. Actually it is about 5000 doses (not a few hundred) - mostly to vulnerable or elderly. Both cases had known existing serious allergy conditions to the extent that they carried epipens. Both are fine after treatment. I can see nothing either to worry about or indeed unusual in the reports. To be honest, it would be more worrying if no reports came up as it would suggest a non-functional reporting procedure. A few people get similar from the 'flu jab - which is why they make you wait a few minutes afterwards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scully Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 A bloke on the shoot today was commenting that he didn’t think his Mother should be having the vaccination as it will be wasted. She is in her 80’s, bedridden, needs 24 hour care, has no idea where she is nor what is going on, and hence no quality of life. Seems harsh but I can understand his reasoning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnfromUK Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 7 minutes ago, Scully said: A bloke on the shoot today was commenting that he didn’t think his Mother should be having the vaccination as it will be wasted. She is in her 80’s, bedridden, needs 24 hour care, has no idea where she is nor what is going on, and hence no quality of life. Seems harsh but I can understand his reasoning. It's a decision for the mother if she is able to make one (which it sound like she isn't) - or otherwise for the family who will probably be able to know what she might have decided if she was in a state to decide (if that makes sense!). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ordnance Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 (edited) Quote So its taken just one day and a few hundred doses for new pretty serious advice to now be issued. Sorry but no matter what anyone says I will never agree that a national roll out of a new drug is a safe course of action! People have similar reactions to the flu vaccine, and numerous other medications. As said whoever is giving you the flu jab, will have a epipen close to hand. Edited December 9, 2020 by ordnance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
serrac Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 10 hours ago, ditchman said: the way i look at it ..(given my limited knowledge)....is that a vaccine is the safest way.....as all you are doing is putting a dead or deactivated ...or part of a virus into your body ...to prompt it to do what it would normally do anyway....so where is the problem ? my worry of "other medicines" that are chemical concoctions,....is you are putting something in your body....that is unatural...and that is where the problems start If only it were that simple: “The formation of so-called “non-neutralizing antibodies” can lead to an exaggerated immune reaction, especially when the test person is confronted with the real, “wild” virus after vaccination.” – The vaccinations are expected to produce antibodies against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. However, spike proteins also contain syncytin-homologous proteins, which are essential for the formation of the placenta in mammals such as humans. It must be ruled out that a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 could trigger an immune reaction against syncytin-1, as it may otherwise result in infertility of indefinite duration in vaccinated women. – The mRNA vaccines from Pfizer/BioNTech contain polyethylene glycol (PEG). 70% of people develop antibodies against this substance. This means that many people can develop allergic, potentially fatal reactions to the vaccination. – The much too short duration of the study does not allow a realistic estimation of the late effects. As in the narcolepsy cases after the swine flu vaccination, millions of healthy people would be exposed to an unacceptable risk if an emergency approval were to be granted and the possibility of observing the late effects of the vaccination were to follow.” Dr. Mike Yeadon PhD, Pfizer’s former Vice President and Chief Scientist for Allergy & Respiratory Disease Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ditchman Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 33 minutes ago, serrac said: If only it were that simple: “The formation of so-called “non-neutralizing antibodies” can lead to an exaggerated immune reaction, especially when the test person is confronted with the real, “wild” virus after vaccination.” – The vaccinations are expected to produce antibodies against spike proteins of SARS-CoV-2. However, spike proteins also contain syncytin-homologous proteins, which are essential for the formation of the placenta in mammals such as humans. It must be ruled out that a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 could trigger an immune reaction against syncytin-1, as it may otherwise result in infertility of indefinite duration in vaccinated women. – The mRNA vaccines from Pfizer/BioNTech contain polyethylene glycol (PEG). 70% of people develop antibodies against this substance. This means that many people can develop allergic, potentially fatal reactions to the vaccination. – The much too short duration of the study does not allow a realistic estimation of the late effects. As in the narcolepsy cases after the swine flu vaccination, millions of healthy people would be exposed to an unacceptable risk if an emergency approval were to be granted and the possibility of observing the late effects of the vaccination were to follow.” Dr. Mike Yeadon PhD, Pfizer’s former Vice President and Chief Scientist for Allergy & Respiratory Disease will you have the vaccine ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fitzy Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 (edited) I had the vaccine today. Sore shoulder but all good. Edited December 9, 2020 by fitzy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.