What do the anti vaxxers think is actually being put in the vaccines?

[eenymeenyminyme]

Serious question

You need to look at the risk of COVID vs the risk of vaccination

For me, I'll be having the vaccine

I'm far more worried about COVID - which has already killed 15,000 people in UK hospitals,
plus another 7,500 in care homes and an unknown number at home

So COVID is known to be very dangerous

I'm worried about the side effects of COVID, for those who are hospitalised
ICU especially can take 18 months to recover from

Nano particles which cause autism 😂

Many common drugs we use today have known side effects and kill people every year,
including aspirin, warfarin .....

Surgery has risks, even the anaesthetic can kill

The risks of drugs and surgery are taken because they are less than those of the disease or condition being treated

It's a matter of balancing the risk of the drug vs the risk of the disease

Or in this case, the risk of the vaccine vs COVID
So a vaccine vs a virus that has killed 15,000 people in UK hospitals plus 7,500 in care homes ....

I'll have the vaccine, please !

Autism
Fetuses
5G
Lizard people venom
New World order soup
Gluten
Dairy
Meat
Mind control serum
The government
Alien anal probes
Trans fats
Bat DNA

@AfterSchoolWorry

Autism and aborted fetuses mainly, but also some microchips so the government can track your thoughts.

It seems that anyone who comes on here and expresses concern about rushing through a vaccine is considered anti-vaccine when often they seem anything but to me. It seems more like they are employing critical thinking skills to think:

1. We have a serious out break that needs to be resolved and a vaccine is being developed
2. But hang on a second, it seems this vaccine is being developed far more quickly than other vaccines. Why is that? Vaccines are usually thoroughly tested. Will this one be? How can it be developed quicker?

All of these questions are sensible. Some people have come back with sensible and knowledgable answers about vaccine development, lack of investment, lack of urgency for certain vaccines to be developed, e.t.c.., which are not relevant issues here in the development of a CV vaccine as everyone is keen to get it produced quickly for obvious. However it seems other responses to it are to belittle any concerns and rubbish the questions about the vaccines. Surely it would be much more sensible to help answer concerns rather than just label people stupid or anti-vaccine for questioning its development.

I’m not anti-vaccine by the way. If it’s offered to me I will likely have it as I have every other vaccine. I think it’s unlikely to be offered to me any time soon though as I have a mid-30 year old woman with no underlying health conditions.

Aluminium is the main ingredient I have heard people object to, but it isn't in every vaccine, so it's something one needs to investigate. Personally I wouldn't have any vaccine without first knowing EXACTLY what is in it. I'm surprised so many people don't seem to care! You should all want to know.

vaccine.guide/vaccine-ingredients/aluminum-adjuvants/aluminum-adjuvant-is-an-acute-exposure/

There was that infamous post saying that a child had been hit by a car and the OP believed it was because the metals in her vaccines made her magnetic and attracted the car.

Still not sure if it was a troll, but it's probably not far off what the anti vaxxers believe.

Thalidomide is an interesting one. The animal tests on the effects in pregnancy were carried out on rabbits. But rabbits will absorb abnormal early embryos. Sure, the resulting litters didn't show an unexpected level of abnormalities but nobody questioned the low average litter size. Rabbits are longer used for these tests. It is a very useful drug for some conditions though. A PP has mentioned it's used in some cancer therapies, but also for leprosy.

Thiomersal (also known as Thimerosal) is a compound containing mercury that was used as a preservative in multi dose vaccine vials. Thiomersal is not the same as free mercury.

For example, lots of people use small amounts of the compound sodium chloride (common salt) as a seasoning. But if you were to ingest pure sodium, it would be harmful to you.

It is a long time since I left the pharmaceutical industry, but as far as I'm aware no vaccines have thiomersal as a preservative anymore anyway.

What I don’t understand is, every medical intervention ever carries iatrogenic risks. If it was developed today, paracetamol would not be approved due to toxicity. Every single medicine you take has a little leaflet with a range of possible side effects which generally range from feeling a little odd to stone dead but people happily buy them and pop them because the odds are in the consumers favour. Same with vaccines.

Anti vaxxers are hypocrites who plead righteousness whilst benefitting from the herd immunity created by others. Suspect they’d be less happy to live on an island inhabited solely by an unvaccinated population where small pox, measles, mumps, rubella, polio, tuberculosis and other life threatening illnesses run rampant. 🙄

Someone I know thinks they’re going to put chips in the vaccine so they can track him

Thank you @kimlo - not only did your comment genuinely make me lol, every time i glance out of a window and catch sight of a bird i laugh again. That’s a marvellous start to the day

NailsNeedDoing if you can’t see the issue with that then....

Those wanting to wait are expecting the rest of us to get the vaccine and potentially take the side effects so that they can make an informed decision. If everyone thought the same then no one would ever take up the vaccine.

I don’t see the issue with that tbh. You’re making an assumption that those who don’t want the vaccine are relying on everyone else. They aren’t. They’re saying that they don’t want it, which they have a right to do, and it’s up to everyone else what they do.

Actually several people have said they don't want it until there is more data. Which is different to saying you don't want it at all.

@tilder

This article describes it in detail.
www-nytimes-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.nytimes.com/2019/05/03/health/dengue-vaccine-sanofi.amp.html?amp_js_v=a3&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQFKAGwASA%3D#aoh=15872865441371&referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From%20%251%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nytimes.com%2F2019%2F05%2F03%2Fhealth%2Fdengue-vaccine-sanofi.html

I'm not an anti vaxxer but ALL medications/drugs can have side effects and severe reactions. I dont know why people act as if vaccines are somehow special. You can have a horrible reaction to penicillin so I dont know why vaccines would be thought of as magically safe.
The flu vaccine Pandemrix was studied and implicated to have caused narcolepsy in Europe for example.
Again, I'm NOT an anti vaxxer but any medical intervention can potentially cause harm. Its a whole subject and its called Iatrogenesis.

My thoughts though are that with any drug or treatment offered to me, I can research the known side effects, the rates at which they occur, and obviously the older the drug the more data is available. Even with a new drug or treatment there is the trial data available. That enables me to.make an informed decision as to whether I want to go ahead or not.

I was offered Infliximab as a treatment for Crohn's disease when it was newly available and I declined it because there just was not enough known about the long term effects for me to be comfortable taking it. I would take it now if I needed to.

Likewise, I had a surgical treatment done a few years ago. The safety data that was available was comprehensive. It was considered very safe with a particular complication occuring 1:10,000. I decided that was an acceptable risk for me.and went ahead. I was the 1:10,000 people. But, I had consented knowing the risks and the benefits and accepted that.

Will.we have sufficient data to be able to give informed consent?

I heard they thought they were going to microchip us all........

I’m not antivax at all, but am feeling very cautious about a covid-19 vaccine. The moment that I started to get concerned was when I heard the Oxford lab were already manufacturing at scale, while trials were still ongoing, as they are so sure that this drug will fly through trials and pass everything. There’s a lot of money and PR at risk there.

As a result, I’m reserving judgment on covid-19 vaccines until I see which ones become licensed, from where, and hopefully at least some clinical data.

On a personal level, I have underlying conditions, but not relevant ones to covid-19. I tend to have unpredictable reactions to medications and vaccinations. But as far as getting Covid-19 goes, I have no risk factors at all. Therefore my current thinking is that I’m personally better off not having a vaccine. And tbh I don’t see why I should risk my health (& therefore my future & my family’s future) in order to potentially save others. View that as you will.

The reality is there’s too little data on any potential vaccines, and too little data on who is actually dying from Covid-19 to make an informed decision.

I would think it would be more efficient to look at treatment options rather than vaccination tbh.

There’s a lot of money and PR at risk there.

If money and PR is their motivation, they won't take the risk of widespread negative side effects. What they've staked so far would be a drop in the ocean by comparison.

5% of COVID-19 deaths are people considered healthy. 0.0001% of people suffer serious side effects from vaccines. I know which gamble I'd rather take!

0.0001% of people suffer serious side effects from vaccines.

How can you know the percentage risk of a vaccine that hasn't even been developed yet? That's the point - they might no the extent of potential side effects at the point when they start wide spread vaccination.