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

@SeasonFinale

You do realise that by starting a thread kike this you too are feeding this nonsense.

It's the same nonsense as "I've seen this on Facebook, what do you think?" Another way to promote conspiracy theories and with the usual wide eyed innocence. So annoying.

I do find it difficult to understand the thinking of people who proclaim that they won't put unknown stuff into their bodies. Why is it preferable to risk extremely nasty stuff making its own way in there without you having a choice in the matter?

@Cygne

I've listened to a number of experts on TV who rightly advise that there's no telling what the side effects or long term issues may be

Not sure who you've been listening to, but I don't really think they can claim to be experts if that is what they are saying. This is not a brand new vaccine, it is based on established vaccines whose side effects and long terms issues we already know. And we know enough now about the side effects and long-term issues of coronavirus to know which is preferable.

BBC and other main news's outlets. They're saying it because it's true and no-one can guarantee there won't be issues. Please point me to peer reviewed papers that categorically state that all of these vaccines are 100% safe.

Also please tell me why pregnant women or breastfeeding mothers aren't being offered the vaccine, if it's heritage is well known?

I'm not scare mongering and it's likely that the vaccines will be fine but to have 100% faith is naive and it's totally fine for people to be cautious.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccination-what-to-expect-after-vaccination/what-to-expect-after-your-covid-19-vaccination#side-effects

www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/11/fever-aches-pfizer-moderna-jabs-aren-t-dangerous-may-be-intense-some

www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-vaccination-women-of-childbearing-age-currently-pregnant-planning-a-pregnancy-or-breastfeeding/covid-19-vaccination-a-guide-for-women-of-childbearing-age-pregnant-planning-a-pregnancy-or-breastfeeding

You can say beforehand that you don’t want those treatments. People don’t have to accept medical care, including vaccines. By law. You have an advance directive then? Because trust me if you’re taken into hospital and are so seriously ill that you are placed on a ventilator they will ask first and seek consent from your next of kin after. So if you want to refuse all interventions in the event you are ever taken seriously ill I suggest you set up an advanced directive to that effect, because when you’re unconscious it is your next of kin who will be consenting, and don’t be so sure that they’ll say no on your behalf.

When i was rushed into hospital four years ago I was unconscious by the time I got there, and I was on full life support before my family could arrive to consent to that.

When I crashed eighteen months ago my parents were actually there, and they were asked to leave the room while the crash team came in to deal. I was already down in ICU before any kind of consent was sought.

And when I had a cardiac arrest two weeks later I was given CPR and was already down in the cath lab having a temp pacemaker fitted before my family got there. Was then placed on a ventilator before they got to see me.

people do refuse treatments, but anyone thinking that they’ll stick around if you need emergency treatment now are naive. Because fact is that the majority of people do want treatment and don’t want to die.

Also, for the people who say that COVID is a miniscule risk, you are concentrating too much on the death rate. There are far worse things than dying from COVID, surviving it with long-term effects. As a flu survivor with now serious heart condition and one day headed for the transplant list I think I can say with some authority that dying would in fact have been the easy route. PS: I am relatively well now, but for three years I wasn’t, until I had surgery preceded by the above-mentioned cardiac arrest/crashes, and one day I am told I will deteriorate again, and for those three years I couldn’t walk from my lounge to my kitchen without becoming breathless, couldn’t walk upstairs, didn’t go out, couldn’t bend to lift trays etc out of the oven. But do continue to think that death is the be all and end all of catching COVID, and that because you’re not likely to die the concern doesn’t apply to you.

I won't be getting it, certainly not immediately anyway.

There have been warnings for people with severe reactions which I have had in the past and l, yes, selfishly, I think my personal risk to covid is lower than the risk of the potential reaction o could have to the vaccine. I still remember the drug trail that went on in the ten-ish years with most of the volunteers getting a severe reaction.

So yeah, in short, I will likely get the vaccine but will be last in line.

No drug is 100% safe so that guarantee would never be given for anything. If you want drugs to be 100% safe then I hope you never take paracetamol!

Dexmethasone has been mentioned on this thread, amazing drug Ds has been on more than once but again it’s certainly not 100% side effect free!

act first not ask

ETA in hindsight I am certain I had it in February, I had ever let single symptom, right down to taste.

AlternativePerspective

I didn’t say I want to refuse medical treatments (not that it would be your business if I did). I said I have a right to do so.

What does it mean on a practical level if one person in a couple gets the vaccine and the other doesnt?

On an individual level it means you’re protected and he isn’t. On a societal level it means vulnerable people who can’t have the vaccine for genuine medical reasons are more likely to catch Covid because anti-vaxxers reduce the efficacy of herd immunity.

Vaccines happened very fast because they basically had blank cheques and a lot of research from SARS-COV-1 that could be reused for SARS-COV-2. When has science had unlimited money to solve a problem?

Governments want people to take the vaccine because they don't want to be associate with mass deaths for voting reasons and we need healthy adults to pay tax and keep the country running. In the UK's case our government had used this pandemic to line the pockets of their friends but why would they put trackers in vaccines when smartphones will do that already and just before COVID they were going to start using facial recognition software for crimes when it's notoriously unreliable when it comes to non-white faces?

Unless your h is over 50, works in a care home /NHS or CEV he doesn't have to worry about being offered a vaccine for a while.

Please point me to peer reviewed papers that categorically state that all of these vaccines are 100% safe.

Do you never take any form of medication at all, then, including aspirin and paracetamol? Because there is none that is 100% safe, and it would be ridiculous to suggest that anyone is claiming that covid vaccinations are. But the odds are still an awful lot better than catching covid, with the added bonus of not risking making other people ill.

I will be getting the vaccine when I can, but I certainly think it's not something to do lightly. There should be concerns and worries about something that's so new.
To me, it's worth it, as the lesser of two evils, but I can understand peoples' concerns and reservations.

When we are talking about approval it’s about the dossier that’s been put together that has large sections; quality over all summary’s, clinical, development and medical sections.

If anyone’s interested here a link to the ICH website detailing the basics:

www.ich.org/page/ctd

This is what the MHRA would be approving, questions go back and forth until they either approve or reject the dossier.

The quality section (module 3) alone can be hundreds of pages long.

Selfish view, the more people who reject the vaccine means I get it sooner.

I'm absolutely sure that all anti-vaxxers study the ingredients list of every item of food and drink they consume. They most do, otherwise they'd be complete hypocrites, wouldn't they.

Please point me to peer reviewed papers that categorically state that all of these vaccines are 100% safe

Well, that's a charter for the antivaxxers movement if ever there was one!

Nothing biological is 100%. Ever. Except that we will all die some day.

Asking for 100% is a big red flag of having been under the influence of the Russian troll factory - something that WHO has down as one of the biggest threats to public health this century

Weaponized Health Communication: Twitter Bots and Russian Trolls Amplify the Vaccine Debate -www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6137759/

Russia trolls 'spreading vaccination misinformation' to create discord -
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-45294192

@Cygne

Please point me to peer reviewed papers that categorically state that all of these vaccines are 100% safe.

Do you never take any form of medication at all, then, including aspirin and paracetamol? Because there is none that is 100% safe, and it would be ridiculous to suggest that anyone is claiming that covid vaccinations are. But the odds are still an awful lot better than catching covid, with the added bonus of not risking making other people ill.

There was an interesting piece on BBC yesterday about how aspirin would fail if it were put through the tests that modern vaccine - including these ones - go through. Because the side effect profile is so bad

‘There have been warnings for people with severe reactions which I have had in the past and l, yes, selfishly, I think my personal risk to covid is lower than the risk of the potential reaction o could have to the vaccine.’

If there’s genuinely a high chance of your having a severe reaction then it’s not selfish to refuse it. I doubt the NHS much wants to be treating people with bad reactions to the jab!

@Cygne

No of course not but I'm not the one suggesting that the experts I've watched on TV were wrong. You were.

Fact is, no-one knows what the long term effects are, which is why the test patients will be closely monitored for the next few years at least.

As for the relative risks, it's up to people to make that judgement. The risk to under 50's is extremely low and lower the younger you are.

The decision then becomes one where the individual needs to compare one extremely low risk with another. There's no right or wrong, unless there's evidence that it prevents transmission.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/health-52197594

They advise women should not take it if they are pregnant , breast feeding or trying for a child. Purely because they haven't trialled on such women and can't guarantee side effects.

Therefore I won't be having it for a while as I'm due in March, plan to breast feed and want a second quite quickly (I know all that could change!!! 🤣)

@CutToChase are you under 50 and generally healthy? If so, you won't be getting it until the summer anyway by which time we will know more about side effects (harsh but true). I doubt there will be any significant issues. As PP said the stages of the trial were done concurrently with no need to apply for funding

For the poster who says “I pump enough stuff into my body,” presumably you have an illness which means you have to take medication and it’s likely that said illness makes you more susceptible to the effects of COVID?

Yes, but not just covid, any infection or virus can cause me big problems. A simple cold sore can land me in hospital, so covid is the least of my worries.

I won’t be getting it and neither will my children
Not be because I’m anti vaccine but because we are not in any higher risk categories and are fit and healthy. I know there is always a chance we could be the outliers and still get hit with COVID but on a weigh up of risks and the fact we don’t know what any possible long term side effects are I’ll pass
I just don’t think we need it

@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

The testing process has been as thorough as any other. All that has happened is the usual bureaucracy that causes delay has been removed and several companies were incentivised to set to work without financial or resource constraint.

It normally takes only normally ten years to get a new drug through because 8 and a half years are wasted doing nothing

@UnmentionedElephantDildo

Not really. If you followed the discussion I was called up for saying, correctly, that the long term effects are unknown so people are ok to be cautious. It was claimed that the covid vaccine was safe and was well known so I asked for peer reviewed proof. There isn't any obviously.

That's not conspiracy.