Why is everyone so eager to get vaccinated?

[FTMF30]

What I mean by this is that a SAFE vaccine for coronavirus wouldn't be available for at least a couple of years. Vaccines need to be thoroughly tested and, although a lot of Mumsnetters don't like to believe it, vaccine injury IS REAL.

It's very sinister how very interested Bill Gates has become in the pharma industry in the last few years and how he advocates forced vaccines, or at least loss of freedom of movement/access for those who choose not to vaccinate (which is pretty much a forced vaccine). He doesn't care about vaccine injury as we are basically collateral damage to his end goal.

Is it not fair to be wary of a rushed vaccine? Is it not fair to not want to be vaccinated if I'm not fully ware of the implications just yet? When I come on here, I see a lot of people who are very happy that we have to stay inside (I understand the reason for this), I see people who are quarantining food and washing eggs and would take a vaccine if one was available tomorrow. I find it quite alarming how we've been fed stories about death after death after death, really biased stuff with hardly any balanced information. We've been frightened into being heavily controlled and that's the thing that really scares me.

Thalidomide? Why is anyone citing a drug developed in the 1950s? Partly because of that tragedy, we have human tests and clinical trials. No one is going to vaccinate a few actual guinea pigs and say 'job done'

Partly because of that tragedy, we have human tests and clinical trials

Well, quite, that's my point.

. No one is going to vaccinate a few actual guinea pigs and say 'job done'hmm

How do you think they will cut development time from four years (quickest ever vaccine) to 18 months? What will they not do in order to shorten that time?

But Errol you will be our human guinea pigs. Thanks for taking one for the team

And re thalidomide - the effect there was teratogenicity. My guess is that a new fast-tracked vaccine wouldn't be given to pregnant women. There are many drugs which pregnant women can't have because of the difficulty of ethically testing if they're teratogens.

And re thalidomide - the effect there was teratogenicity. My guess is that a new fast-tracked vaccine wouldn't be given to pregnant women.

Why? They give whooping cough and flu vaccine to pregnant women

But Errol you will be our human guinea pigs. Thanks for taking one for the team

Quite possibly.

I noted in a piece about the scientist leading the oxford vaccination development team that all of her biochemistry student 21 year old triplets had volunteered for the trials. There was some information in there about how the development and testing might be streamlined - whether what she was saying is likely to actually happen I don't know, her best-case timeline seemed extraordinarily optimistic

ow do you think they will cut development time from four years (quickest ever vaccine) to 18 months? What will they not do in order to shorten that time?

No idea. I don't work in that area.

But equally That doesn't mean that someone else couldn't answer your question.

My point is just that a little knowledge is dangerous.

You see that so often here.

They give whooping cough and flu vaccine to pregnant women
I don't know how and when that was decided on - but I'll assume on the basis of evidence and risk analysis.
I specifically said I doubted they'd give a new fast-tracked vaccine to pregnant women. (I don't know if I'm right about that, there might be reason to.)

with respect & I am not being facetious - with bad reactions to vaccinations: Seriously you can react & have a reaction to almost anything - some individuals - sadly - are more sensitive to things that a majority are not. When dd was little among the (many)things she couldn't eat was bananas - apparently they have a naturally occurring chemical which is similar to a preservative - her consultant allergist told me that it was not that uncommon.
But with the number of researchers & checks & reviews this will be able to go through faster purely because the money & depth of research that will be available will be unprecedented

I think everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Don't want the vaccine? Don't have it, but don't judge those who do.

thalidomide is still be used for Hansen's disease (leprosy) obviously with care & I think it may be used for some cancers

A global pandemic which has spread rapidly by people travelling and carrying the virus to new places, sometimes without showing any symptoms themselves.

If a safe vaccination is found (and appropriately tested before release) I personally believe that vaccination should be optional, but a mandatory for international travel - then people still have a choice, they just might not like the options

People talk about herd immunity, but we also don't know whether people can get this virus more than once. I would hope that they can prove that before relying on it, as much as I would hope they can prove the safety of any vaccination

Why criticise a vaccine not being properly tested and not become part of the testing process? All vaccines and medicines require testing. I'm sure you have taken medication and have benefited from that. Why the double standards?

Actually, I would volunteer to have it once it's completed standard safety testing. I've got an implanted medical device that was actually fairly new when I had it done, my dad has had two very new experimental treatments for life threatening conditions, and I always, always agree to medical students or nursing students practicing procedures in me ( even though I hate it, including delivering my baby - but, I know the safety parameters in all of those situations because I've known that they are safe.

Sorry, but I'm not volunteering for a vaccine that has been sped through safety tests. Let's see what comes of this. They don't even know that it will work yet, so again, time will tell

I couldn’t be bothered to read after the sentence vaccine injury it’s real.

No it’s not. You absolute muppet.

@Boredbumhead

The idea for Windows was stolen from Xerox in the first place, who had given him a tour to talk about similar stuff and he went away & created his version to get it out before Xerox did theirs.
He would buy out small companies with great ideas, just so the new technology could be closed down before it could be a threat to Windows. He COULD have continued to develop these ideas, but preferred to kill them.
Internet Explorer was licensed by the developers on a percentage "per sale" basis, but Microsoft bundled it in with the rest of Office so in theory there was no sale, thereby getting it for free.
There have been multiple anti-trust cases against Microsoft over the years, mostly relating to abuse of monopoly and barrier to entry.

Must admit my biggest anti Microsoft feelings are based around the Ballmer years - he was a slimebag who bent every rule in the book to destroy any possible competitors (a former employer of mine fell foul of that).

All that said, I have no issues whatsoever with the Gates Trust and the research they are doing. As I inferred earlier, I think marrying Melinda was the making of Bill Gates as a human being and I now consider him a philanthropist

thalidomide is still be used for Hansen's disease (leprosy) obviously with care & I think it may be used for some cancers

It won't be given to pregnant women. There are quite a lot of drugs which you aren't allowed to have if there's any possibility you might be pregnant and you have to clearly understand that you mustn't get pregnant while on them.

My point is actually would you volunteer to be part of the testing process if you view is you wouldn't have it unless it was adequately tested ( to your own non medically informed criteria)

My own non medically informed criteria? Ok.

No, I won't be volunteering to have a vaccine tested on me that hasn't completed the initial safety testing that other vaccines go through. No.

I will have a properly tested vaccine, but not one that has been rushed out. I can see this causing arguments with my DH as he is all for vaccines and I won't want our DC having a rushed vaccine. Testing is paramount.

It will be impossible to confirm a new vaccine has a reasonable safety profile in a very short time frame.

They have already skipped years of animal studies does this not ring alarm bells? Why do you think the animal studies are undertaken in the first place?

Exactly my view and I speak as someone whose children have had all vaccines so I am most definitely not an anti vaxxer

They have already skipped years of animal studies does this not ring alarm bells? Why do you think the animal studies are undertaken in the first place?

I think you might mean they are running the animal studies at the same time as the human ones instead of one after the other.

@Allergictoironing thank you for that thorough reply. Very interesting insight into the guy.

No, I won't be volunteering to have a vaccine tested on me that hasn't completed the initial safety testing that other vaccines go through. No.

they won't want people from the 'shielded' group in the initial testing anyway.