I hate anti-vaxxers

What’s that got to do with scientists?
And actually, why not? Beyond general issues with being a billionaire he seems to be fairly philanthropic.

My best friend would not go for her covid jabs .She died last year as she got covid. To my way of thinking hers was a needless death and I still miss her very much.

No I don’t think Bill Gates has much integrity to be honest.

@AnxiousOCDMum dont you believe anyone has any integrity? Anyone at all? (other than you and whoever you are ‘researching’ with).

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce9x4yd27mro

"Emergency vaccination programmes – rolled out in response to outbreaks of five major diseases – are believed to have reduced deaths by around 60% over a period of 23 years, according to a new study.

A similar number of infections are also thought to have been prevented.
Researchers believe that vaccinations stopped much bigger outbreaks of illnesses like Ebola, cholera and yellow fever.

The study also points to the significant economic benefits of vaccination programmes, which run into billions of dollars.

Researchers say this is the first comprehensive study to assess the impact of emergency vaccination programmes in response to the outbreak of five infectious diseases – Ebola, measles, cholera, yellow fever and meningitis.

They studied 210 different incidents from 2000 to 2023, covering 49 different countries.

The vaccine roll-outs seem to have had an impressive impact, reducing deaths by nearly 60%.

The number of overall cases of theses infections were also reduced by nearly 60%.
The swift deployment of vaccines also appears to have halted wider outbreaks.
There were economic benefits too – worth an estimated $32 billion.

These benefits come mainly from averting deaths and years of life lost to disability.
But researchers believe this could be a significant underestimate of overall savings, as it doesn't take into account the costs of dealing with a wider outbreak, or the economic disruption caused by a more serious health emergency.

It's believed the 2014 Ebola outbreak, which occurred before the existence of an approved vaccine, is estimated to have cost West African countries alone more than $53 billion."

For anyone who doesn't have an agenda, when you read this and when you think of smallpox as well, the value of vaccines is overall a black - and - white issue.

Yes, there are some who will react badly to the vaccines and they have an entirely valid reason to not have them and rely on herd immunity.

But for the rest, it's a very clear case.

More and more I come to think that Western people who are anti-vaccinations on principle are plain spoiled, selfish, naive and cossetted idiots. There's no other way to put it.

Very true! My Mum actually never has, she’s the only person I know who hasn’t despite living with my Dad when he had it mildly twice, and she was testing twice weekly for over a year longer than most people as my Nan was in a care home throughout.

You've provided a great example here of taking something completely out of context - you can't just pick out the one line that you want to substantiate your argument!

The FULL quote that you've taken that from clearly states:
"While the smallpox vaccine, developed in the late 1700s, was instrumental in the global eradication of smallpox, it's important to acknowledge that the disease had already begun to decline naturally in some regions BEFORE widespread vaccination programs were implemented. This decline [so, BEFORE widespread vaccination programs were implemented] was likely due to a combination of factors, including increased immunity within populations and changes in disease transmission patterns."

I don't personally know what led to such increased immunity within populations but, whatever it was, was happening 'BEFORE widespread vaccination programs were implemented'.

I must admit, I'm finding this whole thread most bizarre. I made the simple comment that 'the disease had begun to decline naturally prior to widespread vaccination' and I've subsequently been questioned, challenged, asked to confirm my sources, even ridiculed by some, when surely the ONLY thing that matters is that the virus WAS already in decline. This is a good thing, no?
MN really is batshit sometimes!

And they may not have even caught covid in the first place. Not everyone has you know

Not for everyone. The healthy young people in their 20s who died of Astra Zeneca induced blood clots would more than likely have bounced back from covid like a cold. As a healthy young woman who turned 30 at the height of lockdown and worked in a school throughout, I caught covid once and it was mildly annoying. The vaccine ended their lives.

I’m not a covid denier whatsoever, covid can be very dangerous to some people and those people need to weigh up the risk and reward of vaccination. But for many, the vaccines caused more harm than covid would have.

Vaccines are safer than no vaccines. That’s the point

For the majority of illnesses I'd fully agree. For people with low risk of covid complications it's less clear cut

Vaccines are safer than no vaccines. That’s the point

how many died as a result of clots caused by covid?

how many died as a result of clots caused by covid?

Ok… so when the makers of Astra Zeneca admitted in a court document that their vaccine caused blood clots that have led to deaths (70 at least) that was imaginary?

No, they didn’t.

A fair amount of people, especially younger people, who took the covid vaccine, did die. Just not of covid. Hence why people question it. For the older vaccines there is very little (if any) real evidence that they cause harm or death. I’d give my kids the MMR without a second thought. I wouldn’t give them a covid jab.

No, the 5 year data doesn’t suggest that.
There is no mechanism for a vaccine to have long term effects. Other than preventing you dying unnecessarily, obvs.

You make an interesting point.

People were so quick to label anyone who questioned the Covid jab as 'anti-vaxxers' when they were merely people who had questions about what they were being asked to put into their bodies. Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

The argument then, was that we had no long-term data, which we didn't.
It's now 5 years on, so we now have the five-year-data, and it's evident that some people were right to have concerns. And is arguably now why people are questioning traditional jabs.