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.

Lilac tree-how do I manage to shield my little boy with asthma and autoimmune issues without a vaccine? We still have to go to work eventually, his siblings school etc.

I don’t see how I could do this indefinitely. Nor anyone else in my shoes.

I work for the NHS and I won’t be having a rushed through vaccine, neither will some of my colleagues.

Why are people being so ridiculously bitchy. I’m not an anti-vaccer or a conspiracy theorist. It’s completely sensible to question things.

Most people on this thread come a cross like a bunch of bullying idiots. Thinking you’re so original with your ‘witty’ comebacks.

I'll die from the virus too. So when a vaccine becomes available I'll be at the front of the queue fighting @aLilNonnyMouse for the first dose

It will allow me to return to some semblance of normal life, CV will keep me in hiding.

LilacTree1

Where did I say I wanted forced vaccines?!

I'm desparate for a vaccine, I don't want to die or become seriously ill. I'm vulnerable and have the flu jab. Why wouldn't people not want the jab?? Very strange question!!!

FTMF30 I agree but your talking to the wrong crowd on here.

It’s good to question things and not blindly follow what every one else is doing.

It’s good to question the experts.

I dont mind if people sneer and laugh because I don’t believe everything the government say. And I find it worrying that people are so eager to inject themselves and their kids with a vaccine that wouldn’t have had enough time for real evidence - that takes years.

I also find it worrying that we may actually enter a system where we can’t travel unless we have this injection. So many people where upset about Brexit and and freedom of movement but this is just that. We won’t be able to have any movement unless we submit to having an injection.

We are not forced to have any other injections to travel to places where disease is rife yet I see people on here calling for it with CV19.

This virus won’t effect or seriously harm many many more people that it actually does.

It’s astonishing to watch tbh

Lego - you didn’t. I get the impression some MNers woukd like it.

Sorry, I went to bed with a tranquilliser at and haven’t even had a coffee yet. I thought I’d work on losing my mind in case there’s more freedom in a psych hospital.

I don’t think anyone should have a vaccine if they fear it’ll be unsafe because it’s been rushed out. But I do think you shouldn’t then piggyback on the herd immunity that other people getting vaccinated provides. No vaccine, no release from lockdown, unless you have a genuine medical exemption.

Please could you at least TRY to understand the difference between the injury from vaccine compared to the risk from the disease? For most vaccines, the risk of serious injury is less than one out of one million. For diseases such as measles, the risk of serious injury is 6-8 out of a hundred. They will not release a vaccine unless it is fully tested. Fully tested means tested on at least 1036 people.

Forced vaccinations may be thing. From a single but usually reliable source: Apparently in Germany in February all school teachers and hospital workers had to get the flu jab if they wanted to keep working.

Well said @DangerCat01

But it wouldn't just be your chances, would it? It would be the chances of the NHS staff who had to care for you if you developed complications which didn't kill you but still required medical care. It would be the chances of any vulnerable person you came in contact with while asymptomatic. It would be the chances of any NHS staff having to treat that vulnerable person. It would be the chances of any cancer patient/car accident victim/stroke patient who was denied treatment because NHS staff had been drafted into corona treatment or were off sick themselves.

But NHS staff and vulnerable people will be offered the vaccine first, so there won't be a risk to them anymore. Or they will be shielding. You could argue that everyone should take responsibility and be able to make up their own mind about their health, rather than demanding that everyone else gets vaccines to protect them. No-one should be forced to have any medical treatment they don't want (because we live in a democratic society) to protect people they don't know.

@RedPanda2 before you snort with derision any further, perhaps have a look at the Government Vaccine Damages Scheme www.gov.uk/vaccine-damage-payment
Vaccine injury is real. It is admittedly rare, and incredibly difficult to prove, but it is real. I’m not a conspiracy theorist but there is no harm in having an enquiring mind and wanting to know how a particular vaccine is made and tested and what it’s projected efficacy is. Some pro-vaccine people on here are practically dogmatic in their belief that all vaccines are inherently safe and risk free and I’m sorry but you are wrong. There is by and large always going to be a greater benefit than risk in a vaccine approved for use in the general population but for the people who do develop complications like myself it really throws a spanner in the works.

I can understand people who may suffer badly with this virus will want it immediately but that’s actually only a very small percent of the U.K.

I think I’ll wait and see what happens.

And just to add my kids have had their injections an not anti vaccine!

I know a couple of very senior NHS staff who refuse the flu jab

How selfish and irresponsible of them. Flu can be lethal for vulnerable patients, especially if they are in a medical setting exposed to NHS employees with flu.

LilacTree1-I certainly wouldn’t like to see a new rushed vaccine forced on people. I agree with you there.

Have a coffee

@Scautish - The lancet retracted the Wakefield paper - it’s is completely discredited. Wakefield has been struck off as a doctor.

Did you read what I posted? I stated it wasn't retracted until 2010 and that articles refuting it were published in the early 2000's.

The paper is complete and utter nonsense and you are being extremely irresponsible to suggest it has even the tiniest bit of integrity or truth.

I did not suggest it had a modicum of truth. However, in 1998, there was no evidence to suggest the article was fabricated or that the paper was anything other than a reputable article in a top-notch journal. I stated: It's very easy to mock people who gave some credence to an article published in a top medical journal over 20 years after the fact and with the benefit of the numerous articles disputing his work that have been published in the interim.

Yes, we now know it was fabricated. We know that because numerous articles have since been published refuting the article and because the GMC investigated and decided to strike Wakefield off the medical register. They started their investigation in 2007 and completed it in 2010. However, 22 years ago all we knew was that an article had been published in a top medical journal suggesting there might be a link between mmr and autism. I generally give some level of credence to articles published in top-notch, reputable journals. We can mock those who gave credence to the article in 1998. However, nobody in 1998, had any evidence to suggest that the article was anything other than reputable.

Yet you seem to have more faith in him, than someone who is giving billions to many charities. Strange world.

Again, you are showing an inability to read (although I will admit an additional comma or a restructured sentence may have been clearer). I stated: It's very easy to mock people who gave some credence to an article published in a top medical journal over 20 years after the fact and with the benefit of the numerous articles disputing his work that have been published in the interim.

Nothing in that suggests I believe what Wakefield claims. At the time, the article, with no evidence to the contrary, made me cautious until further research either confirmed or disproved his claims. I was able to take an approach (giving the vaccines separately) that meant if there was truth in his claims, I could mitigate the risks whilst still providing my child with the same protection.

@Stingeray - I think MN have made the wrong call on this one - the OP states as a fact (which is not true according to actual scientists, WHO, NHS etc etc) that vaccination harm is real in the opening paragraph.

Vaccination harm IS real. Not for the majority obviously but there are a small number of people harmed by vaccines. Overall, from a public health perspective, this is deemed acceptable in comparison to the damage of an unvaccinated population.

Vaccine injury is real but incredibly rare. For those who suffer vaccine injury it is a tragedy and I am very sympathetic, but on the whole it is much better than the risk of tens of thousands of people getting horrific illnesses like measles, smallpox, or tuberculosis. Those illness used to kill thousands, and leave more with life limiting disabilities and conditions.

The coronavirus vaccine is being fast tracked but that doesn’t mean it isn’t safe. It is subject to the same programme of testing as any vaccine, the process has just been accelerated.

Your accusations about Bill Gates are a bit too vague to respond to properly. Sanctioning people who refuse vaccines isn’t forcing them to have a vaccination. It is just minimising the risk they post to other people. Everyone has the right to refuse vaccines but you don’t have the right to risk other people’s lives. So if you don’t want to vaccinate, there have to be other restrictions to protect people.

I agree that rushed vaccines are potentially dangerous, I also agree that vaccine damage is real. I do however understand the risk/benefit analysis of statistics that state maybe 1 in a million get vaccine damage, and the numbers who will get permanent damage if they catch the condition - someone upthread cited 6-8% for measles vs 0.000001% for vaccine damage.

what I don't understand is what Bill Gates motive is, if not philanthropic? As far as I know, he has no major investment in the pharmaceuticals industry so no financial gain to be made. A very large proportion of his personal wealth was given to the foundation which is non-profit making and is supported by charitable gifts (mainly the one made by BG to set it up).

I'm no fan of Gates prior to him stepping back from Microsoft, I found his business practices immoral and his attitude to the industry (especially potential rivals) dreadful. However since he stepped back & with his wife started the Foundation, I have seen nothing but desire to make the world a healthier place. I think most of this change is down to Melinda, who is the person who actually runs the foundation. Gates' role is to get the word out, be the public face, and when he makes speaches you can be sure that he took the advice of specialists in that field before opening his mouth.

www.who.int/news-room/detail/13-04-2020-public-statement-for-collaboration-on-covid-19-vaccine-development

Soon is what the WHO are saying, soon as in next week , next month, next year , who knows ? if you'll pardon the pun. Look at all the people who are working on this vaccine, from all over the world, that is an impressive level of collaboration. Also note the emphasis on safe and effective in the statement.

This isn’t a rushed vaccine. There are two front runners in terms of development, both of which had already gone through early phases (non human) of testing prior to the outbreak. That is because there has been a significant turn toward designing universal vaccine delivery systems over the last decade, that simply require the addition of the genetic code for the virus or disease you want to prevent. That’s why China coding COVID-19 and publishing the details openly was a huge contribution, and the best thing they could have done. That is why human testing could start almost immediately, because in one case, the vaccine has been tested for a long time using different viruses, and the other isn’t a vaccine in the traditional sense. Rather, it makes use of mRNA to do this. You can find more details by looking at their reports around their Zika vaccine that uses the same technology. It resulted in “ Subjects reported no vaccine-related serious adverse events or adverse events of special interest.”

The other candidate for a vaccine (in just talking about the two front runners right now, from the National Institute of Health’s perspective) is based on a new protein expression vector, which forms and secretes a chimeric soluble protein that delivers the viral antigen into mucosal tissues by self-activated endocytosis, causing the body to form antibodies against the virus. It was designed first to deal with a form of bronchitis and then poultry Coronavirus, which has similarities to COVID-19. So luck, and the emphasis on delivery systems, means that we are thankfully at a point where the discussions are around what the optimal dose is.

There are over 70 vaccine projects that are viable, and endless funding which is often the thing that slows research and testing down (it’s a high risk endeavor and an expensive one). I’d be happy to explain more, or provide people with links to peer reviewed material, but I’m sure there are far more qualified people than myself to continue this explanation.

No one is trying to take away your choice, but make it an educated one - millions of immune compromised people are depending on you to be educated and make the right choice.

Tin hat anyone?

@sergeilavrov that’s such an informative post, thank you