To ask if you're not getting the vaccine...

[Soitis83]

Then why? Just curious as to why some people will not get it

@bare123

How are you defining low risk
I'm not - the BMJ are, it's pretty clear if you bother to read the article I linked to.

End of the day, it is a personal choice, I have received all vaccines I have had to up to now and know of someone who was effected by one, whereas I know countless people who have tested positive for covid and luckily are all ok now, I know there are people who have/ are suffering with long covid but I don’t know them and again this is a personal experience with people I know and not people I read or hear about, I appreciate you have your own personal experiences.

Oh so now you're making a decision based only on personal experience (and not a news article about a single doctor in Mexico). Well if that's the barometer for good sense I might as well take up smoking - after all my gran live til 97 whilst smoking 20 a day, so I reckon those cancer risks are probably exaggerated and science is overrated...

We may as well all wilfully ignore scientific evidence, discard masks and carry on as normal. Because your personal opinion and experience is clearly vastly superior to scientific evidence and social responsibility.

Of course not.
And for what it's worth my personal experience is very similar to yours. I'm just able to recognise that my personal anecdote isn't epidemiological evidence.

@Bookworming

data from participants who received a first half dose and a second full booster dose indicate fewer asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections than in the control group, suggesting reduced transmission.

Data is still being collected regarding other vaccines but the Oxford one at least appears to reduce transmission www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(20)30226-3/fulltext

It's true the data across all vaccines is not yet definitive, but it's a shaky basis for rejecting the vaccine.

If we know the vaccines reduce symptoms and are very likely to reduce transmission, and have been shown to be safe, then why would you choose not to have one? What's your decision actually based on?

@Ginfordinner Well at the moment most of us don’t have a choice! But I would say it’s because the risks for certain age groups are relatively low and people are happy to take them. I’m just pointing out that we’ll still reach herd immunity, even if people are turning down the vaccine. Having the virus and recovering is also contributing so there’s no need for people to get worked up about people’s personal choices. If you don’t want to take the risk that’s fine - take the vaccine. Others may make a different decision and that’s fine too.

@Veterinari

I did read the article you linked and I know there are risks to “young and healthy”people as I have mentioned.

No believe it or not I didn’t make this decision based on one doctor, there is a few different reasons such as situations like that and yes personal reasons but I didn’t mention them all on the few messages I have put on this thread, with regards to the smoking a lot of people that have previously smoked but then seen a close family member/ friend develop lung cancer quit after, so yes I suppose you could say that decision can come from a personal experience also.

[quote bare123]@Veterinari

I did read the article you linked and I know there are risks to “young and healthy”people as I have mentioned.

No believe it or not I didn’t make this decision based on one doctor, there is a few different reasons such as situations like that and yes personal reasons but I didn’t mention them all on the few messages I have put on this thread, with regards to the smoking a lot of people that have previously smoked but then seen a close family member/ friend develop lung cancer quit after, so yes I suppose you could say that decision can come from a personal experience also.[/quote]
Do what you like but don't spread misinformation as justification for you personal decision.
At least try and be a responsible member of society.

@Veterinari

What false information did I spread?

[quote bare123]@Veterinari

What false information did I spread?[/quote]
There is not yet proof the vaccine doesn’t stop you catching and then transmitting the virus, it only stops people who have received it from getting seriously ill.

The Oxford vaccine has been shown to reduce transmission, and whilst the science is still emerging, it's likely the other vaccines will too. So there are societal as well as personal benefits. Don't discourage others based on your own flawed assumptions

I'm not having it after nearly ending up in hospital twice after having the flu jab & ending up with pneumonia.

@Veterinari

Actually they are not 100% sure if it stops transmitting, which is why people who received it still have to wear masks etc because there is a possibility they can transmit it to someone who hasn’t.

I’m not discouraging anyone, I’m giving an opinion as a question was asked, I’m sure everyone reading here can make up their own minds based on actual research and not from an anon on Mumsnet.

@Veterinari

*@Bookworming*

data from participants who received a first half dose and a second full booster dose indicate fewer asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections than in the control group, suggesting reduced transmission.

Data is still being collected regarding other vaccines but the Oxford one at least appears to reduce transmission www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(20)30226-3/fulltext

It's true the data across all vaccines is not yet definitive, but it's a shaky basis for rejecting the vaccine.

If we know the vaccines reduce symptoms and are very likely to reduce transmission, and have been shown to be safe, then why would you choose not to have one? What's your decision actually based on?

@bare123

You said there's no proof the vaccine reduces transmission - that is not true as shown in the study I linked earlier - the evidence indicates the Oxford vaccine does.

Unless you genuinely believe that less than 100% proof = no proof then you have no basis for your scaremongering. Abd if you think less than 100%=0 I can't help you.

The evidence supports reduces transmission in the Oxford vaccine and its very likely that other vaccines will also reduce viraemic shedding and thus reduce transmission.

Interesting isn't it that you're asking for 100% proof to change your flawed assertions yet not actually using any evidence at all to support them. Just your own personal experience which apparently supersedes all scientific evidence....

Surely logic suggests if you do not develop a cough, you aren’t going to spread droplets and aerosols as rapidly as if you got sick and coughed profusely. If your symptoms are mind or asymptomatic you aren’t shedding a huge viral load all over other people. The issue is asymptomatic people passing the virus on to people who are high risk and unvaccinated. By vaccinating you are protecting those who need it more than you do

There is info here

www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4851