Had my invite, but how can I find out in advance which jab I'll be getting?

[PerspicaciousGreen]

I got one of the new shielding letters last week moving me into group six for vaccines, and had my invite today. I've been offered a choice of two centres: one place a short walk away, one absolutely miles and miles away. Plenty of appointments next week, but no information other than an appointment time to select and an address.

I will only accept certain vaccines due to religious reasons, so I would like to find out what vaccine they are distributing at each centre before I book an appointment. The close one is an ex youth centre and I googled their phone number but no one answered - presumably because the office is closed.

I don't want to waste an appointment by booking and then having to find out it's the wrong one when I get there. I suppose I could walk past it and drop in, but that seems like madness covid-wise.

WWYD?

@KeepWashingThoseHands anti-choicers have never been known for their logic, compassion or consistent thought structures. Nothing new here.

@ineedaholidaynow

If COVID passports/certificates are brought in, I wonder if religious beliefs will have to be taken into account, or as many religious leaders are saying vaccines are fine, they might not and people will have to accept they might not be able to have the same access to activities as vaccinated people do

I think people will have access to activities as long as they're prepared to take a Covid test.

Be ironic if you can only go to religious activities if you have vaccine passport and you have refused to have the vaccine on religious grounds!

What an amazingly privileged position to be in, to be able to feel you can be choosy over which vaccine you get. If you’re planning on turning down certain vaccines then I agree with your earlier comment, you should decline a vaccine at this time, to avoid wasting an appointment slot.

This is nuts and I am glad OP is declining the appointment —bet she doesn’t—

Also pleasing to see other Catholics on this thread not following this nonsense line of thinking. I would have thought a lot of modern medicine is built on a less than desirable history. I wonder how much of modern medicine the OP declines?

Whatever your views on abortion, this tiny baby is going to save a vast number of people from death and disease. So it's short life was worthwhile.

Suggest you Google Savita Halappanavar as a starting point

Fucking hell, that’s a leap from refusing a vaccine @SomersetHamlyn! More dramatic than I ever dreamed possible.

It's the aborted baby that is driving OPs opinion on which vaccine to have.

The case just shows not all abortions are bad and that the mother could have been saved by having one

@dementedpixie - I agree.

The OP is using her religion’s anti-choice beliefs to refuse a vaccine, people are pointing out the consequences of the Catholic Churches policies in this area. Not dramatic at all. I consider letting a woman die because you believe a higher being gives a foetus a greater right to life than it’s mother, reducing women to no more than an oven, much more dramatic.

@VinylDetective

What you do NOT have the right to do is put someone else at risk, which you would do by taking an appointment and then declining the vaccine. That is evil, selfish and disgusting, and by putting that course of action down to your religion you make your religion look evil, selfish and disgusting

Oh, chill out. You make it sound like it’s on a par with eating babies.

For the benefit of people who don’t read threads, this is the drama I referred to.

At the time the foetus for this cell line was aborted, abortion was illegal in the Netherlands unless to save the life of the mother. At least that’s my understanding. So the life of the mother was at risk here.

Sorry to sound like a stuck record - BOTH vaccines (and a shit ton of other drugs) have been exposed to/tested/manufactured in the cell line in question by the OP.

I literally cannot say this enough, if people want to object on religious grounds that is their prerogative but they really need to know what they’re talking about first.

This is not an either/or debate on religious grounds as NEITHER vaccine is acceptable based on what the OP has stated (despite the Pope saying it’s ok but what does he know).

[quote MacDuffsMuff]@takemetomars I didn't advise it. I merely responded to your comment to another poster who had.

Why would it be multiplied by hundreds? I don't think most people would have to need to ring their GP about this would they? But some may. My MIL has cancer, has seizures and brittle asthma. If her GP had not taken the time to discuss her concerns, she just wouldn't have had the vaccination. No one is suggesting for one minute that everyone ring their GP about this, as I said above, most won't need to. But what do you suggest people do if they really have a genuine problem that may stop them from getting vaccinated?[/quote]
But you did advise it. And they are. Ringing in their hundreds. Our phone lines are jammed with enquiries, not all of the time but enough for it to be a real problem Perhaps you should listen to the facts as presented to you by those who are actually dealing with this on the frontline?

Thinking on this a bit, isn’t a significant (don’t know the data) percentage of the Catholic following in poor, undeveloped countries? Countries which don’t yet have access to the vaccine? Where infrastructure is so basic that there’s no data even on Covid cases in circulation, let alone deaths resulting from it? Where healthcare for those who live daily life so far below the poverty line we can only imagine their circumstances, is an unaffordable luxury? I wonder what these followers of the Catholic faith are supposed to do when the mobile vaccination truck turns up in their villages and towns in 2023 or beyond. Are they lesser Catholics for not checking if they’re receiving the Pfizer, or the AZ, or the Moderna and exercising their right to choose, on the basis “my body, my choice”?

Of course the pope is saying take any bloody vaccine. His faithful following could be decimated if he didn’t. Anybody who follows religious dogma without consideration to politics and money is a blind fool (to put it mildly) imo.

@ARoseDowntown - they certainly didn’t care about the decimation of their flock in developing countries during the AIDS epidemic, so not sure that argument holds sway.

[quote TitusPullo]@ARoseDowntown - they certainly didn’t care about the decimation of their flock in developing countries during the AIDS epidemic, so not sure that argument holds sway.[/quote]
That was because it was killing off "sinners" - and that's totally OK.

That tiny baby in 1973 who never got to live is very sad. But he or she has, through their death, literally saved thousands and thousands and thousands of lives. I think that isn't a bad legacy

It wasn't a baby, and there's nothing sad about it at all, and a foetus can't have a legacy, but apart from that, yep.

@SerendipityJane - oh yes of course! My bad.

@hatedbytheDailyMail - I completely agree with you. Well said.