I have had my 1st Jab and looking forward to getting the 2nd jab. Why wouldn't I want it ?. We all have a responsibility to look after our self and the people around us. The best Minds in this world from many Countries have developed the vaccines. I am sure the Medical World are developing a vaccine that works. Not all making up some silly theory just to make money and not work. I do not understand a person that does not want to be protected and help protect others. If such a person sadly gets the COVID virus and has refused the jab I am sure you would still want a Doctor or Nurse that has had the jab to help to you get better. Not think of you as a big risk of passing it on to others and still refusing to get the vaccine. We all need to work together and stop this Virus from spreading.
All vaccines are not safe especially new and under tested ones. Ever hear about the contaminated polio vaccines that spread a cancer-causing virus? One batch even killed five people and paralyzed 51. This used to be a conspiracy theory but was later proven to be true. In 1960, it was discovered that the monkey kidney cells used to make the Salk polio vaccine could cause cancer. Americans were not told about this, and between 1955 and 1963, nearly 100 million children were given this contaminated vaccine. Ever know someone that died young of a soft cell cancer in the 70s or 80s? This could have been the cause.
Sending children up chimneys several hundred years ago got many killed. That doesn’t happen today. As with your example of evil vaccines (if true - I haven’t ever heard of that story, and can’t be bothered to check as it’s irrelevant to this argument) are from another era. Vaccines today are very different in manufacturing to those of the 1960’s, and also the way they work on the immune system to those you mention. Both are called vaccines, but it like saying pizza and steak are the same because they are both food. The similarities end there. Indeed there are significant differences between even the modern day ones. The Astrazenica uses adenovirus-vectored technology whereas phizer uses mRNA technology. Both stimulate an immune response but in different ways. Which one is the one that you disagree with? They are VERY different. Every vaccine from Sputnik, Sinovac, Modernas, Novovax, etc are ALL different. Do you, with your immense Google endowed knowledge of virology frown upon all of them too? If so please provide a detailed reason why each is not to be trusted. Using facts please. Do you not think ‘basic’ issues in pharmacology have not yet sorted out the problems of yesteryear? Two minutes searching the internet for decades old irrelevant examples does not compare to the knowledge and skills of the virologists and pharmaceutical scientists. It won’t be long before they can make vaccines within a very short timeframe to address the inevitable mutations that occur in viruses. The testing regime has likewise been improved so making certification for general administration possible in equally short timescales but retain (or improve upon) safety and efficacy. We will never agree. You are incapable of understanding as I doubt you have the relevant education in this to comprehend the salient facts. Imagine a cave man seeing a motorcycle - they wouldn’t understand the concept of an internal combustion engine even if you talked to them all day - even less chance of actually being able to understand the even greater complexity of the engineering design needed to manufacture one with thermodynamics, electronics , mechanics and the like. For whatever reason you hold a belief that vaccines are bad. That isn’t scientific, it’s based upon your peer reinforced world view and selective processing of inaccurate information. Next time try searching for reputable academic studies from proper universities and institutions. Try reading their science papers - they are peer reviewed by experts and are more accurate than what some other ignorant idiot says from the comfort of their armchair based upon what his mate said down the pub. Edit: I found the report to the incident you mentioned. You should have read further. It went in to say: The Cutter incident had an ambivalent legacy. It led to the effective federal regulation of vaccines, which today enjoy a record of safety `unmatched by any other medical product'.“ The problem was not with vaccines but the rank amateurs that tried making it! If you are going to try and use facts make sure they back up your argument.
As I've posted above, I'm looking forward to mine and will be grateful for it. For those that don't believe in, trust or are suspicious of the vaccination program that's fine, don't have one but I just think it's a good thing that those in authority don't think that way 'cos we'd still be struggling with Cholera, Smallpox, TB etc..etc.
You are correct, I am not a Doctor, but I did write my masters thesis on drug research related to guaranteed consumer protection, or lack there of. I have read hundreds of peer reviewed articles and studies on the subject. I choose to use articles that are easily accessible to anyone when responding to forums, I would also expect that anyone interested would do their due diligence to only use what I post as a starting point and look for more information. Like I said I am not a doctor but I also don't trust doctors. Most people believe doctors are trained in medical school and have the patients health as a priority, but in reality the medical schools are funded by big pharma and so are the doctors. Look into how Rockefeller made his money after Standard Oil. The FDA does not conduct research on new drugs, big pharma does, then hands it over to the FDA for review. This research is flawed because the findings always benefit the eventual profits of big pharma. If vaccines are the end all to be all then why don't we get rid of vaccine court and let big pharma be sued just like any business? Why should the tax payers pay restitution to people that are vaccine injured? Why is big pharma offered countless protections under the law? Why do doctors in many countries get bonuses for the number, of vaccines or amount of prescription drugs they dole out? If vaccines really work so well why are they mandatory for school aged children? Shouldn't that be a choice? If your child has the vaccine and is truly protected why should it matter if my child has it or not, your child will still be safe right? Autoimmune issues are increasing and not just because of population increases, there has to be a reason for this and I stand by the idea that it has to do mostly with our food (GMOs and roundup) the chemicals in our daily life, synthetic drugs, and vaccines. We also have higher rates of dementia and Alzheimer's disease than ever before in history, many doctors, yes mainly holistic, believe these issues are directly related to diet, and prescription drugs which have negative effects on brain function. Take statins that are regularly given for high cholesterol. The human brain is ~60% fat and cholesterol, this is what protects and feeds our mind. Statins don't know the difference between hdl and ldl so the drug reduces both. Studies have shown that a majority of dementia and Alzheimers patients were prescribed statins prior to developing problems. Of course if you read articles or research funded by drug companies you will find references to statins preventing dementia and Alzheimers, the findings are all over the place so you have to pick through and find what you believe to be truth. In the end doctors are trained by big pharma to see high cholesterol and reach for a drug instead of finding an alternative, like a better diet that can control cholesterol. Remember when doctors were telling everyone to use margarine instead of butter? Now we find out that was a terrible choice. Also, I never use google, it is paid propaganda. And I don't have a smart phone because they seem to make people dumber. Drugs and vaccines are not the answer to a better life, a better immune system is.
Where to start... No, I can’t be bothered. There are so many factual errors, oversights, biased interpretations, and much that is apocryphal or at least wildly inaccurate in there, its not surprising there is no chance of winning you over with logic and factual objective argument. When you wrote your thesis were you not told to go back and apply scientific rigour to your research? Good luck in cloud cuckoo-land. I shall for one continue taking the statin drug that miraculously DOES know the difference between hdl and ldl and will have confidence that my country’s drug licensing seems (on the whole) to work. Worth noting the FDA assesses the minimum level assurance and drug companies must consider what addition warrant is necessary - Wyeth v. Levine demonstrated that pharmaceutical companies can be sued post FDA approval. Most countries don’t give a stuff about the USA’s FDA though, and each have their own licenses and testing regimes. The global nature and high utilisation, along with risk of global litigation helps keep them honest(ish). Mistakes can be made (even with foods - remind me are eggs good for you or not this week - it’s hard to keep up) and long term findings/feedback can require new recommendations or contraindications on prescribing medications as new knowledge is acquired. On occasion there are recalls. Nothing is 100% safe and there can be side effects - a pragmatic view is necessary to decide if the risks are outweighed by the benefit - think here of chemotherapy where the side effects are grotesque but taking the treatment offers a chance of remission. Likewise vaccines have been proven to have significant health benefits. Whereas claims of woo are abound from the less regulated ‘health’ and ‘quack-monger’ markets and all the untested and unproven health claims of experts that insist (often without justification) their pills, supplements, fad diets, magic crystals, etc will save you from disease x. The use of synthetic (or otherwise) drugs is best avoided if not necessary, but wishful thinking and (only) a good diet (whilst helpful) won’t prevent or fix everything. There we go - full circle.
yes that's true about the monkey kidney. No vaccine is fully safe. It's a game risk/benefit. The benefit is not to be proved. vaccine saved Millions of life, whatever the errors/issues. Since the 60th science evolved. I have great hope with the RNA technology, not only for covid. And you are fully wrong about natural immune. Many cases of reinfected people everywhere. Vaccine is not mandatory, so don't have yours, but spreading such theories is not ok. The source you exposed was all but serious, and your assumption about autism was just plain wrong. Once again, do what you want, but belief doesn't need to be spread on a forum.
Had my first jab yesterday, and I am not swinging from the trees ...yet and other than feeling a little low energy...more than normal I'm fine.
Great to hear you are ok. However are you able to pick up 5G and do you feel a compulsion to upgrade to Windows 10 and Office 365?
I have just carried out an in-depth risk assessment (it took me all of five seconds), balancing the minute risk of an adverse effect from the vaccine against the infinitely greaterl risk from catching the virus (and passing it on to someone I love). I am delighted to be getting my vaccination this afternoon.
Its been 2 weeks since I had my first vaccination and believe it or not every thing is fine with me No tremors, shakes, fever, nothing extra as grown and nothing has fallen off
Pfizer mate. I think that as my appointment was at my local hospital the phials would’ve been easier to store there at the correct temperature. My gp’s surgery are giving the Astra Zeneca vaccine.
Just got back from my Astra Zeneca jab at my GP's surgery at the local health centre. All parts so far seem to be working no worse than before. What is it about some Americans (not you, Sandi) that they trust the internet, but don't trust anybody real?
the wife and I had a text each for Saturday saying to phone for a slot she phoned and was told they are fully booked but have been put on the list for a slot hopefully for this coming week. we will receive another text with date and time fingers crossed.
Exactly what I was thinking. (My question was largely rhetorical.) They've had an individual-first philosophy drummed into them all their lives, while, in the NHS, we still have some remnants of the belief in the public good that we once had.
So cruel to put me under pressure to make life changing decisions like that!!! Is maybe an answer? Partly is another... In certain circumstances, a third. Oh go on, I’ll commit. A 100% (with minor caveats to your first post) but only a 45.2% agreement on your second. I have a thing about bad science. Some people don’t like spiders, or heights, or sprouts, or me. Each to their own. Mine is the conceptual loathing of ideology based upon limited fact - the advocates of the anti-vax ideas believe they are using fact but unfortunately it wouldn’t last five nano seconds under scrutiny that is considered fair and thorough. They don’t understand the rigour that science takes to prove itself - a compelling (they think) argument is no substitute for empirical evidence. Read up on the physiology of those that support conspiracies and the self reinforcing communities they form - almost deliberately blocking rational thought. It’s a bit like flat earthers- part of me thinks there’s a bunch of them who do it as a laugh (I’d join in with that). Others though that think there’s a major conspiracy (at what cost and complexity to maintain) that will keep the truth secret. Sorry I have rambled on as usual. Did that help? Edit: Hello btw. Edit 2: Given I know people that have died and those that have been ill (very seriously) and those the put themselves in danger (NHS and Police) I tend to react to the “it ain’t happening” view a bit badly. Please carry on though as you see fit.
Fair enough, we can agree to disagree and enjoy a beer together if we ever meet. I enjoy the occasional crossed swords, if we can keep it civil.
