To refuse the vaccine for this reason

[SEmyarse]

Goodness know why I'm doing this since I'm most averse to being flamed and I'm going to get grilled alive.

My reason being that I don't think that it will work. I don't mean the vaccine itself, I have no specialist knowledge. I mean the whole strategy of vaccinating everyone.

So we're told that the vaccine is good for personal protection. Got it - no-one wants to die of this nasty disease.
And then we're told that its good to protect those around us. Absolutely got it - even if there's a possibility of nasty side effects, I'm not important in the grand scheme, it's a risk assessment for everyone's benefit.

So of course I'd get the vaccine if those were the only considerations.
But surely that only works if we're isolated from the rest of the world. I know there's been lots of talk of helping poorer countries with their vaccine programmes, but really? We're expecting countries who struggle with persistent poverty, illness, war to prioritise this? It's just not going to happen is it? I just can't see it. And it really feels like we're just doing it to stop them giving it back to us.

And even within our own country, and even with our apparently very successful roll-out, I can't see this being sustainable. We already know that it's going to have to be repeated very frequently. Volunteers won't do it forever, halls etc can't be commandeered forever can they? The numbers are way bigger than the flu scheme.

So then we're back to risk assessment. I'm still not massively bothered by the possibility of side effects, but it does seem unwise to take it if I genuinely don't believe it will work or make things better.

In fact I'd go so far as to say that I'm concerned it's going to make things worse. If there was any way of having the young catch it in fairly quick succession, so from a super spreader, surely that would be safer. It would be transmitted in a smaller number of moves, thus less likely to mutate. As it is though we are forcing it though narrower channels of transmission (by social distancing etc), from person, to person, to person etc, giving it much more chance to change. Of course there is no way of doing this safely though. And then we have absolutely no influence when it lands abroad in much larger populations who often have no choice but to carry on, and there we are with another variant, with quite a possibility it will change enough to be a problem.

I honestly believe that the only sensible use of vaccines is for the most vulnerable, to do our best in an out of control situation.

Agree with OP. All pandemics in the past ran its course and ended so why this one would not? ESPECIALLY when all clinically vulnerable and old are vaccinated. There is no need for 100% of population to be jabbed, we should let the virus run its course

@JustBeKind111

Agree with OP. All pandemics in the past ran its course and ended so why this one would not? ESPECIALLY when all clinically vulnerable and old are vaccinated. There is no need for 100% of population to be jabbed, we should let the virus run its course

I do think that constant on/off lockdowns will prolong it. But 'letting it rip' is not a popular opinion.

[quote JesusIsAnyNameFree]@katylees

*We clearly needed more hospitals for covid"

You realise that they were all empty during the "pandemic " bar one and have now been mostly torn down as a waste of time*

I love how you just made up what I said 😂[/quote]
verbatim

"And those were built for more covid patients. We clearly needed the hospitals to treat covid,"

we clearly didnt need them did we @JesusIsAnyNameFree

All pandemics in the past ran its course and ended so why this one would not?

I just explained how they "run their course". You need enough people to be immune after infection or vaccination (or you prevent infectious people coming into contact with susceptible people). Which is preferable?

It's almost impossible to eradicate a virus entirely. As long as there is always at least one person (or animal) carrying the virus, there comes a point where there are enough new people (babies or people who have migrated to the area who are not immune) who aren't immune for the next outbreak or immunity wanes in people who were infected before or a mutation arises that evades immunity.

@katylees

I'm not referring to the Nightingales.

All pandemics in the past ran its course and ended so why this one would not?

The bubonic plague ran its course, took a couple of centuries though. Pandemics in recent history have all used interventions along the way. Covid will still run its course with our interventions, the aim is to mitigate the damage of that.

From what I can tell the biggest difference between past pandemics and this one is who it’s affecting and a general disbelief that it’s even possible this might be a reality. If covid had stayed confined to China and neighbouring countries I really don’t think these views would be so rampant.

I don’t recall anyone calling Asian countries who took up mask wearing and followed isolation protocols during SARS and MERS, sheep etc.

I also think it’s highly likely the format of 80’s show ‘tomorrow’s world’ could never make a comeback given how people twist developments and new proposals into conspiracy.

I don’t mean to be mean but you’re not an expert. A lot of what you’ve said really isn’t logical and there are real experts who say we should all get the vaccine and I think we’d be best placed following their expert advice rather than coming to all sorts of strange conclusions based on no expertise!

All pandemics in the past ran its course and ended so why this one would not?

It would, eventually. It’s just a question of collective tolerance for what happens on the way.

The pandemic phase of the greatest wave of the Black Death lasted between 7 and 13 years depending on the source. It killed a third of Europe along the way but then, as you say, it ran its course.

The Spanish flu pandemic was much faster in burning itself out, albeit killing 100 million or so on the way. Of course it had the advantage of a faster flu burnout rate as the incubation period for flu is so much shorter than Covid - people aren’t unknowingly spreading virus for nearly as long.

I wonder how long Covid would take and what it would do on the way, both in direct and indirect impacts giving modern sensitivity against just leaving people to die at home with a big red cross on the door. The truth is that none of us know.

I am actually quite saddened by the responses to OP on this thread. The OP set out a view with her logic behind it. Now I am am not taking a side in this debate but if you disagree with her view and logic then a normal logical counter would be to take her points and explain why they are factually incorrect and propose a different viewpoint.

Instead what we have had is a tirade of ""lets see if think that when you are gasping to breath on a ventilator" "what abouttery smallpox, bubonic plague" "millions will die", "what do you know / you're not an expert/ lets just trust the experts" and "not enough is known about the virus" etc etc.

I understand her view is unpopular but no one has deconstructed her arguments, countered them with an alternative logic to demonstrate why she is wrong.

This triumph of emotion over logical reasoning reminds me of the Brexit debate.

I’m not sure that’s quite fair. I agree there have been those kinds of posts but also a significant number of propel who tried to engage with her arguments in a calm and constructive way.

Plenty of people have done what you have said hasn’t happened - from the logic of why it’s in rich countries’ self-interest to help poor countries with vaccines, that yes the country is capable of vaccinating millions of adults every year, why vaccines reduce not increase the risk of variants, etc.

Unfortunately she chose not to engage with very many of those posts.

if you disagree with her view and logic then a normal logical counter would be to take her points and explain why they are factually incorrect and propose a different viewpoint.

There’s lots of that on this thread, go back and read it again.

but no one has deconstructed her arguments, countered them with an alternative logic to demonstrate why she is wrong

Utter rubbish

@TheKeatingFive

"but no one has deconstructed her arguments, countered them with an alternative logic to demonstrate why she is wrong

Utter rubbish"

+++++

FFS - this is exactly the point I am making. Rather than deconstruct her arguments with logic the full extent of your counter argument is "utter rubbish".

I mean how long did it take you to come up with this in depth thought through counter argument? We may as well be back in medieval times call her a witch and tie her to a stake for blasphemy.

FFS - this is exactly the point I am making. Rather than deconstruct her arguments with logic the full extent of your counter argument is "utter rubbish".

FFS Your comment that no one has deconstructed her argument is utter rubbish. RTFT. Do you really expect TheKeatingFive to go and pull out all the multiple posts that address OP's arguments? I mean there are plenty that list OP's points in bold and counter them one by one...

I am actually quite saddened by the responses to OP on this thread. The OP set out a view with her logic behind it.

There was no logic to the OP

[quote 1dayatatime]@TheKeatingFive

"but no one has deconstructed her arguments, countered them with an alternative logic to demonstrate why she is wrong

Utter rubbish"

+++++

FFS - this is exactly the point I am making. Rather than deconstruct her arguments with logic the full extent of your counter argument is "utter rubbish".

I mean how long did it take you to come up with this in depth thought through counter argument? We may as well be back in medieval times call her a witch and tie her to a stake for blasphemy. [/quote]
Have you RTFT? There are PLENTY of posts which have tried to patiently explain reasoning.

Weirdly, the OP’s posts/responses never really responded to the measured posts - just became slightly more bizarre with well known, modern day, stuff that they weren’t aware of. Which may, in some way, explain some more frustrated responses.

But on the whole, there have been patient and explanatory responses on here.

@1dayatatime have you actually read the thread?

Yesterday 07:48 SEmyarse

My SIL gave birth last week for the third time in 4 years and said she's never been offered it.“

Did she have medical care? It’s on the midwife’s check list, every expectant mother receiving antenatal care is asked about their vaccine status.

[quote 1dayatatime]@TheKeatingFive

"but no one has deconstructed her arguments, countered them with an alternative logic to demonstrate why she is wrong

Utter rubbish"

+++++

FFS - this is exactly the point I am making. Rather than deconstruct her arguments with logic the full extent of your counter argument is "utter rubbish".

I mean how long did it take you to come up with this in depth thought through counter argument? We may as well be back in medieval times call her a witch and tie her to a stake for blasphemy. [/quote]
Lots of people have tried to explain to OP. OP was also asked to clarify her theory and would only say she was confused (which is fine).

You need to RTFT.

@loulouljh

I agree with you. It is under trial still. That is a fact (someone will say it is now, no doubt). There are vulnerable people in other countries needing it more than we do

O the irony. I thought it was the anti vaxxers who were criticism Gates for sending vaccines to third world countries.

Criticising.

@Backofbeyond50_ i am no anti-vaxxer. I just prefer them to have been properly tested first!!!!

[quote loulouljh]@Backofbeyond50_ i am no anti-vaxxer. I just prefer them to have been properly tested first!!!![/quote]
Were you around in the days of polio, whooping cough and diphtheria?

Well op that is really weird really fly vaccine. Tge flu vaccibe would have been introduced round about the time your 14vyesr did was born as my 15 year old just missed out by months. I was offered it during all my pregnancies and bith me and dh have one each year for pre existing conditions. All over 50s offered vaccine this year.
Personally I feel having or not having the vaccine is a personal choice and is no one else's business.

@loulouljh referring to it being under trial gives the game away really.
www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-vaccine-monitoring-idUSKBN2AC2G3

@backofbeyong50-why are you so rude? Odd. Embarrassing.

As your article states approved for emergency use only and still being monitored. Final data not being submitted for a couple of years.

The fact that numerous countries have banned AZ speaks for itself!