Anti vaxxers in full force today!

[Shekinah1]

I keep seeing anti vaccine threads. False info about immunity passports and that the vaccine is going to be compulsory.

It is not going to be compulsory.

Health passports are going to be ridiculously hard to implement they can’t even manage track and trace fgs.

Get a grip

@GoldenOmber

Serum from Italians who had been vaccinated with a different pandemic vaccine from Novartis, called Focetria, did not have such antibodies

So other swine flu vaccines using the same flu virus did not cause narcolepsy, only Pandremix. You cannot categorically state that it was caused by the flu virus that was in the vaccine. It's still an unknown after all these years.

@pastandpresent

People deliberately starting many scaremongering threads

If there is a fact or real possibility of something happening that is scary, and someone articulates that fear, expresses concern and starts a thread about that issue, why is this labelled as 'scaremongering'?

Most posters are quoting newspaper articles, research papers, company websites, etc. Who can decree that this is misinformation and should be censored?

You cannot categorically state that it was caused by the flu virus that was in the vaccine. It's still an unknown after all these years.

Which is why I didn’t ‘categorically state’ that. I used the word ‘probably’.

Please could you stop huffily telling me off for things that I didn’t say?

[quote trulydelicious]@pastandpresent

People deliberately starting many scaremongering threads

If there is a fact or real possibility of something happening that is scary, and someone articulates that fear, expresses concern and starts a thread about that issue, why is this labelled as 'scaremongering'?

Most posters are quoting newspaper articles, research papers, company websites, etc. Who can decree that this is misinformation and should be censored?[/quote]
A lot of what is being linked is being misrepresented or from dubious sources. Apparently a lot of people can’t read a paper or article for themselves and conclude that actually it isn’t saying what the person who linked it said it was saying. And many don’t bother to check the legitimacy of sources. That’s how misinformation is propagated.

[quote trulydelicious]@musicalfrog

People not accepting perfectly legitimate answers to those questions - you know, the ones who deliberately ignore the answers - they are the ones that really piss me off.

Why shoud they accept the answers? They don't agree with them[/quote]
Why ask questions if you're not going to accept legitimate, scientifically backed up answers? THAT is the difference between someone just asking questions, and someone who wants to stir up a load of shit.

RNA is already 'used'. It's part of the virus, and so it's part of all vaccines that use a weakened virus. These vaccines only use a bit of the RNA, rather than the whole thing. RNA is not a mysterious new substance we don't understand

That's not quite right. RNA (ribonucleic acid) makes up the genome of the COV-SARS-2 virus. mRNA isn't the same thing in terms of its role - it's messenger RNA, it's not 'part of the virus'. However mRNA is transcribed from the virus's RNA, in the case of this vaccine, the segment of RNA that has been transcribed into mRNA codes for the spike protein. It is this mRNA that is used in the vaccine, the virus's genomic RNA is not there at all.

When the vaccine is injected, the virus mRNA for the spike protein is then translated by our body's protein-assembling mechanisms (using tRNA (transferRNA and rRNA (ribosomalRNA) to collect and join up the required amino acids to make the spike protein). At that point our body says, 'What is this? This spike protein is an invader, it shouldn't be here, quick, get the immune system!' and that triggers the generation of antibodies.

trulydelicious, I've seen posts/comments that spread misinformation. But I don't think I can convince you, I don't think you feel the same as me.

@CrunchyCarrot

Thank you for explaining this clearly

@TamingToddler I'm sorry to hear how badly your partner is suffering. A good friend recently had a stoma put in, which obviously comes with it's own challenges, is this something they've discussed with him at all? Because those side effects sound horrific

The media is not helping. Twice today I've seen vox pops of unqualified people saying stuff like 'it's dodgy' or 'I just don't trust it'.

The mainstream media could massively help by only talking to experts.

@CrunchyCarrot

RNA is already 'used'. It's part of the virus, and so it's part of all vaccines that use a weakened virus. These vaccines only use a bit of the RNA, rather than the whole thing. RNA is not a mysterious new substance we don't understand

That's not quite right. RNA (ribonucleic acid) makes up the genome of the COV-SARS-2 virus. mRNA isn't the same thing in terms of its role - it's messenger RNA, it's not 'part of the virus'. However mRNA is transcribed from the virus's RNA, in the case of this vaccine, the segment of RNA that has been transcribed into mRNA codes for the spike protein. It is this mRNA that is used in the vaccine, the virus's genomic RNA is not there at all.

When the vaccine is injected, the virus mRNA for the spike protein is then translated by our body's protein-assembling mechanisms (using tRNA (transferRNA and rRNA (ribosomalRNA) to collect and join up the required amino acids to make the spike protein). At that point our body says, 'What is this? This spike protein is an invader, it shouldn't be here, quick, get the immune system!' and that triggers the generation of antibodies.

Brilliantly explained. Thank you.

@TrufflyPig

The media is not helping. Twice today I've seen vox pops of unqualified people saying stuff like 'it's dodgy' or 'I just don't trust it'.

The mainstream media could massively help by only talking to experts.

This is my conspiracy theory. We don't have nearly enough vaccine to meet demand. Not for a while at least.

Much more of a problem than a few anti vaxxers is that many more people want and need the vaccine than can get it.

This is where anti vaxxing comes in. They're a tiny minority yet getting disproportionate media coverage. Why? Because the government is secretly encouraging it - as a means of dampening demand.

I predicted several weeks ago that MPs would jump the queue by 'volunteering to prove it's safe'. Matt Hancock (under 40 and healthy) has now said he plans to do just that...

@SheepandCow I think there is some truth that for now the demand will far outstrip supply but I honestly think the media are doing it for selfish reasons, it makes good clickbait.

This is where anti vaxxing comes in. They're a tiny minority yet getting disproportionate media coverage.

I don’t agree with this. I don’t know what the right amount of media coverage is for sceptics (probably none if we shouldn’t even be questioning if it’s safe). But there are a lot of people who are sceptical right now and I personally think the media coverage is reflecting that. Should the media report on facts and figures, or the opinions of society?

Getting a vaccination when you’re not a scientist or medical professional and can’t understand the technical mumbojumbo relies on two things
(1) the relevant authorities telling you it’s safe
(2) knowing thousands of people before you have had it and been OK (“the proof is in the pudding”)

There is no #2 with a brand new vaccination. We’re relying on #1.
The “relevant authorities” are a government agency and a multi billior dollar company. So two things we don’t typically have a lot of trust in.

Feeling afraid, feeling sceptical, feeling overwhelmed doesn’t make anyone an anti-vaxxer or a moron.

I don’t honestly think there’s anything in the ‘deliberate coverage of anti vaxxers to damp down demand’ theory.
We have more than enough jabs on order if you include the Oxford one and others that haven’t been finished yet. Either it will all go well and we will have plenty or there will be delivery problems or they won’t all get approval in which case even the highest levels of antivax sentiment in the world won’t be enough to cover it up and then we would have a problem once it finally did arrive.
Plus because our ability to predict who is vulnerable is relatively good with this disease because it is so closely related to age. If we have limited doses we will get the greatest benefit from the highest possible coverage in those groups rather than spreading it out across the generations - the last thing we want is for anti vax sentiment to grow among the vulnerable.
I think it’s more that looking for conflict is a way to make an engaging story that you can keep going. ‘Hurrah the vaccine is here’ with a side order of anxiety over whether we can get enough isn’t nearly so engaging and long lasting as ‘scientist says we should have the vaccine but this ordinary man in the street doesn’t want to! Can scientist convince him?’

@ReeseWitherfork

Feeling afraid, feeling sceptical, feeling overwhelmed doesn’t make anyone an anti-vaxxer or a moron.

I agree.

Getting a vaccination when you’re not a scientist or medical professional and can’t understand the technical mumbojumbo

The thing is, there are highly educated people in other fields (not scientists or medical professionals) that are making an effort to investigate as much as possible, read, and understand how these vaccines work conceptually even if they don't understand fully the technical mumbojumbo

They can form an opinion on a conceptual level regardless

Of course people have questions but the wonderful science bods of mumsnet have been answering the 'I just feel it's a bit rushed' question patiently for months.

Yet still they come, every day. I honestly think there should just be a sticky thread at this point explaining how the development has been prioritised, not rushed.

Perhaps we could have t-shirts printed for when we encounter 'I just feel it's a bit rushed' in the wild.

The thing is, there are highly educated people in other fields (not scientists or medical professionals) that are making an effort to investigate as much as possible, read, and understand how these vaccines work conceptually even if they don't understand fully the technical mumbojumbo

But how does the average person do this? And how do we know who to trust? For me, I’m struggling with the sheer amount of “experts”. And also the sheer amount of well-articulated non-experts.

I found those shouting the loudest about being anti vaccine are generally the ones who wouldn't be getting the vaccine anyway at least not for a long time, and also make threats to sue the school if they vaccinate their children when it's always been said children wouldn't be vaccinated

I know of 1 ECV person who has said they won't be having the vaccine, he hasn't the flu vaccine either this year claiming he'd be injected with covid 🤷‍♀️

I’m a cautious vaxxer. I actually don’t have a problem with the speed of approval.i think it’s entirely possible to do things more rapidly and the data has been looked at throughout the process.

My bugbear is the longer term effects of a vaccine. How can we know?

My mum is mid 70s but great health. She isn’t personally at much risk from the virus, even at her age and is understandably nervous. When she asks about longer term effects she is told “they don’t approve things that aren’t safe”. How can they possibly know?!

@Calledyoulastnightfromglasgow that just about mirrors my feelings.

I’m struggling with how “no one can know the long term affects of covid” but there being confidence in the long term safety of the vaccine(s).
Also the “of course it’s safe!”. I refer back to my point about having to trust a government organisation and a multi billion dollar industry.

I think the problem is with the two different things ‘it is safe’ can mean. Is it 100% guaranteed definitely no bad effects on anyone ever? No. Is it based on our existing knowledge of the disease covid and of other vaccines much less likely to result in damage than having the disease? Yes.

One of the main questions for people, is do they feel more at risk by getting the vaccine or by getting Covid.

If they're young and healthy then it might be less straightforward than someone who is ECV and old.

Of course people who dint want the vaccine have a choice, they have to make a choice and then live with the consequences. That might be missing out on flights and holidays or dying of Covid, who knows
What really pisses me off is they way they campaign and spout shite about it on SM and elsewhere to try and persuade other people not to have it. Make your own choice to vax or not but either way stop trying to influence others

I do get that. Nothing is risk free. But to me personally covid is zero risk. Probably to my mum too. My younger sister had covid and took two months to recover. Not ideal but she is overweight (this is not a blame game - an observation based on risk).

I don’t know the long term risks of the covid vaccine. If it was an autoimmune disease or similar, £120k is nothing if I can’t work. I’m in perfect health. I won’t need to make the decision until September luckily if then. But mum needs to make it by January. My other sister is in healthcare and is nervous. She is also in perfect health, there is enormous pressure on them to take the vaccine