How many of you will trust Covid-19 vaccine with own lives?

How many of you will trust Covid-19 vaccine with own lives?   113 votes

  1. 1. How many of you will trust Covid-19 vaccine with own lives?

    • I will do it, this vaccine is made by doctors, and they know how is done and if is efficient.
      74
    • I will not do it, doctors got different opinions about side effects, for the moment they don't trust this vaccine, why should I do it?
      4
    • Vaccine? For Covid-19? GTFOOH! Doctors still learn the virus and you want to do a vaccine? Are you insane?
      3
    • They plan to force people to do the vaccine, in order to fly, otherwise you cannot fly or travel internationally without one.
      10
    • I am ok without one, I am still healthy, after 8-9 months of ''quarantine living'. With mask and disinfectants who needs a vaccine?
      2
    • I will do it, but in a year or so, first persons are ''lab rats'' testers. I don't trust them yet.
      18
    • I was already sick. No need for a vaccine for me.
      2

Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

896 posts in this topic

1 hour ago, fraufruit said:

The Moderna vaccine is 94% effective against getting corona and 100% effective against getting a serious case.

I can understand how they work out the effectiveness of not getting Corona but how do they work out the effectiveness of getting a serious case ?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Keleth said:

I can understand how they work out the effectiveness of not getting Corona but how do they work out the effectiveness of getting a serious case ?

That is a mystery to me. 

I can only think of two ways.

1). They look at how many of the test subjects do and do not develop complications.

2). The know hat the complications look like at the body level (the changes at the body cell level, blood level, lung level), find them in test subjects and see how many do not go on to suffer said complications.

 

However damn it Jim, I'm an IT consultant, not a medical researcher..

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's down to the amount of people who develop serious complications in the test phase - https://www.bbc.com/news/health-54902908

 

Quote

The trial involved 30,000 people in the US with half being given two doses of the vaccine, four weeks apart. The rest had dummy injections.

The analysis was based on the first 95 to develop Covid-19 symptoms.

Only five of the Covid cases were in people given the vaccine, 90 were in those given the dummy treatment. The company says the vaccine is protecting 94.5% of people.

The data also shows there were 11 cases of severe Covid in the trial, but none happened in people who were immunised.

 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the UK the government seems to be adamant that the vaccine will not be available privately which means that I might not be able to travel because let's face it, they will make a hash of it and Brexit won't help. I've actually had Corona (community acquired and I have a note showing that I have the antibodies), but I get the feeling that if a vaccination is required then this will have to go via some official form and vaccination only.

Apart from that, I tried to volunteer for testing, but was turned down (they don't give you the reason's why).

I've had lots of vaccines in my life and only ever had minor reactions, so I'm not scared. What I've seen wrt immunotherapy (which is probably the closed to an RNA vaccine) in people I know is that the side effects are temporary, though they can be unpleasant. By the time this reaches the general public literally tens of thousands of people will have been vaccinated. Obviously there can't have been any study of long term side effects, though if nothing has shown up in the first 6 months, chances are good nothing will show up later. I can hardly wait 20 years just to be sure.  Now I just need to talk my dad into it. 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not an antivaxxer. In terms of prority I am about last in the queue. I have also had the virus. As the vaccine has come out so quickly, I would gladly let others go first...:ph34r: and will have to anyway... however, what does not reassure me is the strange logic of France giving half its allocation to the very frailest and oldest section of society first. Those in homes and due to depart this life soon anyway (these are the facts even if it sounds callous) are priority... is that the best use of a limited number of vaccines? Are the oldies passing as guinea-pigs?

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, optimista said:

however, what does not reassure me is the strange logic of France giving half its allocation to the very frailest and oldest section of society first. Those in homes and due to depart this life soon anyway (these are the facts even if it sounds callous) are priority... is that the best use of a limited number of vaccines?

First, that´s a very cold though from you. Second, those are the most likely to clough the hospital ICU beds, so it makes perfect sense!

 

1 hour ago, optimista said:

Are the oldies passing as guinea-pigs?

That phase ended a month ago.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MikeMelga said:

First, that´s a very cold thought from you.

Indeed.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if I were glad to take the vaccine tomorrow, no one is ever going to give it to me. In terms of priority I’m last in the queue. So it’s another year of social distancing / home office / semi-lockdown for me until the vaccine becomes commonplace.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine you will be seen as individuals and not as a group - your kids won't get it at all, and the grown ups will be categorised however that is done - pre-existing conditions, age etc. They probably won't vaccinate parents as a priority even though our revolting children spend hours each day breathing shared mucky air and bring nasties home to us ;)

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 01/12/2020, 17:11:05, MikeMelga said:

...that´s a very cold though from you

 

On 01/12/2020, 17:14:20, Metall said:

Indeed.

Sigh. That was inevitable. They are the FACTS. Don't shoot the messenger.

 

I don't find it reassuring. And other people are asking the same question.

I also was told by doctors in the past that you should be in excellent health when having a vaccine shot... clearly that section of the population is not in excellent health.

I repeat I am not anti-vax.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, optimista said:

I also was told by doctors in the past that you should be in excellent health when having a vaccine shot...

So the Doctors say vaccines shouldn`t be given to those in care homes and people with pre existing conditions then ?

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not saying that. I am querying the logic of prioritising the most frail with the shortest future life expectancy when stocks are limited.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, optimista said:

Not saying that. I am querying the logic of prioritsing the most frail when stocks are limited. Is that allowed?

You said a doctor said that you should be in excellent health when receiving a vaccine yet care homes are not really full of people in excellent health are they ?

Also you prioritise the most frail to stop them fucking dying from it.

Great idea though don`t give it to the people who will die from it just give it to other people.

 

All we`ve heard from the Covid muppets in the past few months is "It´s no worse than the flu,deaths are an irrelevant %"

Now we hear from those same muppets is "why prioritise the irrelevant % that actually die from it".

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to admit, I kind of had similar thoughts.  People in care homes are already isolated.  I might be missing something, but it seems more logical to vaccinate people who come in contact with with them rather than the other way around?  People who don't live in care homes but are free to roam around spreading the virus?  If the old and frail in care homes stay put, and no one who is infected comes into their space, they should be protected as well?  I guess it's not jail and they're allowed to go out... but do they? :unsure:

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, dessa_dangerous said:

I have to admit, I kind of had similar thoughts.  People in care homes are already isolated.  I might be missing something, but it seems more logical to vaccinate people who come in contact with with them rather than the other way around?  People who don't live in care homes but are free to roam around spreading the virus?  If the old and frail in care homes stay put, and no one who is infected comes into their space, they should be protected as well?  I guess it's not jail and they're allowed to go out... but do they? :unsure:

 

I believe it already has been mentioned that people who are at high risk for severe COVID illnesses are also the ones that put the biggest strain on the healthcare system.  If you need medical care for something non-COVID related, but can’t get it because the hospitals are full of severe COVID cases, what will you do then?

 

So, it makes perfect sense to give a high priority to both healthcare workers and those at high risk, so that the healthcare system is available for other purposes.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Healthcare workers and their families, it’s no use for the hospitals to have healthy personnel when they’re  home taking care of their sick family.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, dessa_dangerous said:

healthcare workers, absolutely.  But how will people who are already isolated from society get Covid if no one brings it to them?

 

So are people not allowed to see their family members/relatives in Care Homes now then? Or is it s case of waiting until people have been vaccinated before they are allowed to visit family members/relatives in Care Homes?

 

There are lots of cases of people who haven't been able to visit their family members/relatives in Care Homes since the pandemic started and, in some cases, people have died without their family members/relatives being able to visit them. Are we saying it's ok for this to continue and people in Care Homes will just have to wait? It will take more than a year to get the 60% - 65% of people vaccinated

 

All of the vaccines (Biontech/Moderna/AZ) have been tested against the high-risk group and have performed well. People saying that certain people shouldn't have the vaccine just stinks of selfishness as they want to be vaccinated as soon as possible so they can get back to their normal life and do the things that are important to them i.e. go to the pub, on holiday, etc.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't said that anyone shouldn't get it and I think you know that.  The question is who gets it first and what makes sense.  You are also perfectly aware that I'm not advocating for leaving old people to rot and languish alone in their jails, don't be daft.  I have no idea of the logistics of those places and if it makes more sense to make sure everyone who visits the home is vaccinated or rather everyone who lives in the home, in the case that there is not enough to go around and we want to move quickly on this thing.  Will it be faster AND more useful to vaccinate all of them or all of everyone who visits them?  I don't know that and I doubt you do either.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now