Are people right to be worried about the vaccine?

[CutToChase]

I had a "good tempered" argument with DP last night. He says theres no way hes putting something in his body that hasnt undergone all the checks and tests and says that normally vaccines take 20 years to approve.

I think that when I have a choice between a known negative (covid) and an unknown (vaccine) I will always take the unknown.

In response he says people have forgotten a minuscule proportion of people actually suffer from covid. He says this is all about money (however he is a conspiracy theorist...)

What do you think about the vaccine and the speed of it?

Also vote:
YABU = I will not be getting the vaccine
YANBU = I will be getting the vaccine

Nothing has been rushed rushed. Timescales and stages have been compressed. That is not the same thing.

@pinbinpin

Nothing has been rushed rushed. Timescales and stages have been compressed. That is not the same thing.

All I'm saying is that, to the layman, which most of us are, it's fairly easy to understand why people might be wary. I'm not saying they have their facts right or wrong. I'm saying we're all humans and we have different levels of risk aversion, and it's understandable why people may perceive risk here. It feels rushed because it was a very pressured race to produce it, as reported all over the press for months. Things can go wrong when a new vaccine is rolled out, as per the article upthread.

It's inhuman to have no understanding of why people may feel wary. None of us, not a single one, has all the facts we need to make an educated decision.

But surely those laymen are intelligent enough to see that the amount of resource thrown at THIS vaccine, in terms of time, manpower and money, MUST have been in the 100x if not 1000x compared to normal as it was the first and only virus in modern times (since vaccines were invented) that paralysed the entire world?

Compressed stages and timescales were SURELY to be expected.

Honestly sick of threads like this. Just anti-vax shite dressed up as something else.

I see you, OP.

@pinbinpin

But surely those laymen are intelligent enough to see that the amount of resource thrown at THIS vaccine, in terms of time, manpower and money, MUST have been in the 100x if not 1000x compared to normal as it was the first and only virus in modern times (since vaccines were invented) that paralysed the entire world?

Compressed stages and timescales were SURELY to be expected.

It's not a question of intelligence, it's a question of risk aversion. It's not about how much knowledge you have, it's about how scared you are. Nobody has any right to tell anyone else how scared they should be with regard to putting something inside their own body.

Of course it had to be rushed. Of course it's highly, highly likely to be safe. Nobody on the thread is saying 'the vaccine is dangerous'. A proportion of people are worried because that's what people do. If you ask a thousand people to cross the road, one or two of them will choose not to because there's a risk. And nobody can tell them for sure that they wouldn't have been knocked down by a bus if they'd done it.

There's science here, and there's humans. Unless humans have what they perceive to be facts, some will be very risk averse.

So why do these risk-adverse humans now require the facts about how highly complex vaccines are made and the highly complex human immune system's possible response to it - things people spend 4/7 years studying and years of their life working on, but are happy to put any old food or drink in their bodies, legal and illegal drugs etc etc.

If people who don't have that understanding are waiting to get it before they have the vaccine then I suggest they enroll for GCSE Biology now and then block 7 years of medical school out because that's what they will need. Or maybe a couple of year on a highly focussed program of self study.

Before I put a medication into me, regardless of the legalities, I want to know it works. Otherwise what is the point?

This vaccine raises so many questions because of all those unknowns.

5 months in the, the makers should surely have some indication by now that there isn't a concern about Long CV considering some did get CV?

Surely it should be known by now about if those asymptomatic can still transmit?

People mentioned restrictions for the unvaccinated. This was discussed at length a few days ago in Parliament.

petition.parliament.uk/petitions/323442

Holy moley. People choose to eat/drink/smoke/take medicine.

It is important that they do not feel pressured to eat/drink/smoke/take medicine if they have their own reasons for not wanting to. If you agree with this statement, then you agree that people should be able to decide for themselves, pressure-free, whether to take the vaccine.

And yes, it affects others, but so does over eating/over drinking/smoking/over medicating.

Once again, this is not about facts/science/knowledge/education (you have clearly missed this point) but about each human's right to make their own decision about what is put inside their own body.

@BethlehemIsInTier1

I think your husband is right, certainly in my nurses training, the regulation of medicine is something we learnt a lot about, this vaccine certainly has been rushed and it is worrying how they got emergency approval with so little data. I for one will not be having it and I am in the ECV group.

Then you should not work as a nurse. Period. Your nurse's training is not a substitute for actual scientific knowledge.

I haven't missed any points. The original OP said "are people right to be worried about having the vaccine?". The answer has clearly been demonstrated to be "they should be as worried (or not) as they are about taking any other licenced vaccine or medication"

As to whether it should/will be mandatory or restrictions should/will be imposed on people that don't choose to take it, that is a completely separate question and not what the OP asked. I am not commenting on that, largely because I don't really have any skin in the game as I will be choosing to have this vaccine, or the Oxford one, if I am offered it.

because I don't really have any skin in the game as I will be choosing to have this vaccine, or the Oxford one, if I am offered it

Nor do I. I just don't think it's fair to decide for people whether they 'should' be worried. There are no official guidelines about emotions. Everybody has to make their own boundaries regarding what happens to their own bodies, and everybody needs to respect their own emotional responses. This is enormously important. We can't tell people what they 'should' be feeling.

I don't believe anyone is telling anyone else what they should do or think. People have responded to the OP to give their opinion that there is nothing particular about this vaccine that they might need to worry about, over and above normal due dilligence. Whether or not the government try and legislate around it remains to be seen (I doubt it).

I hope more people do decide not to have it due to vague worries about government surveillance and misplaced concern about perceived rushing, which is frankly insulting to everyone involved in the process. There will then be more doses to go around and I might actually manage to get one.

Tell your idiot partner I'll have his. Also, I'm a lizard.

@Eckhart

No. What I'm saying is that the full spectrum of other medications is not the right comparator

Right, so you're talking about comparators. The general question was about the long term effects of the vaccine, so focusing on the fact that I used a poor comparator is just avoidance of the question.

Did you have an answer regarding the long term effects of the vaccine, and whether they could potentially be harmful?

Essentially my answer has been given by pinbinpin.