# Will you have the Covid Vaccine



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 3, 2020)

It’s a question going around social media at the moment 

So simple - will you have the Covid Vaccine when it gets offered to you


----------



## fundy (Dec 3, 2020)

c for me


----------



## pauljames87 (Dec 3, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			It’s a question going around social media at the moment

So simple - will you have the Covid Vaccine when it gets offered to you
		
Click to expand...

100% yes

However I'll gladly wait my turn behind the at least 9 groups in front of me who need it more.

Who doesn't want bill gates controlling their mind anyways 😂


----------



## ColchesterFC (Dec 3, 2020)

Yes, 100%. I'll get whichever of the approved vaccines I'm offered when it comes to my turn. Not that it will be any time soon as I'm not in any of the first 10 groups to get it.


----------



## upsidedown (Dec 3, 2020)

Yes absolutely and the good lady will get hers first as she is going to be a vaccinator


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Dec 3, 2020)

Yup, group 9. Feb? March? Hopefully by then.


----------



## Ethan (Dec 3, 2020)

Yes, definitely. We know the risks of Covid now and it is a nasty, so vax is a no brainier for any of us who have played with persimmon woods, and definitely for those of you who have played with the 1.62 golf ball. If you only know 460cc drivers, you can probably wait a bit to see if the vax turns the country into a post apocalyptic wasteland with zombies wandering around, kind of like [insert your own choice of what town or city to insult] right now, then.


----------



## chrisd (Dec 3, 2020)

Yes, without any shadow of doubt  asap


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Dec 3, 2020)

100%, looking forward to it.


----------



## larmen (Dec 3, 2020)

It’s a yes from me.

I might be group 6, I might be others. But I have annual check ups coming up and do some lobbying there ;-)


----------



## Swinglowandslow (Dec 3, 2020)

Yes, too right .


----------



## fenwayrich (Dec 3, 2020)

Yes, as and when it is available. I keep getting messages because apparently I am 'clinically extremely vulnerable' due to immunosuppression. I can't say that I have been shielding, or indeed doing anything other than the usual social distancing and washing hands etc. But it would seem rather foolish to refuse something that a respected professional body have approved.

I don't understand it in any detail, nor do I want to, but I suppose that logically a vaccine would be less likely to provide protection for someone who is already immunosuppressed that a person whose immune system is not so compromised. I'll still give it a go though.


----------



## ExRabbit (Dec 4, 2020)

Yes - just joined group 7 earlier this year. My wife is group 8 - but, as she is a teacher, I hope she might end up leapfrogging my group.


----------



## Imurg (Dec 4, 2020)

As I said before...I will be as close to the front of the queue as I can get.


----------



## HampshireHog (Dec 4, 2020)

I’ll have it when I eventually fall into a qualifying group.


----------



## Foxholer (Dec 4, 2020)

Yes! ASAP.


----------



## bluewolf (Dec 4, 2020)

Yes, when my group is eventually up. 

I’m quite interested to hear from the single person who voted NO though.


----------



## AmandaJR (Dec 4, 2020)

Yes 100%. Had it, don't want it again!


----------



## Jimaroid (Dec 4, 2020)

Yes but I'm so far down the priority order it's still a long way away.

I'd really like to see more news+progress on antibody testing because I have reason to be bothered by long covid. One step at a time though.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Dec 4, 2020)

As I started playing with 1.62“ and some hickory shafts were in my canvas bag - that’ll be an unhesitating yes.


----------



## Robster59 (Dec 4, 2020)

Yes but at Group 7 it will be a while before I get it.  It may be that as we are caring for an 88 year old with Dementia we may get it earlier but I'm not sure of the rules on that.
What depresses me is the mountains of misinformation and conspiracy theories out there.  
However, for those who choose not to take it then I'm sorry but I'll have no sympathy for them.


----------



## cliveb (Dec 4, 2020)

AmandaJR said:



			Yes 100%. Had it, don't want it again!
		
Click to expand...

Chances are you won't get it again whether you get vaccinated or not. There have been properly peer-reviewed studies that suggest there will be long term immunity after infection.

This youtube video is worth watching:




I've seen quite a few of this guy's videos and he's definitely not one of the naysayers - indeed he clearly understands the seriousness of the situation.
But he has a properly open mind and is prepared to study ALL of the science available (unlike lots of so-called experts who seem to have dogmatic views one way or the other).


----------



## hovis (Dec 4, 2020)

I think I would have it.  However, this article doesn't inspire confidence.  I'm sure it's all OK but I'd like to know if this is standard practice or is an exception being made 
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...egal-indemnity-safety-ministers-b1765124.html


----------



## Ethan (Dec 4, 2020)

I think it is fine if someone is young and in good health to wait a while. Young slim white women (or as many of those characteristics as possible) without any serious illnesses, for example, are very unlikely to die or end up in ICU. That is a rational and reasonable choice to make. 

If the reason, though, is that someone is worried about the 5G nanobots put there by Bill Gates, they need to catch a grip of reality.


----------



## Doon frae Troon (Dec 4, 2020)

Reply to an anti vaxxer on Wings.

'You obviously feel very strongly about it but do you know anyone who could perhaps present your thoughts in a coherent way'

Ouch....better quality of insults in Scotland.


----------



## Ethan (Dec 4, 2020)

cliveb said:



			Chances are you won't get it again whether you get vaccinated or not. There have been properly peer-reviewed studies that suggest there will be long term immunity after infection.

This youtube video is worth watching:




I've seen quite a few of this guy's videos and he's definitely not one of the naysayers - indeed he clearly understands the seriousness of the situation.
But he has a properly open mind and is prepared to study ALL of the science available (unlike lots of so-called experts who seem to have dogmatic views one way or the other).
		
Click to expand...

I agree with the general sentiment, that immunity will last a decent time. I suspect it will be years rather than months, although eroded somewhat by mutations. He doesn't really understand the science all that well, though. 

Some scientists have dogmatic views, but most are wiling to look at evidence and data. They will, however, critically assess that data and reject some of it as being of poor quality or making unreliable assumptions.


----------



## pauljames87 (Dec 4, 2020)

Ethan said:



			I think it is fine if someone is young and in good health to wait a while. Young slim white women (or as many of those characteristics as possible) without any serious illnesses, for example, are very unlikely to die or end up in ICU. That is a rational and reasonable choice to make.

If the reason, though, is that someone is worried about the 5G nanobots put there by Bill Gates, they need to catch a grip of reality.
		
Click to expand...

Thing is if people had said elon musk you would think less crazy 

But the nicest man on the planet?


----------



## Ethan (Dec 4, 2020)

hovis said:



			I think I would have it.  However, this article doesn't inspire confidence.  I'm sure it's all OK but I'd like to know if this is standard practice or is an exception being made
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...egal-indemnity-safety-ministers-b1765124.html

Click to expand...

This applies when Govt chooses to make an emergency use authorisation, which is not a full approval because the full data package has not been submitted by the manufacturer. Because the vaccine is effectively unlicensed (which requires a full approval), the company is not responsible for the shortfall in data and indemnity is offered to bridge this period until full approval, at which time the company assumes the normal product liability.


----------



## funkycoldmedina (Dec 4, 2020)

Ethan said:



			I agree with the general sentiment, that immunity will last a decent time. I suspect it will be years rather than months, although eroded somewhat by mutations. He doesn't really understand the science all that well, though.

Some scientists have dogmatic views, but most are wiling to look at evidence and data. They will, however, critically assess that data and reject some of it as being of poor quality or making unreliable assumptions.
		
Click to expand...

Interesting to know which parts you thought he didn't understand too well. It's been a long time since I studied immunology in my degree so am no expert but I thought he's explanations were pretty good. I suppose from his perspective as someone trying to explain to the layman on youtube there has to be a degree of simplification?


----------



## Ethan (Dec 4, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Thing is if people had said elon musk you would think less crazy

But the nicest man on the planet?
		
Click to expand...

No, I would think just a different flavour of crazy. I have never been a fan of Microsoft, but Bill Gates has chosen to use a huge amount of his fortune to help others, and he deserves credit for that. I haven't seen Elon Musk do the same.


----------



## Ethan (Dec 4, 2020)

funkycoldmedina said:



			Interesting to know which parts you thought he didn't understand too well. It's been a long time since I studied immunology in my degree so am no expert but I thought he's explanations were pretty good. I suppose from his perspective as someone trying to explain to the layman on youtube there has to be a degree of simplification?
		
Click to expand...

He didn't seem to know that antibodies come from B-cells. Like I said, I agree with the general message, and much better than most of the people who 'do their research' on facebook.


----------



## hovis (Dec 4, 2020)

Ethan said:



			This applies when Govt chooses to make an emergency use authorisation, which is not a full approval because the full data package has not been submitted by the manufacturer. Because the vaccine is effectively unlicensed (which requires a full approval), the company is not responsible for the shortfall in data and indemnity is offered to bridge this period until full approval, at which time the company assumes the normal product liability.
		
Click to expand...

Thanks for that.  Funny how "the media" didn't include that part 🙄


----------



## funkycoldmedina (Dec 4, 2020)

Ethan said:



			He didn't seem to know that antibodies come from B-cells. Like I said, I agree with the general message, and much better than most of the people who 'do their research' on facebook.
		
Click to expand...

A quick search on him shows he was an honorary Prof at the Institute of Infection Immunity & Inflammation at Glasgow Uni so I would think he probably does. 
On another noteI listened to an a good Radio 4 podcast called "how the they made us question everything" and it starts with how the tobacco industry, using an ad agency, used scientists to sow seed of doubt in the public conciousness. They called it "white coating". They then showed how it has been used in Climate Change and other areas and it's been used by people with vested interests during this pandemic.


----------



## ScienceBoy (Dec 4, 2020)

If asked right now it would be no. My first question would then be has everyone that needs it had it first, NHS and care homes? Those at risk and the elderly? The young who can have it and those who care for anyone one of the above.

I would happily give up getting it until the last moment to ensure anyone else who needs it more has it first.

I will isolate, wear masks, not see friends and relatives if needed to before those criteria are met.


----------



## rosecott (Dec 4, 2020)

Group 2 - I'm very old - and just waiting to be summoned.


----------



## AmandaJR (Dec 4, 2020)

I'm happy to know immunity "should" be pretty good and being in the young white slim female group (well 3 out of 4 aint bad!!) my risk is also low. So I'll be towards the back of the queue but would still have the vaccine.


----------



## chrisd (Dec 4, 2020)

rosecott said:



			Group 2 - I'm very old - and just waiting to be summoned.
		
Click to expand...

By the NHS or God? 🤫


----------



## Backache (Dec 4, 2020)

funkycoldmedina said:



			A quick search on him shows he was an honorary Prof at the Institute of Infection Immunity & Inflammation at Glasgow Uni so I would think he probably does.
.
		
Click to expand...

Are you sure it's the same Prof John Campbell? There is a Professor of the same name who is hte director of the Scottish Blood transfusion service.

I have seen a couple of his You Tube videos and whereas I would certainly agree that he is an honest and effective communicator with no obvious bias I do think he sometimes gets the science wrong, which is understandable no one can be up to date and knowledgeable about all fields which the pandemic covers, but he is certainly not an 'expert' in all the topics he covers.
His background is I believe A&E and education.


----------



## Ethan (Dec 4, 2020)

funkycoldmedina said:



			A quick search on him shows he was an honorary Prof at the Institute of Infection Immunity & Inflammation at Glasgow Uni so I would think he probably does.
On another noteI listened to an a good Radio 4 podcast called "how the they made us question everything" and it starts with how the tobacco industry, using an ad agency, used scientists to sow seed of doubt in the public conciousness. They called it "white coating". They then showed how it has been used in Climate Change and other areas and it's been used by people with vested interests during this pandemic.
		
Click to expand...

That is a different John Campbell. The youtube guy is a retired nurse, not a medical doctor. The Hon Prof is a scientist at the Blood Transfusion Service in Scotland.

Edit: Beaten to it by backache. 

So can you expand on your theory on 'white coating' as it applies to Covid?


----------



## Ethan (Dec 4, 2020)

Backache said:



			Are you sure it's the same Prof John Campbell? There is a Professor of the same name who is hte director of the Scottish Blood transfusion service.

I have seen a couple of his You Tube videos and whereas I would certainly agree that he is an honest and effective communicator with no obvious bias I do think he sometimes gets the science wrong, which is understandable no one can be up to date and knowledgeable about all fields which the pandemic covers, but he is certainly not an 'expert' in all the topics he covers.
His background is I believe A&E and education.
		
Click to expand...

Precisely. Means well, and we can agree with common sense advice, but he is not an expert in this area.


----------



## SocketRocket (Dec 4, 2020)

Bring it on.


----------



## williamalex1 (Dec 4, 2020)

chrisd said:



			By the NHS or God? 🤫
		
Click to expand...

Probably 666


----------



## williamalex1 (Dec 4, 2020)

Yes, at 74 this is a rare occasion, I wish I was just a little older.


----------



## funkycoldmedina (Dec 4, 2020)

Backache said:



			Are you sure it's the same Prof John Campbell? There is a Professor of the same name who is hte director of the Scottish Blood transfusion service.

I have seen a couple of his You Tube videos and whereas I would certainly agree that he is an honest and effective communicator with no obvious bias I do think he sometimes gets the science wrong, which is understandable no one can be up to date and knowledgeable about all fields which the pandemic covers, but he is certainly not an 'expert' in all the topics he covers.
His background is I believe A&E and education.
		
Click to expand...

Ah right, that's good to know. As I say my immunology is not a strong point so am happy to be educated.


----------



## funkycoldmedina (Dec 4, 2020)

Ethan said:



			That is a different John Campbell. The youtube guy is a retired nurse, not a medical doctor. The Hon Prof is a scientist at the Blood Transfusion Service in Scotland.

Edit: Beaten to it by backache.

So can you expand on your theory on 'white coating' as it applies to Covid?
		
Click to expand...

It would stray into the political I'm afraid but essentially organisations and people platforming scientists like Michael Yeadon et al to muddy the waters sufficiently so as to apply enough pressure on policy makers to loosen restrictions rather than tighten them.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Dec 4, 2020)

Doon frae Troon said:



			Reply to an anti vaxxer on Wings.

'You obviously feel very strongly about it but *do you know anyone who could perhaps present your thoughts in a coherent way*'

Ouch....better quality of insults in Scotland.

Click to expand...

Just don't ask a certain Ms Carone... (if you know you'll know why - if you don't, then don't look if you don't want a glimpse into a rather bizarre non-UK political exchange)


----------



## drdel (Dec 4, 2020)

I guess a more interesting question is "why not get a jab?

I'll certainly have mine ASAP.


----------



## hovis (Dec 4, 2020)

ScienceBoy said:



			If asked right now it would be no. My first question would then be has everyone that needs it had it first, NHS and care homes? Those at risk and the elderly? The young who can have it and those who care for anyone one of the above.

I would happily give up getting it until the last moment to ensure anyone else who needs it more has it first.

I will isolate, wear masks, not see friends and relatives if needed to before those criteria are met.
		
Click to expand...

Why would you be offered the vacine before the risk groups?   You will never be in a position to ask if all the other groups have had it first. 
The government said "don't contact us, we will contact you"


----------



## jim8flog (Dec 4, 2020)

One point for me is that by the times it gets to my groups turn they will probably have had another 4 months and millions of other guinea pigs to watch for side effects.


----------



## ScienceBoy (Dec 4, 2020)

hovis said:



			Why would you be offered the vacine before the risk groups?   You will never be in a position to ask if all the other groups have had it first.
The government said "don't contact us, we will contact you"
		
Click to expand...

Your reply sums up my feelings perfectly!


----------



## Ethan (Dec 4, 2020)

funkycoldmedina said:



			It would stray into the political I'm afraid but essentially organisations and people platforming scientists like Michael Yeadon et al to muddy the waters sufficiently so as to apply enough pressure on policy makers to loosen restrictions rather than tighten them.
		
Click to expand...

Yeadon et al are perfectly entitled to give their view but people are also perfectly free to respond by demanding they produce evidence for their assertions or be rightly criticised along with most of the rest of the FaceBook crew.


----------



## funkycoldmedina (Dec 4, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Yeadon et al are perfectly entitled to give their view but people are also perfectly free to respond by demanding they produce evidence for their assertions or be rightly criticised along with most of the rest of the FaceBook crew.
		
Click to expand...

As were they scientists in the tobacco and climate change debate. What's more pernicious is how they are used and promoted by others.


----------



## backwoodsman (Dec 4, 2020)

Vax. Would I?  Of course - why wouldnt I?  Group 7 for me,  group 5 for HID.  

Anti-vaxers? If I've had the vax (and so have those who I care about)  then I don't especially care what you do. If you choose to leave it for those that want it, then fine.


----------



## Old Skier (Dec 4, 2020)

Foxholer said:



			Yes! ASAP.
		
Click to expand...

Only available to those with white socks.


----------



## Ethan (Dec 4, 2020)

backwoodsman said:



			Vax. Would I?  Of course - why wouldnt I?  Group 7 for me,  group 5 for HID. 

Anti-vaxers? If I've had the vax (and so have those who I care about)  then I don't especially care what you do. If you choose to leave it for those that want it, then fine.
		
Click to expand...

The anti-vaxxers will still bung up the NHS as karma visits them, causing disruption for other people with non-Cvid conditions.


----------



## 4LEX (Dec 4, 2020)

I saw someone on Facebook ranting about not getting a vaccine due to safety reasons. I pointed out she doesn't wear a mask, ignored lockdown, eats absolute garbage, sniffs coke laced with rat poison and gets a mobile lash lady to pump her face full of cheap filler, so can't be that bothered about safety. She countered with she was worried the government might want to track her


----------



## rosecott (Dec 4, 2020)

williamalex1 said:



			Yes, at 74 this is a rare occasion, I wish I was just a little older.
		
Click to expand...

You could pass for group 2.


----------



## williamalex1 (Dec 4, 2020)

rosecott said:



			You could pass for group 2.
		
Click to expand...

 Probably the only thing I could pass at.


----------



## cliveb (Dec 4, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Precisely. Means well, and we can agree with common sense advice, but he is not an expert in this area.
		
Click to expand...

Agreed that he is a retired nurse (and his doctorate is in education), so not a bona-fide "expert".
But he does seem to find out about interesting genuine scientific research which has not been otherwise disseminated to the general public by the media.
Does the fact he's not an expert make this research less credible? He's just the messenger, and he's pointing out stuff we ought to hear about.

Sunetra Gupta and Chris Whitty are real experts in this field, but I somehow trust them less. They both give me the impression that they will ignore/hide any data that doesn't fit their agenda.


----------



## Liverpoolphil (Dec 4, 2020)

I wonder if any of the three people thag said No would be ok to explain their reasoning?


----------



## Pathetic Shark (Dec 4, 2020)

I wouldn't say some of the people here are that old but I heard a rumour the first lorry carrying the vaccines made a special scheduled stop at chrisd's house


----------



## USER1999 (Dec 4, 2020)

I am one. 

I am, maybe at risk, being over 55, just. I am healthy, fit ish, have no under lying health conditions. I don't eat out much, I don't go to pubs, or socialise hugely.I don't go to many concerts, football games, or use public transport, or go anywhere else I am likely to contract this virus. The lock downs have been inconvenient, but really have  not effected me hugely. I am not planning on going abroad any time soon, and my passport ran out last year. I don't like flying anyway. Too many people.
My wife works from home, and is pretty much in the same boat as me.
I go to work, but there is a rigid policy re covid. It's pretty safe.
I am not registered with a GP,  can't see the point, have seen a doctor twice in the last 20 years.
Vaccinations have two purposes. To prevent spread in the community, and to may be stop vulnerable people from getting a nasty illness. I am probably not vulnerable, and if enough vulnerable people have the vacine, I probably don't need it.
I have had the flu jab twice in 55 years. I have caught flu twice also, although clearly not connected.
My job as present would not require me to have the vaccine, neither would my preferred mode of transport, car.


----------



## Ethan (Dec 4, 2020)

cliveb said:



			Agreed that he is a retired nurse (and his doctorate is in education), so not a bona-fide "expert".
But he does seem to find out about interesting genuine scientific research which has not been otherwise disseminated to the general public by the media.
Does the fact he's not an expert make this research less credible? He's just the messenger, and he's pointing out stuff we ought to hear about.

Sunetra Gupta and Chris Whitty are real experts in this field, but I somehow trust them less. They both give me the impression that they will ignore/hide any data that doesn't fit their agenda.
		
Click to expand...

This is all just my opinion. Others may have other views. 

Anderson seems well intentioned, and lack of specific expertise is not a major problem except that it limits the degree to which you can accurately critique other work. I was just struck by a remark he made about antibodies and then mentioned B-cells without seeming to realise the main function of the B-cell was to produce the antibodies. The work he cites is findable if you know where to look, but I agree it is useful to bring interesting information to the general audience, providing you can put some of it in context. 

Gupta is a signatory of the Great Barrington Declaration. She has published some very controversial and largely discredited work. She may be an expert in theoretical epidemiology but she is not an expert in actually managing pandemics. She should be developing hypotheses for experimental testing, not extrapolating those hypotheses to policy recommendations. The second waves are proving her wrong. She said it was all more or less over in early summer.  

Whitty is a different matter. I think he is pretty good, he is extremely measured and precise, a bit of an egghead, but ultimately a senior civil servant and cannot freely express his views in public, and probably only to a limited degree in private. I find it difficult to believe he was really an advocate of herd immunity in Feb/March. I don't find it hard to believe Patrick Vallance was, though.


----------



## Jamesbrown (Dec 4, 2020)

Liverpoolphil said:



			I wonder if any of the three people thag said No would be ok to explain their reasoning?
		
Click to expand...

I knew this question would come. 

5g nanochips controlling me and then materialising me into a kill switch for a mass depopulation exercise. 

Seriously, 30 years old, not overweight, haven’t had a flu or cold for years, get more than enough vitamins, well hydrated and not to mention I don’t even have an NHS number and wouldn’t be offered it if that’s how your contacted. 
Unfortunately you didn’t include a not for a number of years option so I’m a No


----------



## Ethan (Dec 4, 2020)

Jamesbrown said:



			I knew this question would come.

5g nanochips controlling me and then materialising me into a kill switch for a mass depopulation exercise.

Seriously, 30 years old, not overweight, haven’t had a flu or cold for years, get more than enough vitamins, well hydrated and not to mention I don’t even have an NHS number and wouldn’t be offered it if that’s how your contacted.
Unfortunately you didn’t include a not for a number of years option so I’m a No
		
Click to expand...

That is a rational choice. it is all about benefit-risk. The national policy is that people at highest risk get priority, so it follows that people at much reduced risk are not a priority at all, indeed not even on the list, and you are one of those. Waiting to see what happens with the rollout is reasonable. The only probably snag will be if you want to go on holiday overseas and the country concerned demands a certificate of vaccination to let you in.


----------



## HomerJSimpson (Dec 4, 2020)

I'm having it. Given where I work and the number of staff we have had with the virus it makes perfect sense for me. I could be described as a sheep as I'm not put off by any side effects or the information for or against it being a success. Sign me up, vaccinate and we'll deal with what happens when it does. I get the flu jab (either at work or at the GP because of my diabetes but little getting away from it) and never question it. Sometimes I think some people can overthink the whole vaccination picture. It boils down to an individual choice but if you choose not to have any jab it doesn't reduce (in my opinion) the validity and effectiveness of the vaccination in question


----------



## Jamesbrown (Dec 4, 2020)

Ethan said:



			That is a rational choice. it is all about benefit-risk. The national policy is that people at highest risk get priority, so it follows that people at much reduced risk are not a priority at all, indeed not even on the list, and you are one of those. Waiting to see what happens with the rollout is reasonable. The only probably snag will be if you want to go on holiday overseas and the country concerned demands a certificate of vaccination to let you in.
		
Click to expand...

We sacrificed our holidays abroad for three dogs and weeks in the wet Lincolnshire wolds and brown waters of the east coast.
 Would usually go to Portugal for golf but won’t be booking anything for next year.


----------



## backwoodsman (Dec 4, 2020)

Ethan said:



			The anti-vaxxers will still bung up the NHS as karma visits them, causing disruption for other people with non-Cvid conditions.
		
Click to expand...

Ok, fair enough. I wasn't  thinking it through. 

But somehow, I think they should reap what they sow (but in accordance with the principle that they don't affect "non-sowers" 😀 )


----------



## Beedee (Dec 4, 2020)

backwoodsman said:



			Ok, fair enough. I wasn't  thinking it through.

But somehow, I think they should reap what they sow (but in accordance with the principle that they don't affect "non-sowers" 😀 )
		
Click to expand...

Perhaps the anti-vaxxers should receive treatment, but only with homeopathic remedies.


----------



## pauljames87 (Dec 4, 2020)

4LEX said:



			I saw someone on Facebook ranting about not getting a vaccine due to safety reasons. I pointed out she doesn't wear a mask, ignored lockdown, eats absolute garbage, sniffs coke laced with rat poison and gets a mobile lash lady to pump her face full of cheap filler, so can't be that bothered about safety. She countered with she was worried the government might want to track her 

Click to expand...

I welcome the gov tracking me.. might help me.remember what I was suppose to do today


----------



## rulefan (Dec 4, 2020)

murphthemog said:



			I am one.

I am, maybe at risk, being over 55, just. I am healthy, fit ish, have no under lying health conditions. I don't eat out much, I don't go to pubs, or socialise hugely.I don't go to many concerts, football games, or use public transport, or go anywhere else I am likely to contract this virus. The lock downs have been inconvenient, but really have  not effected me hugely. I am not planning on going abroad any time soon, and my passport ran out last year. I don't like flying anyway. Too many people.
My wife works from home, and is pretty much in the same boat as me.
I go to work, but there is a rigid policy re covid. It's pretty safe.
I am not registered with a GP,  can't see the point, have seen a doctor twice in the last 20 years.
Vaccinations have two purposes. To prevent spread in the community, and to may be stop vulnerable people from getting a nasty illness. I am probably not vulnerable, and if enough vulnerable people have the vacine, I probably don't need it.
I have had the flu jab twice in 55 years. I have caught flu twice also, although clearly not connected.
My job as present would not require me to have the vaccine, neither would my preferred mode of transport, car.
		
Click to expand...

So you have no problem with getting the virus with virtually no symptoms and then infecting others?


----------



## USER1999 (Dec 4, 2020)

rulefan said:



			So you have no problem with getting the virus with virtually no symptoms and then infecting others?
		
Click to expand...

When did I say this? 

I have avoided getting this virus (unless I have already had it), doing exactly what I would normally do, for the best part of 8 months. Nothing that I would normally do will change. Why do you think I will suddenly get it, and give it to others? Especially if a significant proportion of the others are vaccinated against it? Given that those vaccinated are less likely to have it, my chances of getting it go from remote, to extremely remote.


----------



## rosecott (Dec 4, 2020)

Jamesbrown said:



			I knew this question would come.

5g nanochips controlling me and then materialising me into a kill switch for a mass depopulation exercise.

Seriously, 30 years old, not overweight, haven’t had a flu or cold for years, get more than enough vitamins, well hydrated and not to mention I don’t even have an NHS number and wouldn’t be offered it if that’s how your contacted.
Unfortunately you didn’t include a not for a number of years option so I’m a No
		
Click to expand...

Assuming you were born in UK, I would not thought it possible not to have a NHS number.


----------



## Jamesbrown (Dec 5, 2020)

rosecott said:



			Assuming you were born in UK, I would not thought it possible not to have a NHS number.
		
Click to expand...

I had one, but on the data base I was replaced with another chap with the same name and date of birth who may have lost his number when all numbers changed in the mid nineties. 
Unfortunately there isn’t much protection of your data within the NHS, any admin staff can access and change it without scrutiny. 
So another me has my stolen my number, I’ve had it changed back once, but it was swapped again rather than creating him a new one or me one. 
I’ve since more or less gave up and gone private and buy my meds online.


----------



## jim8flog (Dec 5, 2020)

Jamesbrown said:



			I’ve since more or less gave up and gone private and buy my meds online.
		
Click to expand...

All the way from the far east!


----------



## Jamesbrown (Dec 5, 2020)

jim8flog said:



			All the way from the far east!

Click to expand...

I don’t geo politicise medication unless they’re from North Korea. 

Plus it’s just generic, nothing special.


----------



## Swinglowandslow (Dec 5, 2020)

murphthemog said:



			When did I say this? 

I have avoided getting this virus (unless I have already had it), doing exactly what I would normally do, for the best part of 8 months. Nothing that I would normally do will change. Why do you think I will suddenly get it, and give it to others? Especially if a significant proportion of the others are vaccinated against it? Given that those vaccinated are less likely to have it, my chances of getting it go from remote, to extremely remote.
		
Click to expand...

You don't have to say it. The virus will stay out there for a long time, longer if people don't get vaccinated.
"Why do you think I will suddenly get it"?  What sort of reasoning is that? It isn't something you apply for
Nor is it something you choose to give to others..

Why do you not wish to be vaccinated, given that if you do ,you will assist in reducing this virus spread?
Do you see a cost to helping the community in this respect?


----------



## Backache (Dec 5, 2020)

Beedee said:



			Perhaps the anti-vaxxers should receive treatment, but only with homeopathic remedies.  

Click to expand...

To be fair vaccines are the nearest thing there is to a homeopathic remedy that truly works.
An absolutely tiny minute dose of a portion of the thing that does you harm which then prevents the thing doing you harm.


----------



## NearHull (Dec 5, 2020)

A pp‘s neighbour took part in the Oxford Zeneca trials.  She obviously wasn’t told whether she had the actual vaccine or a placebo - until they had to explain to her that there had been a mistake and she had only received half a dose on her initial jab! 

result!


----------



## ScienceBoy (Dec 5, 2020)

4LEX said:



			she was worried the government might want to track her 

Click to expand...

But probably spends all day posting every detail of their day on Facebook and lets Google or Apple collect loads of lovely data.


----------



## Ethan (Dec 5, 2020)

Backache said:



			To be fair vaccines are the nearest thing there is to a homeopathic remedy that truly works.
An absolutely tiny minute dose of a portion of the thing that does you harm which then prevents the thing doing you harm.
		
Click to expand...

Oh, I don't like that construction. Homeopathy is anti-scientific nonsense, vaccines exploit an understandable and verifiable part of our immunology. Bacteria and vaccines come in rather small doses too, and a few micrograms of some of them will put you 6 feet under.


----------



## Slime (Dec 5, 2020)

I'd have it in a heart beat, provided it was my turn.


----------



## MC72 (Dec 5, 2020)

https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4037


----------



## Colonel Bogey (Dec 6, 2020)

My son is alive today and hopefully for a lot longer due to medicines developed for his condition. He'll be having it, no question whatsoever, and so will I. Absolutely no brainer. I'm not impressed with anyone who is against the vaccine. No matter what your reasoning is.


----------



## Ethan (Dec 6, 2020)

MC72 said:



https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4037

Click to expand...

Peter Doshi. Lots of questions, few answers. The BMJ likes to adopt a contrarian attitude and has a long history of unbalanced attacks on pharma, even though they are part of the problem about which they complain. The simple question for the BMJ is 'Do you want the vaccine sometime soon, or do you want all the questions answered and have it in a couple of years?'.

The current clinical trials programmes are large andthere is enough efficacy and safety data to treat at least higher risk patients. In doing so, more time will pass for trial subjects to accrue data and more patients from high risk cohorts will be added. This seems the sensible attitude, although not satisfying the holier than thou brigade.


----------



## Backache (Dec 6, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Oh, I don't like that construction. Homeopathy is anti-scientific nonsense, vaccines exploit an understandable and verifiable part of our immunology. Bacteria and vaccines come in rather small doses too, and a few micrograms of some of them will put you 6 feet under.
		
Click to expand...

It was a quote I heard from an American professor of virology who is very anti the antivaxxers, sorry if you don't like it.


----------



## Ethan (Dec 6, 2020)

Backache said:



			It was a quote I heard from an American professor of virology who is very anti the antivaxxers, sorry if you don't like it.
		
Click to expand...

It isn't that I don't like it (although I don't), it is that is makes a totally specious and unhelpful point. S/he may be antivax, but if they think that because vaccines use quite small doses they resemble in any way homeopathic products, they need to revise their understanding of both.


----------



## Backache (Dec 6, 2020)

Ethan said:



			It isn't that I don't like it (although I don't), it is that is makes a totally specious and unhelpful point. S/he may be antivax, but if they think that because vaccines use quite small doses they resemble in any way homeopathic products, they need to revise their understanding of both.
		
Click to expand...

From the podcast I heard him on I think he probably has a pretty good understanding of the basics of vaccines, though I may be wrong
The point about homeopathy was not just the size but the fact that they are using part of the thing that makes you sick.


----------



## JamesR (Dec 6, 2020)

Yep; with my knackered lungs, my folks being in their 70’s, my Mum having leukaemia and my Sister having an auto immune illness, I’m hoping we’ll all be pretty high up the list.


----------



## Ethan (Dec 6, 2020)

Backache said:



			From the podcast I heard him on I think he probably has a pretty good understanding of the basics of vaccines, though I may be wrong
The point about homeopathy was not just the size but the fact that they are using part of the thing that makes you sick.
		
Click to expand...

Well, the science underlying homeopathy is non-existent and contrary to all we know about the world. To be pedantic, the vaccine contains code for the spike protein, which is simply part of the vehicle for the virus genetic code and does not have any pathogenic effect. 

I hate any suggestion that either the vaccine is anything like homeopathy or that homeopathy may be medically valid.


----------



## Backache (Dec 6, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Well, the science underlying homeopathy is non-existent and contrary to all we know about the world. To be pedantic, the vaccine contains code for the spike protein, which is simply part of the vehicle for the virus genetic code and does not have any pathogenic effect. 

I hate any suggestion that either the vaccine is anything like homeopathy or that homeopathy may be medically valid.
		
Click to expand...

Well different vaccines have different contents, but the RNA code for the spike is an even smaller bit of the virus,  and therefore even more potent according to homeopathic theory.
But I think you are missing the point which is not to give homeopathy credibility amongst doubters but to give vaccines credibility amongst homeopathic enthusiasts.


----------



## Ethan (Dec 6, 2020)

Backache said:



			Well different vaccines have different contents, but the RNA code for the spike is an even smaller bit of the virus,  and therefore even more potent according to homeopathic theory.
But I think you are missing the point which is not to give homeopathy credibility amongst doubters but to give vaccines credibility amongst homeopathic enthusiasts.
		
Click to expand...

I am concerned that it could undermine belief in vaccines among sensible people who know homeopathy has the same scientific credibility as witchcraft. The spike protein does not cause any of the effects of Covid and is, in itself, harmless.


----------



## Ethan (Dec 6, 2020)

Please delete that rubbish. That document is full of complete crap, too many to mention in rebuttal, but here is just one: RNA medicines DO NOT alter your genetics in any way.


----------



## Fade and Die (Dec 6, 2020)

Jesus what a croc!

“In my opinion, these new vaccines represent a crime against humanity that has never been committed in such a big way in history.”

And

“this “promising vaccine” for the vast majority of people should be FORBIDDEN, because it is genetic manipulation! ”

He must have gone to the same school as Donald Trump!


----------



## IanM (Dec 6, 2020)

Looks like I’m so far down the list, I don’t need to think about it.


----------



## larmen (Dec 6, 2020)

If they are starting on Tuesday, has anyone heard of a person that has been contacted for an appointment yet?
Just wondering if we are really just 36 hours away from the beginning of the end.


----------



## Billysboots (Dec 6, 2020)

larmen said:



			If they are starting on Tuesday, has anyone heard of a person that has been contacted for an appointment yet?
Just wondering if we are really just 36 hours away from the beginning of the end.
		
Click to expand...

My sister in law is booked for Tuesday.


----------



## Backache (Dec 6, 2020)

Ethan said:



			I am concerned that it could undermine belief in vaccines among sensible people who know homeopathy has the same scientific credibility as witchcraft. The spike protein does not cause any of the effects of Covid and is, in itself, harmless.
		
Click to expand...

I think people who think homeopathy lacks credibility are not ones who reject vaccines.
Most  rational people accept homeopathy is mildly eccentric and only causes harm when it is used to reject conventional medicine. The act of taking a few drops of water thoroughly beaten by a leather strap is almost the definition of a harmless activity.
There is far more good to encouraging homeopathic believers to accept vaccines than to try and argue the science with them. Very few completely reject allopathic treatments.


----------



## Ethan (Dec 6, 2020)

Backache said:



			I think people who think homeopathy lacks credibility are not ones who reject vaccines.
Most  rational people accept homeopathy is mildly eccentric and only causes harm when it is used to reject conventional medicine. The act of taking a few drops of water thoroughly beaten by a leather strap is almost the definition of a harmless activity.
There is far more good to encouraging homeopathic believers to accept vaccines than to try and argue the science with them. Very few completely reject allopathic treatments.
		
Click to expand...

Your faith in the ability of people to sort the rational from nonsensical is kinda heart warming. I lack the same faith.


----------



## grumpyjock (Dec 6, 2020)

I have had the flu jab for the past 10 years so that will be a yes from me. As a 67 year old I would be mad not to and have not try and be safe.
Last year we had a holiday in Kyrgyzstan and I caught a bug over there, all the symptoms that they now say are for covid19, took a course of antibiotics and flew back to UK.
The wife came down the following week and had 3 courses of UK antibiotics. 
So have been watching the news since January when this mild covid19 started to infect populations across the globe.
Can any one say why the Chinese have not been promoting a vaccine?
If the only way to go is by having a microchip to say they have been vaccinated then so be it.
Or lets go to country and everyone have a proper ID card.


----------



## JamesR (Dec 6, 2020)

People keep mentioning where they are on “the list”.
Can you point me in the direction of said list?


----------



## williamalex1 (Dec 6, 2020)

JamesR said:



			People keep mentioning where they are on “the list”.
Can you point me in the direction of said list?
		
Click to expand...

Right behind me


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Dec 6, 2020)

JamesR said:



			People keep mentioning where they are on “the list”.
Can you point me in the direction of said list?
		
Click to expand...

This is Phase 1 announced this week by the Government:
1 - Residents in a care home for older adults and their carers
2 - All those aged 80 and over. Frontline health and social care workers
3 - All those aged 75 and over
4 - All those aged 70 and over. Clinically extremely vulnerable individuals
5 - All those aged 65 and over
6 - All individuals aged 16-64 with underlying health conditions which put them at higher risk of serious disease and mortality
7 - All those aged 60 and over
8 - All those aged 55 and over
9 - All those aged 50 and over


----------



## JamesR (Dec 6, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			This is Phase 1 announced this week by the Government:
1 - Residents in a care home for older adults and their carers
2 - All those aged 80 and over. Frontline health and social care workers
3 - All those aged 75 and over
4 - All those aged 70 and over. Clinically extremely vulnerable individuals
5 - All those aged 65 and over
6 - All individuals aged 16-64 with underlying health conditions which put them at higher risk of serious disease and mortality
7 - All those aged 60 and over
8 - All those aged 55 and over
9 - All those aged 50 and over
		
Click to expand...

Cheers, very helpful


----------



## Deleted member 16999 (Dec 6, 2020)

JamesR said:



			Cheers, very helpful
		
Click to expand...

When it was announced the PM did mention the aspiration of Phase 2 starting in the Spring.


----------



## Backache (Dec 6, 2020)

JamesR said:



			People keep mentioning where they are on “the list”.
Can you point me in the direction of said list?
		
Click to expand...

The list does occasionally change a bit but is here.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...ine-priority-groups-advice-on-2-december-2020


----------



## grumpyjock (Dec 7, 2020)

I have a little list and yes you are on it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## User62651 (Dec 7, 2020)

I'll take it if there's any left.
Hoping the side effects include curing arthritis, diabetes, balding, short sightedness, trigger finger and a bad back.


----------



## upsidedown (Dec 7, 2020)

SM very excited as she will be first off on Weds administering the "Jab". Came home on Friday night with printed off protocols about inch and half thick


----------



## Backache (Dec 7, 2020)

maxfli65 said:



			I'll take it if there's any left.
Hoping the side effects include curing arthritis, diabetes, balding, short sightedness, trigger finger and a bad back.

Click to expand...

They're not very good for those but the Pfizer one adds twenty yards to your drive.


----------



## williamalex1 (Dec 7, 2020)

I'm really looking forward to my vaccination vacation


----------



## Fade and Die (Dec 7, 2020)

williamalex1 said:



			I'm really looking forward to my vaccination vacation 

Click to expand...

Plus the rumour of a 3 day raging hard-on as a side effect.😄


----------



## williamalex1 (Dec 7, 2020)

Fade and Die said:



			Plus the rumour of a 3 day raging hard-on as a side effect.😄
		
Click to expand...

I'll be happy as dog with 2 tails , as long as I can wag one of them , oh the memories


----------



## Wildboy370 (Dec 7, 2020)

pauldj42 said:



			This is Phase 1 announced this week by the Government:
1 - Residents in a care home for older adults and their carers
2 - All those aged 80 and over. Frontline health and social care workers
3 - All those aged 75 and over
4 - All those aged 70 and over. Clinically extremely vulnerable individuals
5 - All those aged 65 and over
6 - All individuals aged 16-64 with underlying health conditions which put them at higher risk of serious disease and mortality
7 - All those aged 60 and over
8 - All those aged 55 and over
9 - All those aged 50 and over
		
Click to expand...

I also read the list with numbers of people in. As I’m in level 8 there are approx 37m in front of me so that’s 74m doses to go. Mmm could be here a while then as only 400,000 before xmas.


----------



## Pathetic Shark (Dec 8, 2020)

Fade and Die said:



			Plus the rumour of a 3 day raging hard-on as a side effect.😄
		
Click to expand...


That is going to make the news of the first man to get the vaccine one hell of a story later today on the BBC


----------



## Grant85 (Dec 8, 2020)

murphthemog said:



			I am one.

I am, maybe at risk, being over 55, just. I am healthy, fit ish, have no under lying health conditions. I don't eat out much, I don't go to pubs, or socialise hugely.I don't go to many concerts, football games, or use public transport, or go anywhere else I am likely to contract this virus. The lock downs have been inconvenient, but really have  not effected me hugely. I am not planning on going abroad any time soon, and my passport ran out last year. I don't like flying anyway. Too many people.
My wife works from home, and is pretty much in the same boat as me.
I go to work, but there is a rigid policy re covid. It's pretty safe.
I am not registered with a GP,  can't see the point, have seen a doctor twice in the last 20 years.
Vaccinations have two purposes. To prevent spread in the community, and to may be stop vulnerable people from getting a nasty illness. I am probably not vulnerable, and if enough vulnerable people have the vacine, I probably don't need it.
I have had the flu jab twice in 55 years. I have caught flu twice also, although clearly not connected.
My job as present would not require me to have the vaccine, neither would my preferred mode of transport, car.
		
Click to expand...

I am glad the responses have been so overwhelmingly in favour of getting the vaccine. 

However in response to Murph... you are 55 now and healthy. But of course you won't stay 55 for long and who knows what health issues you will develop as you get older. 

Ultimately if everyone or most people took your view, the vaccine would obviously be ineffective and the virus would continue circulating and killing people.  

And you realise your work will not retain a rigid policy re: Covid indefinitely. Entirely likely situations will develop where you will be in rooms or meeting in close contact with people again, perhaps not as often, but any work activities you had to do a year ago, it would be entirely reasonable to expect you do again from the Spring onwards. Such as sharing a work space, travelling to other locations, sitting in a conference hall or meeting or having a series of meetings in an office.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Dec 8, 2020)

Grant85 said:



			I am glad the responses have been so overwhelmingly in favour of getting the vaccine.

However in response to Murph... you are 55 now and healthy. But of course you won't stay 55 for long and who knows what health issues you will develop as you get older.

Ultimately if everyone or most people took your view, the vaccine would obviously be ineffective and the virus would continue circulating and killing people.

And you realise your work will not retain a rigid policy re: Covid indefinitely. Entirely likely situations will develop where you will be in rooms or meeting in close contact with people again, perhaps not as often, but any work activities you had to do a year ago, it would be entirely reasonable to expect you do again from the Spring onwards. Such as sharing a work space, travelling to other locations, sitting in a conference hall or meeting or having a series of meetings in an office.
		
Click to expand...

...and you never know when your home/work circumstances or health might change as we just do not know what is around the corner of life - and they can change overnight...


----------



## Kellfire (Dec 8, 2020)

Now that the vaccinations have started I expect to see huge swathes of the population die from mercury poisoning/develop genetic defects from their DNA being altered/become mindless robots from the nanobots/develop an immunity to Covid-19. 

One of those is more likely than the rest.


----------



## ColchesterFC (Dec 8, 2020)

Kellfire said:



			Now that the vaccinations have started I expect to see huge swathes of the population die from mercury poisoning/develop genetic defects from their DNA being altered/become mindless robots from the nanobots/develop an immunity to Covid-19.

One of those is more likely than the rest.
		
Click to expand...

My favourite comment on Twitter this morning was "I wonder how Bill Gates will spend his first day in control of Margaret Keenan, aged 90 , from Coventry"?


----------



## pauljames87 (Dec 8, 2020)

Kellfire said:



			Now that the vaccinations have started I expect to see huge swathes of the population die from mercury poisoning/develop genetic defects from their DNA being altered/become mindless robots from the nanobots/develop an immunity to Covid-19. 

One of those is more likely than the rest.
		
Click to expand...

If it altered the DNA of those anti vaccers that might develope half a brain cell between them.


----------



## SaintHacker (Dec 8, 2020)

Clearly fantastic new this morning. My only worry is that Gerneration Snowflake will now decide they don't need to wear those nasty oppresive masks anymore as we're all safe already


----------



## pauljames87 (Dec 8, 2020)

SaintHacker said:



			Clearly fantastic new this morning. My only worry is that Gerneration Snowflake will now decide they don't need to wear those nasty oppresive masks anymore as we're all safe already

Click to expand...

Think the anti mask boomers are just as bad to be fair....


----------



## road2ruin (Dec 8, 2020)

pauljames87 said:



			Think the anti mask boomers are just as bad to be fair....
		
Click to expand...

I think across all the generations that appear to think that the injustice of wearing a mask is just too much for them to bear. On a recent(ish) golf trip the ones causing most issues to the staff were the groups of 60-70yr old men for whom the rules didn't seem to apply. Same in the supermarket, older ladies who pull down their masks to tell Doris how they can't talk properly with the mask on and have a full blown conversation in the aisle.


----------



## Billysboots (Dec 8, 2020)

Wildboy370 said:



*I also read the list with numbers of people in.* As I’m in level 8 there are approx 37m in front of me so that’s 74m doses to go. Mmm could be here a while then as only 400,000 before xmas.
		
Click to expand...

I’ve searched and can’t find such a list - can you post a link please, or cut and paste from it? I’d be interested to see it.


----------



## road2ruin (Dec 8, 2020)

Billysboots said:



			I’ve searched and can’t find such a list - can you post a link please, or cut and paste from it? I’d be interested to see it.
		
Click to expand...

This priority list is as follows:

residents in a care home for older adults and their carers
all those 80 years of age and over and frontline health and social care workers
all those 75 years of age and over
all those 70 years of age and over and clinically extremely vulnerable individuals[footnote 1]
all those 65 years of age and over
all individuals aged 16 years to 64 years with underlying health conditions which put them at higher risk of serious disease and mortality
all those 60 years of age and over
all those 55 years of age and over
all those 50 years of age and over


----------



## Billysboots (Dec 8, 2020)

road2ruin said:



			This priority list is as follows:

residents in a care home for older adults and their carers
all those 80 years of age and over and frontline health and social care workers
all those 75 years of age and over
all those 70 years of age and over and clinically extremely vulnerable individuals[footnote 1]
all those 65 years of age and over
all individuals aged 16 years to 64 years with underlying health conditions which put them at higher risk of serious disease and mortality
all those 60 years of age and over
all those 55 years of age and over
all those 50 years of age and over


Click to expand...

Not that list - the one with the numbers in each category. Thanks, though.


----------



## Bdill93 (Dec 8, 2020)

Same as a few above.

Ive had covid and I have the antibodies (been tested) - ill have the vaccine as late as possible so everyone who needs it more than me can have it!

Im not even sure when 27 year old males will be considered


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Dec 8, 2020)

In response to 'why have UK Gov given Pfizer legal protection?'

I liked the answer I heard earlier today which went alone the lines...

Pfizer are not saying the vaccine is 100% effective - they are being totally open about it being 95% effective - and so this protection is against claims being raised by those in the remaining 5% who are given the vaccination but subsequently still contract the virus.  

Nothing at all to do with safety concerns or the vaccination causing serious side-effects...just that the vaccine might not work for everyone - and the government is happy to accept that (what vaccine is ever going to be 100% effective after all...)


----------



## fundy (Dec 8, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			In response to 'why have UK Gov given Pfizer legal protection?'

I liked the answer I heard earlier today which went alone the lines...

Pfizer are not saying the vaccine is 100% effective - they are being totally open about it being 95% effective - and so this protection is against claims being raised by the remaining 5% who are given the vaccination but still contact the virus.  Nothing at all to do with the vaccination causing serious side-effects...
		
Click to expand...

do pfizer have protection if it causes side effects? yes or no


----------



## ColchesterFC (Dec 8, 2020)

fundy said:



			do pfizer have protection if it causes side effects? yes or no
		
Click to expand...

I believe the answer to this is yes as it's been authorised for emergency use. The protection is then removed further down the line possibly after further testing. I think it might have been @Ethan who mentioned this earlier in the thread.


----------



## SwingsitlikeHogan (Dec 8, 2020)

fundy said:



			do pfizer have protection if it causes side effects? yes or no
		
Click to expand...

*All *drugs have side effects...

The question was 'why do Pfizer have legal protection?'

The answer was '...because the vaccination is not 100% effective'

and yes - it will have some side effects...but these are clearly deemed acceptable as they are with any other drug.  But clearly if I am vaccinated and think I am safe then go and get seriously ill as I am one of the 5% then I might be a bit upset.  

But I am not going to hang about waiting for a vaccination that is proven 100% effective as that might never turn up.  because as I hang around waiting there is a much greater chance that I will pick up the virus and with no protection could develop Covd-19


----------



## fundy (Dec 8, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



*All *drugs have side effects...

The question was 'why do Pfizer have legal protection?'

The answer was '...because the vaccination is not 100% effective'
		
Click to expand...


no thats the way you are choosing to spin the story. they have legal protection against anything going wrong currently, not just it not protecting someone


----------



## Ethan (Dec 8, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



			In response to 'why have UK Gov given Pfizer legal protection?'

I liked the answer I heard earlier today which went alone the lines...

Pfizer are not saying the vaccine is 100% effective - they are being totally open about it being 95% effective - and so this protection is against claims being raised by those in the remaining 5% who are given the vaccination but subsequently still contract the virus. 

Nothing at all to do with safety concerns or the vaccination causing serious side-effects...just that the vaccine might not work for everyone - and the government is happy to accept that (what vaccine is ever going to be 100% effective after all...)
		
Click to expand...

This is about licensing. Normally manufacturers determine when they think they have enough data to make an application for approval. Approval in the UK is still covered (for a few weeks) by EMA, but EMA regulations allow all countries in the EU to take local steps to approve a medicine for emergency use. The UK has chosen to do this, for a mixture of reasons, discussion of some of which are precluded by forum rules. 

The same regulations make provision for indemnity for some elements of liability to be covered by a Govt that chooses to bring forward a drug before it is fully approved. That is what is going on here. These vaccines do not have marketing authorisations (i.e. full approvals), they only have emergency use authorisations. When they do get full approval, the companies will take back liability for prospective use. The indemnity is limited. Manufacturing defects and quality control are still their responsibility to the point of delivery. 

If you take a medicine and get a side effect, in order to make a claim, you would have to show negligence on the part of the company. If the manufacturer has done their development properly and described their findings accurately, they will not be liable. Being in the 5% who still get Covid is definitely not grounds for a claim. Remember that it was estimated the vaccs would only be 50-60% effective.


----------



## Ethan (Dec 8, 2020)

If anyone is interested, the Oxford vaccine interim results have been published in The Lancet

Oxford vaccine results


----------



## Ethan (Dec 8, 2020)

SwingsitlikeHogan said:



*All *drugs have side effects...

The question was 'why do Pfizer have legal protection?'

The answer was '...because the vaccination is not 100% effective'

and yes - it will have some side effects...but these are clearly deemed acceptable as they are with any other drug.  But clearly if I am vaccinated and think I am safe then go and get seriously ill as I am one of the 5% then I might be a bit upset. 

But I am not going to hang about waiting for a vaccination that is proven 100% effective as that might never turn up.  because as I hang around waiting there is a much greater chance that I will pick up the virus and with no protection could develop Covd-19
		
Click to expand...

The correct answer is not because it is not 100% effective. It was never expected to be, certainly not promised to be, and few medicines are.


----------



## AmandaJR (Dec 8, 2020)

Ethan said:



			If anyone is interested, the Oxford vaccine interim results have been published in The Lancet

Oxford vaccine results

Click to expand...

I read a bit and especially the part about the half/full dose producing a better result than full/full. Does it mention this was serendipitous?


----------



## ColchesterFC (Dec 8, 2020)

Well having seen the roll out of the vaccine this morning I've changed my mind and definitely won't be getting it having seen the side effects.

The woman that had it first seemed fine but the guy that went second came out thinking he was William Shakespeare.


----------



## Swinglowandslow (Dec 8, 2020)

ColchesterFC said:



			Well having seen the roll out of the vaccine this morning I've changed my mind and definitely won't be getting it having seen the side effects.

The woman that had it first seemed fine but the guy that went second came out thinking he was William Shakespeare.
		
Click to expand...

Oh, To be ( vaccinated) or not To be, that is the question.


----------



## yandabrown (Dec 8, 2020)

Swinglowandslow said:



			Oh, To be ( vaccinated) or not To be, that is the question.
		
Click to expand...

The taming of the flu


----------



## Ethan (Dec 8, 2020)

AmandaJR said:



			I read a bit and especially the part about the half/full dose producing a better result than full/full. Does it mention this was serendipitous?
		
Click to expand...

This issue is discussed in the paper. As I understand it, it appears that one of the contract manufacturing sites which was supposed to be a normal dose, but because of a problem with their assay used to determine dose, the actual dose was about half of that expected. The paper says the investigators discussed this with the MHRA who agreed they should interpret the data as they did. 

I don't think this is an issue of any concern, and it would not put me off taking the Oxford vaccine, which is the one most of us will be offered.


----------



## pauljames87 (Dec 8, 2020)

Today marks an exciting day for science 

What an achievement to develope a vaccine on a global scale under what must be serious pressure .

Hats off to all involved 

I will wait my turn, I'm guessing 2022 maybe sooner as a key worker but least the most vunrable will get the protection


----------



## AmandaJR (Dec 8, 2020)

Ethan said:



			This issue is discussed in the paper. As I understand it, it appears that one of the contract manufacturing sites which was supposed to be a normal dose, but because of a problem with their assay used to determine dose, the actual dose was about half of that expected. The paper says the investigators discussed this with the MHRA who agreed they should interpret the data as they did.

I don't think this is an issue of any concern, and it would not put me off taking the Oxford vaccine, which is the one most of us will be offered.
		
Click to expand...

I agree completely. Do we know if it will be rolled out with a half/full dose as standard?


----------



## Ethan (Dec 8, 2020)

AmandaJR said:



			I agree completely. Do we know if it will be rolled out with a half/full dose as standard?
		
Click to expand...

I expect that is what the MHRA is looking at, better efficacy, better tolerability, makes a scarce resource go further, what's not to like?


----------



## ColchesterFC (Dec 8, 2020)




----------



## rulefan (Dec 8, 2020)

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2020/12/moderna-covid-19-vaccine-design.html


----------



## Ethan (Dec 8, 2020)

FDA report on the Pfizer vaccine FDA report

Nothing we have't heard before, but a lot more detail and analysis.


----------



## Wildboy370 (Dec 10, 2020)

Billysboots said:



			I’ve searched and can’t find such a list - can you post a link please, or cut and paste from it? I’d be interested to see it.
		
Click to expand...

This is the list I saw. There is a large number at the bottom which you have to factor in as the amount in each group is the minimum they define as needing it then lump everyone else in the bottom group 

https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content...VID-VACCINE-TIMELINE-v3-2.jpg?strip=all&w=620


----------



## Jimaroid (Dec 10, 2020)

Wildboy370 said:



			This is the list I saw. There is a large number at the bottom which you have to factor in as the amount in each group is the minimum they define as needing it then lump everyone else in the bottom group

https://www.thesun.co.uk/wp-content...VID-VACCINE-TIMELINE-v3-2.jpg?strip=all&w=620

Click to expand...

There's something wrong in those numbers, it adds up to about 5 or 6 million more people than there are in the UK according to the ONS 2019 population estimate.


----------



## Lord Tyrion (Dec 10, 2020)

There is also an extra category. They have 10 groups, every one else specifies 9.


----------



## bluewolf (Dec 10, 2020)

Jimaroid said:



			There's something wrong in those numbers, it adds up to about 5 or 6 million more people than there are in the UK according to the ONS 2019 population estimate.
		
Click to expand...

That'll be those bloody imagrunts that Farage has told'em will be coming over by dinghy this month....


----------



## rosecott (Dec 10, 2020)

Jimaroid said:



			There's something wrong in those numbers, it adds up to about 5 or 6 million more people than there are in the UK according to the ONS 2019 population estimate.
		
Click to expand...

You only have to look at the source - The Sun - to wonder about its accuracy.


----------



## Ethan (Dec 10, 2020)

Jimaroid said:



			There's something wrong in those numbers, it adds up to about 5 or 6 million more people than there are in the UK according to the ONS 2019 population estimate.
		
Click to expand...

There is probably some double counting, e.g. the number aged over 50 is all people regardless of risk, so includes some also counted in high risk under 65.


----------



## Pathetic Shark (Dec 10, 2020)

rosecott said:



			You only have to look at the source - The Sun - to wonder about its accuracy.
		
Click to expand...


Good point.  I would always rely on something reliable on-line like the Daily Mail.      Irony meter goes off the scale.


----------



## chrisd (Dec 10, 2020)

I was thinking I'd lie about my age and tell em I'm over 80 👍


----------



## Imurg (Dec 10, 2020)

chrisd said:



			I was thinking I'd lie about my age and tell em I'm over 80 👍
		
Click to expand...

So only a teeny weeny ickle white one then..?


----------



## AmandaJR (Dec 10, 2020)

Just signed up as a St John's volunteer to stick needles in people - sounds kinda fun 

Fortunately they do provide training!!


----------



## upsidedown (Dec 10, 2020)

SM did 50 yesterday and her team also have had their first one


----------



## chrisd (Dec 10, 2020)

Imurg said:



			So only a teeny weeny ickle white one then..?
		
Click to expand...

The winner of the weeks " first eejit to bite competition" is ...........


----------



## Imurg (Dec 10, 2020)

chrisd said:



			The winner of the weeks " first eejit to bite competition" is ...........
		
Click to expand...

I'll have you know I'm as intelligent as the next man..


----------



## rosecott (Dec 10, 2020)

chrisd said:



			I was thinking I'd lie about my age and tell em I'm over 80 👍
		
Click to expand...

I'm sure you could get away with it.


----------



## chrisd (Dec 10, 2020)

Imurg said:



			I'll have you know I'm as intelligent as the next man..

View attachment 33903



Click to expand...




rosecott said:



			I'm sure you could get away with it.
		
Click to expand...


And in second place .....................


----------



## Ethan (Dec 12, 2020)

Pre-print version of a scientific paper written by the BioNTech team just published, basically showing that the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine is effective in stimulating humoral immunity (i.e. antibodies) and cellular immunity (i.e T-cells). This is good news and suggests that immunity should last beyond the disappearance of antibodies, possibly well after. 

Here is the paper for your interest, but it is not written for a lay audience.


----------



## SaintHacker (Dec 12, 2020)

chrisd said:



			I was thinking I'd lie about my age and tell em I'm over 80 👍
		
Click to expand...

Try it, I doubt they'll bother asking you for id...


----------



## SaintHacker (Dec 12, 2020)

Ethan said:



, but it is not written for a lay audience. 

Click to expand...

Too right, I got lost at BNT162b2


----------



## fundy (Dec 12, 2020)

SaintHacker said:



			Too right, I got lost at BNT162b2 

Click to expand...

it wasnt a postcode to put in your satnav


----------



## SaintHacker (Dec 13, 2020)

fundy said:



			it wasnt a postcode to put in your satnav 

Click to expand...


----------



## Backache (Dec 13, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Pre-print version of a scientific paper written by the BioNTech team just published, basically showing that the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine is effective in stimulating humoral immunity (i.e. antibodies) and cellular immunity (i.e T-cells). This is good news and suggests that immunity should last beyond the disappearance of antibodies, possibly well after.

Here is the paper for your interest, but it is not written for a lay audience. 

Click to expand...

The paper for the efficacy study is here
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2034577?query=featured_home

Of interest to those wondering about safety, it was powered to pick up adverse reactions occurring greater than 0.01% with 83% probability over the time course of the trial so far. Protection was observed from 12 days after the first dose.


----------



## SocketRocket (Dec 13, 2020)

fundy said:



			it wasnt a postcode to put in your satnav 

Click to expand...

Or a far right anti -vax group


----------



## Karl102 (Dec 13, 2020)

Ethan said:



			Pre-print version of a scientific paper written by the BioNTech team just published, basically showing that the BioNTech/Pfizer vaccine is effective in stimulating humoral immunity (i.e. antibodies) and cellular immunity (i.e T-cells). This is good news and suggests that immunity should last beyond the disappearance of antibodies, possibly well after.

Here is the paper for your interest, but it is not written for a lay audience. 

Click to expand...

Nice easy read that Ethan, Thanks.  

Mind-blowing how clever these guys are!


----------



## bluewolf (Dec 13, 2020)

Karl102 said:



			Nice easy read that Ethan, Thanks. 

Mind-blowing how clever these guys are!
		
Click to expand...

I work in a department of academics. Degrees, PHD’s and Doctorates everywhere. Guess who they shout for when they need a box or a desk moving though 😂


----------



## larmen (Dec 13, 2020)

bluewolf said:



			I work in a department of academics. Degrees, PHD’s and Doctorates everywhere. Guess who they shout for when they need a box or a desk moving though 😂
		
Click to expand...

Lots of Sheldon Cooper like people around?


One thing no one mentioned in terms of vaccination are Government an Royalty. Do they skip the line? I don’t particularly like the current bunch but I still think they should get an early turn. Even though they should all be immune by now because they passed the virus around themselves previously.

Hospital appointment for me tomorrow. Not vaccination, but I am going to lobby the cardiologist. I might take chocolates and flowers along ;-)


----------



## Ethan (Dec 13, 2020)

Karl102 said:



			Nice easy read that Ethan, Thanks. 

Mind-blowing how clever these guys are!
		
Click to expand...

The first and last authors (the two most prestigious positions on a paper) are the Turkish couple who founded BioNTech. They are definitely smart people!


----------



## Karl102 (Dec 13, 2020)

bluewolf said:



			I work in a department of academics. Degrees, PHD’s and Doctorates everywhere. Guess who they shout for when they need a box or a desk moving though 😂
		
Click to expand...

Surely not you with your shoulder 🤣😂🤣😊🤣😂😊


----------

