Coronavirus (2022) thread

roubaixtuesday

Well-Known Member
Joined
14 Dec 2019
Messages
3,372
Team supported
City
Well, assuming you would be happy to take or have already had other vaccines you can’t really be classed as antivax. Maybe some people are worried about myocarditis and other potential long term side effects for something that is highly unlikely to kill someone who is young and healthy. If you’re over 65 or have underlying health problems then it’s understandable to have the jab.

It’s risk and reward really and it should be up to people to make their own choices. Hopefully there are no long term side effects in 10 years from this vaccine but at present nobody can say with any certainty that will prove to be the case. It’s very wrong how anyone who has decided to not have the vaccine is vilified as antivax when they most probably aren’t.

I agree it's personal choice.

But choosing not to be vaccinated is antivax though? By definition?

[On the specifics you refer to

The myocarditis - risks of that from covid are >> risk from vax.

The 10 years is a typical antivax trope. Quote me a vaccine where side effects appear only years after. ]
 

Craig

Well-Known Member
Joined
23 Jul 2006
Messages
4,437
I agree it's personal choice.

But choosing not to be vaccinated is antivax though? By definition?

[On the specifics you refer to

The myocarditis - risks of that from covid are >> risk from vax.

The 10 years is a typical antivax trope. Quote me a vaccine where side effects appear only years after. ]
I don’t think it is if it’s only on this particular vaccine that you’re choosing not to take. For example you could decide not to have it yourself but want an elderly relative who’s in the vulnerable category to have it.
 

M18CTID

Well-Known Member
Joined
15 Jul 2008
Messages
16,459
Location
In the cricket club at Burnley away
I’m saying statistically he has lived what is considered a full life.

It’s you claiming to be able to know someone has had 10,11,12 or 13 years knocked off their life despite dying at an age beyond what is considered an average life expectancy in the UK.
No. Your original point was that the vast majority of people dying of Covid were on their last legs anyway. The article proves that that is horseshit. There will be some 80 year olds out there who will live for another 15 or 20 years, and are healthier than some people half their age. To just group all old people dying of Covid who are above the average UK life expectancy as being at the end of their life anyway is bizarre.
 

BlueHammer85

Well-Known Member
Joined
13 Oct 2010
Messages
25,832
Up to 15 hospital patients will be moved into a hotel in a bid to free up beds as the NHS continues to face "enormous pressure".

The patients, who do not have COVID, will receive care at a city centre hotel in Norwich in a pilot scheme that will last three months, NHS Norfolk and Waveney Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) said.

The area's health and care system remains in a critical incident.
 

blueinsa

Well-Known Member
Joined
16 Nov 2021
Messages
1,721
Team supported
City
Up to 15 hospital patients will be moved into a hotel in a bid to free up beds as the NHS continues to face "enormous pressure".

The patients, who do not have COVID, will receive care at a city centre hotel in Norwich in a pilot scheme that will last three months, NHS Norfolk and Waveney Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) said.

The area's health and care system remains in a critical incident.

Credit to you for trawling to find that bit of negative news.
 

bluemc1

Well-Known Member
Joined
4 Oct 2012
Messages
6,779
I agree it's personal choice.

But choosing not to be vaccinated is antivax though? By definition?

[On the specifics you refer to

The myocarditis - risks of that from covid are >> risk from vax.

The 10 years is a typical antivax trope. Quote me a vaccine where side effects appear only years after. ]

but you’d be comparing a typical vaccine to a brand new one which works in a completely different way, why would we look at previous evidence to how this one will effect people ?

good news is the FDA has had their request to lock away the vaccine trial data away for 55-75 years and have been told they’ve got till August to produce everything

if it shows everything is fine with it then it should go a long way to convincing those currently hesitant to get vaxed to have it, can’t understand why they wanted it locked away not to be seen for 55 years in the first place
 

grunge

Well-Known Member
Joined
30 Jun 2009
Messages
5,842
Location
Warrington
but you’d be comparing a typical vaccine to a brand new one which works in a completely different way, why would we look at previous evidence to how this one will effect people ?

good news is the FDA has had their request to lock away the vaccine trial data away for 55-75 years and have been told they’ve got till August to produce everything

if it shows everything is fine with it then it should go a long way to convincing those currently hesitant to get vaxed to have it, can’t understand why they wanted it locked away not to be seen for 55 years in the first place

Outside of MRNA, The vaccines we are seeing here are typical vaccines, they are modern vaccines but they are typical.

and MRNA has been used in Theraputic vaccines in Immunotherapy for 10+ years, the "new" part is changing them from training the body to fight cancer to training the body to fight a virus.
 

Don't have an account?

Register now!
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.