|
Post by musik on Mar 6, 2021 16:40:19 GMT
Well, here in Sweden they have started discussions about preventing not vaccinated people from entering theaters, cinemas, concerts and sport events. Worse than apartheid. Disgraceful, if that is the route they are going down. relegated 🤣
|
|
|
Post by mutters on Mar 6, 2021 16:51:22 GMT
You can choose not to be vaccinated but if you do there could well be consequences in terms of what you are allowed to do. You have no choice as to whether other countries or businesses decide to impose restrictions on people who decide not to be vaccinated. If you don't want to be vaccinated and can live with the possible consequences that's fine. All I'm saying is that it's unrealistic to expect that deciding not have the jab won't be consequence free . Not having the jab could well mean you won't be allowed to do everything you might want to do - and there's nothing you can do about it. The government can't (and shouldn't) make them take it, but by not getting it you're also helping it the virus spread, killing more Brits and hurting the economy even more. So it's not just the vaccine refusers taking the risk of consequences for themselves, they're making things shitter for everyone else too. But the vaccine doesn't prevent you from getting or spreading does it? Just reduces the symptoms - that's my understanding
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Mar 6, 2021 16:55:32 GMT
The government can't (and shouldn't) make them take it, but by not getting it you're also helping it the virus spread, killing more Brits and hurting the economy even more. So it's not just the vaccine refusers taking the risk of consequences for themselves, they're making things shitter for everyone else too. But the vaccine doesn't prevent you from getting or spreading does it? Just reduces the symptoms - that's my understanding My post above mate: But you're right that most of the trials only looked at whether it stopped symptoms because that's what we care about. It's other results coming through that seem to show way weaker (or not at all) infections.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Mar 6, 2021 17:04:42 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Mar 6, 2021 17:16:29 GMT
Brilliant job NHS and everyone involved in the vaccine rollout.
Also, we should never forget those who volunteered as guinea pigs for a scary new vaccine and all the underpaid postdocs who toiled away in dark labs for years.
This is one of humanity's great achievements, and Britain led the way.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Mar 6, 2021 17:23:36 GMT
The government can't (and shouldn't) make them take it, but by not getting it you're also helping it the virus spread, killing more Brits and hurting the economy even more. So it's not just the vaccine refusers taking the risk of consequences for themselves, they're making things shitter for everyone else too. But the vaccine doesn't prevent you from getting or spreading does it? Just reduces the symptoms - that's my understanding That's simply not true. The reason the vaccines reduce symptoms is that it stops the virus from replicating in the host - which also means the host has less viral load to shed which in turn means the person with the virus is less likely to spread it. When the vaccines were approved there was no experimental evidence as to how effective they were at reducing infection and the scientists were rightly cautious at saying how effective they would be even even though they knew, given the way vaccines work, that they would reduce transmission. The anti-vacc brigade jumped on this to claim that the vaccines only prevented symptoms and this has become received wisdom - which is really scary. There is lots of evidence now available to show that the vaccines are also very effective at reducing infection. There are two reasons for the vaccine programme - firstly to prevent vulnerable people from dying and secondly to reduce the spread and create vaccine induced herd immunity. However if enough people choose to not have the vaccine this won't happen - which means some people will still die from covid and the increased viral load in the population increases the chance of a rogue variant evolving. There is absolutely no good reason to refuse the vaccine and even if your bag is pure self interest even on those terms it doesn't make sense because like it or not if you don't get vaccinated there will be things you won't be able to do.
|
|
|
Post by stokeuk474 on Mar 6, 2021 17:43:50 GMT
But the vaccine doesn't prevent you from getting or spreading does it? Just reduces the symptoms - that's my understanding That's simply not true. The reason the vaccines reduce symptoms is that it stops the virus from replicating in the host - which also means the host has less viral load to shed which in turn means the person with the virus is less likely to spread it. When the vaccines were approved there was no experimental evidence as to how effective they were at reducing infection and the scientists were rightly cautious at saying how effective they would be even even though they knew, given the way vaccines work, that they would reduce transmission. The anti-vacc brigade jumped on this to claim that the vaccines only prevented symptoms and this has become received wisdom - which is really scary. There is lots of evidence now available to show that the vaccines are also very effective at reducing infection. There are two reasons for the vaccine programme - firstly to prevent vulnerable people from dying and secondly to reduce the spread and create vaccine induced herd immunity. However if enough people choose to not have the vaccine this won't happen - which means some people will still die from covid and the increased viral load in the population increases the chance of a rogue variant evolving. There is absolutely no good reason to refuse the vaccine and even if your bag is pure self interest even on those terms it doesn't make sense because like it or not if you don't get vaccinated there will be things you won't be able to do. You really won't have anyone say a bad word about this vaccine will you? It's literally months old, and we are yet to see the full long-term effects of it. I suspect it will be absolutely fine, but let's wait and see shall we rather than making outlandish statements as fact? I think Mutters is right. Transmission can still occur in vaccinated people, just like it can with Flu etc. We know that these vaccines reduce transmission quite significantly, but there has been many cases recently, of people becoming infected again after receiving the first dose. Just stop jumping all over anyone who questions, or has any concerns about the vaccine.
|
|
|
Post by westlandstokie on Mar 6, 2021 18:10:44 GMT
Fair comment mate...hope your gf is right.
|
|
|
Post by CBUFAWKIPWH on Mar 6, 2021 18:25:41 GMT
That's simply not true. The reason the vaccines reduce symptoms is that it stops the virus from replicating in the host - which also means the host has less viral load to shed which in turn means the person with the virus is less likely to spread it. When the vaccines were approved there was no experimental evidence as to how effective they were at reducing infection and the scientists were rightly cautious at saying how effective they would be even even though they knew, given the way vaccines work, that they would reduce transmission. The anti-vacc brigade jumped on this to claim that the vaccines only prevented symptoms and this has become received wisdom - which is really scary. There is lots of evidence now available to show that the vaccines are also very effective at reducing infection. There are two reasons for the vaccine programme - firstly to prevent vulnerable people from dying and secondly to reduce the spread and create vaccine induced herd immunity. However if enough people choose to not have the vaccine this won't happen - which means some people will still die from covid and the increased viral load in the population increases the chance of a rogue variant evolving. There is absolutely no good reason to refuse the vaccine and even if your bag is pure self interest even on those terms it doesn't make sense because like it or not if you don't get vaccinated there will be things you won't be able to do. You really won't have anyone say a bad word about this vaccine will you? It's literally months old, and we are yet to see the full long-term effects of it. I suspect it will be absolutely fine, but let's wait and see shall we rather than making outlandish statements as fact? I think Mutters is right. Transmission can still occur in vaccinated people, just like it can with Flu etc. We know that these vaccines reduce transmission quite significantly, but there has been many cases recently, of people becoming infected again after receiving the first dose. Just stop jumping all over anyone who questions, or has any concerns about the vaccine. I'm not jumping on people - I'm jumping on the blatant misinformation doing the rounds. Mutters said the vaccines ONLY reduces symptoms - which isn't true. It's now well established that the vaccines DO significantly reduce transmission and there is plenty of evidence out there to support this view. I never said vaccinated couldn't get the virus or that they couldn't pass it on - in fact I know someone who was vaccinated and subsequently had a positive covid test. The fact that they didn't develop any symptoms and they didn't pass it onto their partner doesn't prove anything other than some anecdotal support for what they scientific community are now saying. The vaccines reduce transmission as well as reduce symptoms. In terms of long term effects no-one KNOWS what they are because as you rightly pointed out it's too early know because that level of knowledge requires facts rather than conjecture. However what is known is the damage caused by the covid virus and to date there is no evidence of any serious ill effects from the vaccines. In terms of KNOWN risk it is far riskier not to have the vaccine than to have it. If there is evidence that the vaccines are dangerous then I'll reconsider - but at the moment people who say it's riskier to have the vaccine are the one's making outlandish statements based on absolutely no evidence to support their fears. I haven't made any outlandish statements about the vaccines - I've challenged people over misconceptions and blatant lies and will continue to do so. And I've not accused Mutter of lying - he's just repeating some of the bollocks doing the rounds. If you don't like my posts tough - prove me wrong through evidence and reasoned argument rather than on the grounds you don't like what I say.
|
|
|
Post by stokeuk474 on Mar 6, 2021 19:08:08 GMT
You really won't have anyone say a bad word about this vaccine will you? It's literally months old, and we are yet to see the full long-term effects of it. I suspect it will be absolutely fine, but let's wait and see shall we rather than making outlandish statements as fact? I think Mutters is right. Transmission can still occur in vaccinated people, just like it can with Flu etc. We know that these vaccines reduce transmission quite significantly, but there has been many cases recently, of people becoming infected again after receiving the first dose. Just stop jumping all over anyone who questions, or has any concerns about the vaccine. I'm not jumping on people - I'm jumping on the blatant misinformation doing the rounds. Mutters said the vaccines ONLY reduces symptoms - which isn't true. It's now well established that the vaccines DO significantly reduce transmission and there is plenty of evidence out there to support this view. I never said vaccinated couldn't get the virus or that they couldn't pass it on - in fact I know someone who was vaccinated and subsequently had a positive covid test. The fact that they didn't develop any symptoms and they didn't pass it onto their partner doesn't prove anything other than some anecdotal support for what they scientific community are now saying. The vaccines reduce transmission as well as reduce symptoms. In terms of long term effects no-one KNOWS what they are because as you rightly pointed out it's too early know because that level of knowledge requires facts rather than conjecture. However what is known is the damage caused by the covid virus and to date there is no evidence of any serious ill effects from the vaccines. In terms of KNOWN risk it is far riskier not to have the vaccine than to have it. If there is evidence that the vaccines are dangerous then I'll reconsider - but at the moment people who say it's riskier to have the vaccine are the one's making outlandish statements based on absolutely no evidence to support their fears. I haven't made any outlandish statements about the vaccines - I've challenged people over misconceptions and blatant lies and will continue to do so. And I've not accused Mutter of lying - he's just repeating some of the bollocks doing the rounds. If you don't like my posts tough - prove me wrong through evidence and reasoned argument rather than on the grounds you don't like what I say. Without actually saying it though, you've basically said he is lying. He said, and I quote: "said:But the vaccine doesn't prevent you from getting or spreading does it? Just reduces the symptoms - that's my understanding" You said, it's simply not true, but it is. The vaccine reduces the chances of becoming seriously ill or needing hospitalisation. People can still become infected and transmit the virus after vaccination, we know that now. So why are you shooting down his post, when what he's saying is actually true? Also, I never said it was riskier to have the vaccine, then to not. This seems to be your opinion though if anyone who queries or questions it in any way.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Mar 6, 2021 20:19:48 GMT
You really won't have anyone say a bad word about this vaccine will you? It's literally months old, and we are yet to see the full long-term effects of it. I suspect it will be absolutely fine, but let's wait and see shall we rather than making outlandish statements as fact? I think Mutters is right. Transmission can still occur in vaccinated people, just like it can with Flu etc. We know that these vaccines reduce transmission quite significantly, but there has been many cases recently, of people becoming infected again after receiving the first dose. Just stop jumping all over anyone who questions, or has any concerns about the vaccine. I'm not jumping on people - I'm jumping on the blatant misinformation doing the rounds. Mutters said the vaccines ONLY reduces symptoms - which isn't true. It's now well established that the vaccines DO significantly reduce transmission and there is plenty of evidence out there to support this view. I never said vaccinated couldn't get the virus or that they couldn't pass it on - in fact I know someone who was vaccinated and subsequently had a positive covid test. The fact that they didn't develop any symptoms and they didn't pass it onto their partner doesn't prove anything other than some anecdotal support for what they scientific community are now saying. The vaccines reduce transmission as well as reduce symptoms. In terms of long term effects no-one KNOWS what they are because as you rightly pointed out it's too early know because that level of knowledge requires facts rather than conjecture. However what is known is the damage caused by the covid virus and to date there is no evidence of any serious ill effects from the vaccines. In terms of KNOWN risk it is far riskier not to have the vaccine than to have it. If there is evidence that the vaccines are dangerous then I'll reconsider - but at the moment people who say it's riskier to have the vaccine are the one's making outlandish statements based on absolutely no evidence to support their fears. I haven't made any outlandish statements about the vaccines - I've challenged people over misconceptions and blatant lies and will continue to do so. And I've not accused Mutter of lying - he's just repeating some of the bollocks doing the rounds. If you don't like my posts tough - prove me wrong through evidence and reasoned argument rather than on the grounds you don't like what I say. If only you'd challenge people over the vile, neanderlithic, draconian blanket lockdowns that have ravaged this great country over the past year.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2021 20:26:47 GMT
www.ft.com/content/e4aaf7a8-3ccb-4223-b8e9-4cd069a9dbf2EU to import millions of vials of Oxford vaccine produced under licence from us , from the United States , to avoid importing it directly from us , Even though the profits will go to us anyway 🤣 Politics equals madness First it doesn't work ! Now they want to buy millions of vials of the stuff , without actually directly buying it from us Anything to avoid being honest with their own people
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Mar 6, 2021 20:52:41 GMT
Fair comment mate...hope your gf is right. The constant vaccine news has been almost too good to be true. A lifetime following Stoke means I'm just waiting to see how we're gonna get screwed over somehow.
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Mar 6, 2021 21:24:44 GMT
Piers has had his jab. The pandemic is over!
|
|
|
Post by Bojan Mackey on Mar 6, 2021 21:27:42 GMT
Piers has had his jab. The pandemic is over! What a shame it wasn’t filled with arsenic.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Mar 6, 2021 23:15:01 GMT
Fair comment mate...hope your gf is right. I’ve definitely read papers that say they reduce transmission by up to 70%.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Mar 6, 2021 23:27:32 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mtrstudent on Mar 6, 2021 23:41:28 GMT
Nice job getting those together. It's all good news, and BBC says 80% of over 80s already took up jab. If we get 80% population wide and the double jab is 90% effective then that's somewhere around herd immunity. It'll keep circulating, but we can probably live with that.
|
|
|
Post by mutters on Mar 6, 2021 23:47:52 GMT
www.ft.com/content/e4aaf7a8-3ccb-4223-b8e9-4cd069a9dbf2EU to import millions of vials of Oxford vaccine produced under licence from us , from the United States , to avoid importing it directly from us , Even though the profits will go to us anyway 🤣 Politics equals madness First it doesn't work ! Now they want to buy millions of vials of the stuff , without actually directly buying it from us Anything to avoid being honest with their own people Please feel free to correct me but Medway potter said that no profit was being made on 18/02/2001 saying Astra Zeneca making no profit - so should be no profit?
|
|
|
Post by mutters on Mar 7, 2021 0:01:33 GMT
I'm not jumping on people - I'm jumping on the blatant misinformation doing the rounds. Mutters said the vaccines ONLY reduces symptoms - which isn't true. It's now well established that the vaccines DO significantly reduce transmission and there is plenty of evidence out there to support this view. I never said vaccinated couldn't get the virus or that they couldn't pass it on - in fact I know someone who was vaccinated and subsequently had a positive covid test. The fact that they didn't develop any symptoms and they didn't pass it onto their partner doesn't prove anything other than some anecdotal support for what they scientific community are now saying. The vaccines reduce transmission as well as reduce symptoms. In terms of long term effects no-one KNOWS what they are because as you rightly pointed out it's too early know because that level of knowledge requires facts rather than conjecture. However what is known is the damage caused by the covid virus and to date there is no evidence of any serious ill effects from the vaccines. In terms of KNOWN risk it is far riskier not to have the vaccine than to have it. If there is evidence that the vaccines are dangerous then I'll reconsider - but at the moment people who say it's riskier to have the vaccine are the one's making outlandish statements based on absolutely no evidence to support their fears. I haven't made any outlandish statements about the vaccines - I've challenged people over misconceptions and blatant lies and will continue to do so. And I've not accused Mutter of lying - he's just repeating some of the bollocks doing the rounds. If you don't like my posts tough - prove me wrong through evidence and reasoned argument rather than on the grounds you don't like what I say. Without actually saying it though, you've basically said he is lying. He said, and I quote: "said:But the vaccine doesn't prevent you from getting or spreading does it? Just reduces the symptoms - that's my understanding" You said, it's simply not true, but it is. The vaccine reduces the chances of becoming seriously ill or needing hospitalisation. People can still become infected and transmit the virus after vaccination, we know that now. So why are you shooting down his post, when what he's saying is actually true? Also, I never said it was riskier to have the vaccine, then to not. This seems to be your opinion though if anyone who queries or questions it in any way. Thank you for your contribution What I am saying is that I wish to have the choice to take or not take the vaccine Should I or others be penalised if we don't take the vaccine? Where does it end? - so if I dont have the vaccine I cannot go the supermarket and get food, so I cannot eat? I cannot travel as I don't have a vaccine passport? I find it a great infringement on my privacy that other people know if i have / have not had a vaccine - they don't know if have cancer or measles jab / chickenpox jab or others What about people who cannot have the jab? Having lived with a disabled person for more than 15 years only then can you see the hidden discrimination I took this person for an interview at Royal Stoke and they were told that the area wasn't accessible in a wheelchair and hence couldn't be undertaken, so where does it end Also, due the roll out of the vaccine, why should younger people be penalised / prevented from going abroad / travelling - I appreciate that this is in the hands of non uk governments, but this is ultimately age discrimination In simple terms, for me , we should be open at the earliest opportunity and be able to travel at the earliest opportunity We should be able to make our own decision and accept any risks that we feel come with this and live our lives as we did and move forward in a positive manner That is without getting into the public enquiry that should happen about spending and government conduct over this period, whilst connected, a slightly different matter, but for me, interconnected nevertheless
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Mar 7, 2021 9:36:39 GMT
Without actually saying it though, you've basically said he is lying. He said, and I quote: "said:But the vaccine doesn't prevent you from getting or spreading does it? Just reduces the symptoms - that's my understanding" You said, it's simply not true, but it is. The vaccine reduces the chances of becoming seriously ill or needing hospitalisation. People can still become infected and transmit the virus after vaccination, we know that now. So why are you shooting down his post, when what he's saying is actually true? Also, I never said it was riskier to have the vaccine, then to not. This seems to be your opinion though if anyone who queries or questions it in any way. Thank you for your contribution What I am saying is that I wish to have the choice to take or not take the vaccine Should I or others be penalised if we don't take the vaccine? Where does it end? - so if I dont have the vaccine I cannot go the supermarket and get food, so I cannot eat? I cannot travel as I don't have a vaccine passport? I find it a great infringement on my privacy that other people know if i have / have not had a vaccine - they don't know if have cancer or measles jab / chickenpox jab or others What about people who cannot have the jab? Having lived with a disabled person for more than 15 years only then can you see the hidden discrimination I took this person for an interview at Royal Stoke and they were told that the area wasn't accessible in a wheelchair and hence couldn't be undertaken, so where does it end Also, due the roll out of the vaccine, why should younger people be penalised / prevented from going abroad / travelling - I appreciate that this is in the hands of non uk governments, but this is ultimately age discrimination In simple terms, for me , we should be open at the earliest opportunity and be able to travel at the earliest opportunity We should be able to make our own decision and accept any risks that we feel come with this and live our lives as we did and move forward in a positive manner That is without getting into the public enquiry that should happen about spending and government conduct over this period, whilst connected, a slightly different matter, but for me, interconnected nevertheless Excellent post.
|
|
|
Post by westlandstokie on Mar 7, 2021 10:03:25 GMT
I’ve just booked my jabs on the NHS website...first a week on Tuesday...second on 2nd June....Turkey here I come (hopefully) !
|
|
|
Post by riverman on Mar 7, 2021 10:32:46 GMT
I’ve just booked my jabs on the NHS website...first a week on Tuesday...second on 2nd June....Turkey here I come (hopefully) ! Booked mine yesterday. Week on Wednesday then 2nd June also. Greece here I come! 👍
|
|
|
Post by Northy on Mar 7, 2021 12:57:07 GMT
Similar here with booking, a week in Norfolk in June 😁 Hopefully abroad later in the year when the Mrs can cope
|
|
|
Post by musik on Mar 7, 2021 14:03:23 GMT
Riots and wild angry violent demonstrants in Stockholm against the tougher restrictions. Six injured policemen, one or two pretty bad. Many arrests!
Bloody numskulls who affect the climate in our country! As if the politicians make decisions out of the blue. Sweden has been EXTREMELY spared from tough restrictions. They have applied a kind of laissez-faire approach up until now, so keep your voices and axes down, you idiots! And don't take off the face masks from people who needs them!
Obviously I noticed the national effect from this today, when I went out for a walk and some shopping (blueberries, milk, potatoes and Toblerone). Not ONE person wore a face mask today. Not one. Yesterday it was 80%. I met or saw probably 1000 people.
|
|
|
Post by thehartshillbadger on Mar 7, 2021 15:40:22 GMT
Similar here with booking, a week in Norfolk in June 😁 Hopefully abroad later in the year when the Mrs can cope I shall be floating down the broads in August availability permitting.
|
|
|
Post by crouchpotato1 on Mar 7, 2021 16:11:34 GMT
|
|
|
Post by wakefieldstokie on Mar 7, 2021 16:51:15 GMT
Read the room Dr Hopkins. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56312621‘UK must prepare for 'hard winter' of flu - expert’ seriously this woman could make winning the lotto a bad thing. Just fuck off
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Mar 7, 2021 17:14:36 GMT
Read the room Dr Hopkins. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56312621‘UK must prepare for 'hard winter' of flu - expert’ seriously this woman could make winning the lotto a bad thing. Just fuck off We very often have hard winters of flu ....it’s nothing new that
|
|
|
Post by wakefieldstokie on Mar 7, 2021 17:18:39 GMT
Read the room Dr Hopkins. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-56312621‘UK must prepare for 'hard winter' of flu - expert’ seriously this woman could make winning the lotto a bad thing. Just fuck off We very often have hard winters of flu ....it’s nothing new that Exactly, I wish they’d get these experts of doom off the media.
|
|