Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Would you take the vaccine for COVID if it became available?

246 replies

weltonn · 22/10/2020 00:48

I'm undecided. Would you?

OP posts:
toxtethOgradyUSA · 22/10/2020 09:26

I'd take it if I could have cast iron proof that all those involved in its development and signing it off were taking it.
The rushed nature of this is a real issue for me. People keep going on about regulators but in many cases these regulators are staffed by ex-big pharma people. It's a close knit community.
How much pressure will they all have been under to get this thing over the line (particularly given the stratospheric financial rewards on offer)?
So, on balance, no, not yet.

GreenPlum · 22/10/2020 09:40

It's not 'rushed'.

We've got to this stage faster than usual because of a combination of factors.

1, China shared the virus DNA with the rest of the world very early which saved a lot of time. 2, They had already done a lot of ground work with the sars and mers vaccines so they had a head start. 3, They have not had to struggle to obtain funding. 4, They have not had to struggle to obtain volunteers. 5, The regulatory bodies have all agreed to put covid vaccine cases at the front of the queue so there are no delays due to time simply spent waiting in line.

At no point has safety been compromised and the processes of analysis peer reviews are in place as usual.

larrygrylls · 22/10/2020 09:48

@PuzzledObserver,

Great post. People should read and digest it.

toxtethOgradyUSA · 22/10/2020 09:49

At no point has safety been compromised
You simply cannot say this with any authority, so please stop talking bollocks GreenPlum
Of course it has been bloody rushed! Talk to anybody involved off the record and they would admit that in a hearbeat.

TheCountessofFitzdotterel · 22/10/2020 09:55

Sarah Gilbert’s three adult children had it in April.

MrsSchadenfreude · 22/10/2020 10:08

Absolutely. Not the Chinese or Russian one, but the British one, or one from another reliable country that has been extensively tested, and is safe.

WiseUpJanetWeiss · 22/10/2020 10:28

@PhilCornwall1

Your body, your choice and all that, but I don’t want to be around unvaccinated people. They’ll prevent us from achieving herd immunity.

How are you going to know who has been vaccinated or not, are you going to ask everyone you come into contact with?

No of course not. I realise I will have no choice to be around unvaccinated people, but I don’t want to be.
Sunshinegirl82 · 22/10/2020 10:33

Everybody should listen to this podcast, it's excellent and deals with a large number of common concerns that people seem to have.

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m000mj18

unchienandalusia · 22/10/2020 10:34

Yes in a flash.

RhubarbTea · 22/10/2020 10:34

No.

Moondust001 · 22/10/2020 10:53

@toxtethOgradyUSA

At no point has safety been compromised You simply cannot say this with any authority, so please stop talking bollocks GreenPlum Of course it has been bloody rushed! Talk to anybody involved off the record and they would admit that in a hearbeat.
This is the bollocks. You haven't spoken to anyone "on" or "off" the record who is claiming this at all. You are simply demonstrating your ignorance of the world. Of course there are financial benefits to companies landing vaccines. This is the way companies work - they do think to make profits. You may not have noticed this, but the world is capitalist. It does not operate on charitable effort. It is about making money. Why would you think, therefore, that pharma companies shouldn't be about profit?

They would also be complete idiots to compromise safety or effectiveness, or to in any way operate in a less than scrupulous manner - because if anything goes wrong with something they produce, whether knowingly or not, you can guarantee that the company will be hit by so many court cases and sanctions that they will cease to exist within months. Yes, they may be huge multi-nationals with incomes that rival that of some countries - but this is a world wide pandemic, and screw with the world and you can guarantee that the world can bring any multii-national to its knees.

The reason why other vaccines have taken time to develop are two fold. Initially, and still to some small extent, we needed the science to be able to do it, and do it in the safest way possible. Scientific advancement in just the last 20 years outstrips all of that in the previous 50 or so years. That advancement in the previous 50 years outstrips centuries of scientific advancement. And it hasn't finished advancing yet. It will get better and faster - but by all previous standards, what we have now, with, for once, a world that actually has a common goal, is the platinum standard of scientific development to find that effective vaccine.

The second reason why is can be done much faster is very simple - money. Billions have been thrown at the development of this vaccine, and that is simply something that has never happened before. Take HIV as a comparison - in comparison the amount invested in a vaccine for HIV in total and over more than a decade is significantly less than has been invested in a coronavirus vaccine in the last six months! Why? Because HIV has suffered from being the "gay disease" or "the African disease" and since "we" aren't gay or African, it isn't a priority.

Compare Ebola - which now does have a vaccine. It is a terrible disease and a real killer virus. But it affects few people and they are all African, not even most of Africa. How much money was invested in developing a vaccine. You couldn't, quite literally couldn't, find anyone who wanted to invest in it. It wasn't worth anything to anyone except a bunch of poor Africans who couldn't afford it anyway. But they very minute that a handful of Europeans / Americans contracted it, and there was widespread hysteria bout how "we" might be in danger from it (which was simply never even remotely possible) and two decades of research was suddenly off the back boiler and it took months to land a vaccine.

Perversely, that very research into an Ebola vaccine has underpinned one of the coronovirus vaccine strategies, and provided a headstart for developers.

You are peddling fake news and disinformation, and you need to stop.

Aragog · 22/10/2020 10:57

Yes.

I currently have COVID. I've been in bed for over a week. I'm still shattered. My limbs ache and my breathing is laboured if I do much. However, I think image turned a corner and my chest feels a little,less tight and I think I may be coughing a bit less today.

Regardless I'd rather avoid having this again, so if immunity is short then yes - I'll take the vaccine, just like like I have a flu vaccine each year.

toxtethOgradyUSA · 22/10/2020 11:05

You are peddling fake news and disinformation, and you need to stop
No, Moondust001 you need to stop being all high and mighty as well as putting words in the mouths of others. I never once said I had spoken to anybody in the industry - stop just making things up to suit your argument, it makes you sound silly.
I responded to a question raised by the OP and offered reasons as to why, no, I would not take the vaccine. It was an OPINION. You really need to learn the difference between an opinion and somebody presenting something as FACT. It's quite important.
As for your suggestion: "They would also be complete idiots to compromise safety or effectiveness, or to in any way operate in a less than scrupulous manner"
So there have never in history been any scandals involving the pharmaceuticals or the aggro sectors? Are you having a laugh?

BiBabbles · 22/10/2020 11:06

Probably not for a while. I suspect even with the funding that there will be supply issues and I want those in higher-risk groups and living lives that have been more greatly impacted by COVID to have the first go. I want to those who have loved ones and things they've been denied because of all this to be covered first - I can wait.

Other than the masks, my 'living like this' isn't much different to how I was living pre-COVID. It's certainly brought home how isolated I can get, but neither I nor my kids have grandparents we're missing or anything time pressing like that.

I don't think it's part of the plan, but if they started giving it in schools, I'd sign the consent forms for them, but otherwise, as a low risk family, there isn't much of a reason for us to rush out and get it as soon as it's available. Even in the ways it sucks for all of us, we can keep going as things are for longer than others without it being as detrimental as it would be for others that I thing should be before us in the queue.

yearinyearout · 22/10/2020 11:09

Everyone saying "a rushed vaccine" this has had so much money and manpower thrown at it to get it done faster than normal, it's not like they're just saying "oh we'll wing it and see how it goes!"

IcedPurple · 22/10/2020 11:09

I'd be rolling up my sleeve right now if the vaccine were ready!

rooarsome · 22/10/2020 11:14

I don't feel that I have enough information to make an informed judgment right now, so no.

BatleyTownswomensGuild · 22/10/2020 11:20

Currently in my second week of COVID, would bite lab technician's arm off to have a vaccine and never get this again....

countrygirl99 · 22/10/2020 11:29

It's up to people whether they take it or not but once it's available people aren't going to live with restrictions.

110APiccadilly · 22/10/2020 11:35

Given that the head of the roll out said that for people in my age group with no underlying conditions it wouldn't be offered as (I paraphrase) the chance of freak damage from the vaccine was greater than the chance of damage from the virus, no.

And I'm vaccinated against other things.

WunWun · 22/10/2020 11:37

Those saying no because of pregnancy - it's not likely to be available while you're still pregnant!

timeforawine · 22/10/2020 11:37

Once it’s passed testing & approved - yep!

Moondust001 · 22/10/2020 12:24

@toxtethOgradyUSA

You said, and I quote "Of course it has been bloody rushed! Talk to anybody involved off the record and they would admit that in a hearbeat." That is a statement, not an opinion. There is no evidence to support that statement, so you are peddling disinformation and fake news. You have no evidence, and there is not a shred of evidence anywhere, to support your claim.

movingonup20 · 22/10/2020 12:26

Not unless I could have an antibody test first as I had suspected covid in March. Would rather not put chemicals with the minimum of testing into my body needlessly

BlueBlancmange · 22/10/2020 12:49

@toxtethOgradyUSA

You are peddling fake news and disinformation, and you need to stop No, Moondust001 you need to stop being all high and mighty as well as putting words in the mouths of others. I never once said I had spoken to anybody in the industry - stop just making things up to suit your argument, it makes you sound silly. I responded to a question raised by the OP and offered reasons as to why, no, I would not take the vaccine. It was an OPINION. You really need to learn the difference between an opinion and somebody presenting something as FACT. It's quite important. As for your suggestion: "They would also be complete idiots to compromise safety or effectiveness, or to in any way operate in a less than scrupulous manner" So there have never in history been any scandals involving the pharmaceuticals or the aggro sectors? Are you having a laugh?
If you haven't spoken to any one in the industry then it isn't right to present as a fact what you speculate they would say about it were you to speak to them.
Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is closed and is no longer accepting replies. Click here to start a new thread.