What happens about the unvaccinated ?

[vera99]

There is a lot of speculation about how many will buy into the continuing vaccination program. Some has said 20% won't but I'm sure it will be less than that. We don't know any would be refuseniks. But say it's 10% and suppose Covid will become stronger and therefore potentially more lethal and troublesome will that not lead to many more deaths and hospitalisations amongst this cohort and by doing so threaten the capacity of the hospital's once again ? Hopefully not of course does anyone know of any modelling around that outcome. Therapeutics of course will be of importance to lessen any resultant disease and persuading the currently unpersuaded remains of paramount importance. The stick of no vaccine no travel or no entry will be a great persuader no doubt as well.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow

To achieve herd immunity 90% of the population need to be vaccinated or immune.

I’ve understood that immunity from catching the disease doesn’t last.

Therefore a belt and braces approach i.e vaccinating those who’ve had the virus respects the fact that we live in a small densely populated island where it spreads easily.

It’s about respect for the population as a whole.

The level of immunity required for herd immunity depends on the virus.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow

we’re talking of wider society and the concept of respect, right - please tell me - if you personally touch something infected with the deadly virus, then proceed to touch someone’s hand and transfer the virus: does then it matter if you’re vaccinated in that interaction?

Yeah, because you could just as easily touch yourself. And if the person you touch was vaccinated then they wouldn’t get it. What’s not to get?

I don’t know much about how it transfers, but the vaccine seems to reduce the chances of passing it on.

‘What’s not to get?’

Actually, if they are vaccinated there is NO guarantee that they won’t still get it. Where have you read that it stops all people from contracting it??? This is incorrect information.

If the vaccine is so effective - as you have just claimed, then WHY are you concerned about those who don’t get it? Like seriously why?

Question right back at you - what’s there not to get?

I’ve understood that immunity from catching the disease doesn’t last.

We don't know anything of the sort. Antibodies are produced if you've had Covid and can be found in the blood up to a year later (this may extend as time goes by and Covid has been around longer). Then after that you will have T-cell memory as well. There's no reason to think we won't be immune for life to COV-SARS-2, unless it completely mutates away from it's current forms.

Israel are aiming for herd immunity with 90% vaccination.

I’m not sure what you mean, no it’s not 100% effective but it is massively effective so will protect people who have it to a fairly large degree.

Those who don’t get the vaccine could enable mutations, could infect those who are unable to have it.

It’s people’s rights to decide if they want a medical intervention or not and forcing people through legislation, coercion or any other means is fundamentally wrong particularly for something with such a low infection rate . We don’t do it for measles and people choose to vaccinate based on the risk which incidentally is much higher that covid.

This is not the first time a vaccine was pushed in response to a pandemic. It was found to be the wrong approach then and resulted in countries paying millions unnecessary .

People should be entitled to do their research and make their decision and I think you will find that could drive a better outcome

Nerdygirl have a look at this too. These are doing research too on children who caught covid:
www.longcovidkids.org/

If the vaccine is so effective - as you have just claimed, then WHY are you concerned about those who don’t get it? Like seriously why?

I have people around me who can't have the vaccine for valid medical purposes and depend somewhat on strangers to ensure their long term health.
Sadly the last year has proved that most people don't give a fuck about a strangers welfare if it means the slightest inconvenience for them.
I am concerned because every single person who choses not to get vaccinated increases the very real risk for someone I care deeply about.

My last post does not mean I think the vaccine should be mandatory. I fully support free choice. But you have to consider the consequences of your choices on others when weighing up the pros and cons.

Nerdygirl,
I completely agree.

I fully support free choice. But

I’m not racist but....
I’m not homophobic but...

@LarryWasAHappyChap

If the vaccine is so effective - as you have just claimed, then WHY are you concerned about those who don’t get it? Like seriously why?

I have people around me who can't have the vaccine for valid medical purposes and depend somewhat on strangers to ensure their long term health.
Sadly the last year has proved that most people don't give a fuck about a strangers welfare if it means the slightest inconvenience for them.
I am concerned because every single person who choses not to get vaccinated increases the very real risk for someone I care deeply about.

People don’t give a fuck? Are you serious? Do you have any idea what people have sacrificed this year for strangers’ welfare? It’s a hell of a lot more than a slight inconvenience.

The majority of people with underlying health conditions also recover from this virus btw.

But this is about the health of the entire nation.

Nothing to do with homophobia and racism. These characteristics aren’t a threat to public health!

I think acceptance of the vaccine will drop rapidly once you get to the age groups below 40 who aren't at risk. And, in my opinion, rightly so. I think the vaccine should only be offered to those who are routinely offered the flu jab, as it's a similar group of people at risk.

We can't vaccinate everyone in the UK twice a year, every year. Not when you consider the fact that the majority of 'vaccine centres' will be used for other things when restrictions are lifted. Ours is the local sports stadium for example.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow

But this is about the health of the entire nation.

Nothing to do with homophobia and racism. These characteristics aren’t a threat to public health!

The point I was making is Thad if you say you support free choice and add ‘but’ the fact is that you don’t support free choice at all.

*that

@Pensionista

Please tell me how you can make a comment about a link that would take you at least half an hour to read.

I said at the start of my previous comment that I didn't read it all, I only skimmed the first quarter of it. How can I comment on it? Because I'm a random person on the internet, not a scientist, lawyer, journalist. There is no duty of due diligence etc, I can interact with it at whatever level I choose.

I read so far, it seemed implausible, I was not motivated to read further. I might go back and have another look later, if I feel so inclined.

You suggest I google the scientist. Well, I may just do that. However, the people who developed the vaccines and the people in the MHRA who approved them are also scientists and clearly have a different view or the vaccines would not have been approved for use. Yes, it's an emergency licence - because we are in an emergency.

Andrew Wakefield was also a doctor when he wrote his infamous and wrong paper on MMR. The fact that one person has credentials does not necessarily mean they are right about everything.

The people with scientific and medical credentials who are describing the vaccines as dangerous are vastly, vastly outnumbered by people with the same credentials who think it is fantastic and can't administer it fast enough.

Who are lay people supposed to believe? I think the rational choice is to go with the overwhelming majority of credentialled people rather than the small number saying something different. That's my choice.

@LindaEllen

I think acceptance of the vaccine will drop rapidly once you get to the age groups below 40 who aren't at risk. And, in my opinion, rightly so. I think the vaccine should only be offered to those who are routinely offered the flu jab, as it's a similar group of people at risk.

We can't vaccinate everyone in the UK twice a year, every year. Not when you consider the fact that the majority of 'vaccine centres' will be used for other things when restrictions are lifted. Ours is the local sports stadium for example.

doubt in the future it'll be 2 vaccines for every one , once the virus calms down and it becomes less of a problem only those at risk will be vaccinated (like it happens with the flu)

We have 3 Millennial Ds’s, all in their 20’s.

They and their friends really really want the vaccine. They won’t be turning it down, they want to go on holiday. Even if Britain doesn’t have ‘vaccine passports’ Europe will.

Arsel- my 21 DT’s are waiting for the day when their age group are offered the vaccine. They and their friends want it as soon as possible.

@ArseInTheCoOpWindow

We have 3 Millennial Ds’s, all in their 20’s.

They and their friends really really want the vaccine. They won’t be turning it down, they want to go on holiday. Even if Britain doesn’t have ‘vaccine passports’ Europe will.

The uptake of the vaccine in a lot of countries in Europe is much lower than the U.K.

Yeah, but Europe want the vaccine passports for travel not the UK

Quite a few 16 year olds have been vaccinated already but going back to school with only a couple of weeks of antibodies in them. It would have been nicer for them and all the clinically vulnerable to have 3 weeks worth of antibodies in them (and teachers in general). Thank goodness my child is now 16 and is allowed to have the vaccine. She was healthy until a virus she had at 15 gave her a brain injury (the virus she caught was never identified). I am very grateful she’s had the vaccination. Her older sister and all their friends want it ASAP.

PuzzeledObserver,

If your going to comment and debate on someones post, you first have to read it, whether your a scientist, lawyer, journalist, or any other profession. Yes, there is no obligation to read it all, but don't expect to put up a credible argument against it without knowing all the facts. I do not have a different view of these new gene therapies, as I am informed about them, something you seemed to have 'skimmed' over . You seem to be under the impression that because Government Paid Scientists say they are safe, that must be gospel. Your assumption that the people with scientific and medical credentials that disagree with the Gov scientists are in the minority and are vastly outnumbered by people with the same credentials . I wonder how you came to that conclusion ? Is there a survey or the like on it? Or could it be listening to gov scientists every day for a year using techniques like NLP and repetition has somewhat clouded your opinion, while the rest of us dont just follow but research. You think it's rational to just believe government without question ? There are BILLIONS being made out of these vaccines. Chris Whitty accepted 40 million dollars from Bill Gates to research into the treatment and prevention of malaria. If you go down the Rabbit hole, many connections can be made from gov scientists to Big Pharma.
I never mentioned Andrew Wakefield as it's not relevant, because we could argue all day which Scientist is or is not correct. My initial post on exactly how these new gene therapies work from a well respected SENIOR SCIENTIST IN MOLECULAR CELL RESEARCH was to inform, not argue , as her FACTS cannot be refuted by any other scientist worth their salt. Make of it what you will, that's your choice. I don't want to be a lab rat, that's my choice. I will wait and see how this pans out. I have already had covid, it wasn't pleasant and took three weeks for me to recover, and recover I did at 77 years of age. I am pro choice, and I won't be used as a weapon to save the so called human race. I can decide for myself as others must do without being made to feel they are some sort of selfish human being.

@Parker231

The vaccination programme is not an experiment. The three Covid vaccines currently approved for use in the UK have already been shown to be safe and effective in clinical trials.

It’s normal that authorities continue to monitor the safety of these vaccines even after they have been approved. This monitoring happens with all vaccines, including those that have been in use for years, to detect any adverse effects. Just because studies into these vaccines are continuing, doesn’t mean anyone getting the vaccine in the nationwide roll-out is part of an experiment.

When people say 'experimental' they are referring to the vaccine technology itself, both mRNA and DNA vaccines which have never, ever been used on populations before. They have been used on a very small scale in Ebola outbreaks but these vaccines are very, very new otherwise. We don't and can't know the longer term effects. It's not a case of saying 'well, other vaccines don't have long term effects so these cannot'. They are not the same.

That being said I support anyone who wants to get it. Most of my family are doing so. At the end of the day everyone has the same access to information, media, studies etc. People have different risk profiles and different attitudes to risk. As the scientists say, vaccines make sense at a population level but not always at the individual level.

While I support those that want it, I expect people to be able to refuse it without consequence since it is brand new, experimental and real world trials are still ongoing. What kind of society are we that we would force people who have already sacrificed so much to take a risk they don't want to take with medication that has shown to have serious and unexpected side effects in lots of people. And by force, I mean refuse to return their liberties that were confiscated in the name of 'protecting the NHS and saving lives' with the understanding that they would be returned without expecting participation in a medical trial.

@Pensionista

I haven’t called you selfish. In fact, I don’t think I have made any comment on you at all. I also haven’t tried to badger you into having a vaccine.

You didn’t mention Andrew Wakefield, that’s right. I did, as an example of someone who, despite his credentials, made the wrong judgement, and has ended up harming a lot of people by it.

Re the number of scientists arguing for/against vaccines.... hmmm... well, yes I suppose it is an assumption on my part that there are more for than against. I do not know of any survey, that’s for sure. I suppose I come to this conclusion partly because of news coverage, but also because of family members, neighbours and friends. I have six medics in my family, several among my friends and others among my circle. They have been nothing but keen to have and give the vaccines.

I’ve had Covid too. No, it wasn’t pleasant, but it wasn’t dreadful either - and according to the latest government assessment, I am CEV. However, my medical friends/family have been telling me about the numbers and types of people they have been seeing in ITU. Some lived, some died. Thankfully the numbers are going down. That is currently due in large measure to lockdown, but increasingly vaccines are making the difference. They are seeing the age of those in hospital fall.

If we want to get out of lockdown - and I really do - without our hospitals being overrun, we have to vaccinate.