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.

It isn't unusual for post-use monitoring to be in place, and it isn't just for vaccines.

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

This is not true. fullfact.org/online/blood-clot-az-ban/

So I have read the whole thread and out of 577 posts and only 15 posters have made an effort to go through OPs view and counter argue her logic:
@Gladioli23
@AlmostSummer21 @Flyonawalk @HercwasanEnemyofEducation @EileenGC @jacks11 @mainsfed @anon5678 @Dailywalk @ChewtonRoad @whippetwoman @FOJN

Only one post has given a detailed argument in favour of OP @katylees

And lastly only one I think fully understood the point OP was making @Twattergy

The rest of you simply dismissed OP as "anti vaxxer" "no logic" "bollocks" "just get the jab"or a "wind up" which is all rather playground and disappointingly nasty.

If you think OP is a wind up then ignore the post or if you disagree the put together a counter argument or if you agree then an argument why but to simply throw insults at a viewpoint you disagree with is pathetic.

The rest of you simply dismissed OP as "anti vaxxer" "no logic" "bollocks" "just get the jab"or a "wind up" which is all rather playground and disappointingly nasty.

That's not right, though, is it? I wasn't nasty to the OP and did make an effort to politely, non-nastily counter her logic over several posts, so you missed me, for one. I don't expect you to make a particular note of anything I or any specific other poster says, but if you're going to go through all posts and count up who was 'playground' and who wasn't, you could at least count up accurately!

You’ve missed an awful lot of thoughtful, fact-based, constructive and non-insulting posts in your detailed review. I’ve certainly tried to be reasoned and calm, explaining why lower viral load due to vaccination meant fewer chances for variants, how the adult flu vaccine programme works, the domestic public health motivations for rich countries supporting poorer, and others. I’ve also see. some thoughtful posts from others you’ve not mentioned on your honour roll on public health in other countries and other relevant topics.

Or did we just not respond constructively in precisely the way you have ordained is acceptable? Perhaps people thought they should only comment when they had something new to add rather than being Johnny Big Brain for the rest of the thread.

However, as you’ve tarred me with the “the rest of you simply dismissed OP as "anti vaxxer" "no logic" "bollocks" "just get the jab"or a "wind up" which is all rather playground and disappointingly nasty^” brush and you’ve gone to the trouble of reading all the posts in detail, I’d be grateful if you could detail which of mine did this.

I’ll take an apology in its stead.

Actually having reviewed I made one post about feelings rather than facts - my own feelings, with no extrapolation to others - within the context of the ‘moral’ choice, given that morality is rarely fact-based or objective.

Struggling to see how any of the posts were dismissive, however.

I agree with Jassy and Omber, 1dayatatime - I wasn't one of the name calling brigade either, though my explanation wasn't as good as some other people's. I said OP's logic was upside-down because that is a fact. Her logic around opportunities for mutation is completely topsy-turvy - that isn't insulting, it's true. Like many others on this thread I explained why that was (though not as well as some). So I'll have an apology too, thanks.

I haven't ready anything but the title of the post. You don't want the vaccine, don't get it - you don't need to explain yourself to anyone.

I have asthma so have the flu jab. I knew vulnerable and older people qualified for it. I'm not sure I knew you could buy it and I definitely didn't know workplaces did it. I also had no idea they gave it children in nasal spray form in schools.
I'm autistic and don't always know what other people seem to think it's normal to know. Could you be autistic, OP?

Thanks @1dayatatime, I'm glad I bothered taking time trying to explain in layman's terms why vaccines reduce the mutation rate, how epidemics end, and standing up for OP when she was called a troll only to be told I am illogical and nasty by you

@chesirecat99

Vaccination will slow the mutation rate because less people are infected at the same time and if a vaccinated person is infected, they will clear the infection faster. Say a mutation occurs every million replications, think how long it will take for viable mutation to occur if only 1 person is infected at a time compared to if a million are infected. Now think about what happens if a million replications takes 1 day and an unvaccinated person is infected for 10 days but a vaccinated person clears the infection in 3 days.

So by not getting vaccinated you are actually contributing to speeding up the mutation rate making it more likely that a mutation that can evade the vaccine will arise sooner.

You are right that vaccination can cause selection pressure for virus mutations that evade the vaccination but that is exactly the same for natural immunity.

Also, although it is likely the vaccine will not provide the same level of immunity long term, part of the immune system, B cells and T cells may still have a memory of the virus and spring into action, providing some protection for many years. Just google if you want a full explanation.

I stand corrected this is clearly reasonably answering the OP and NOT simply insulting the OP. Clearly amongst the 577 I missed your post.

@JassyRadlett

This from @maddening is fairly dismissive wouldn't you say?

"Your ill informed logic is a pile of shite"

Or this from @timedoesntalwaysheal

"Just get fucking vaccinated and stop being an idiot!"

Or this from @DenisetheMenace

"Bollocks."

@1dayatatime, why are you quoting that to me? I am not that poster.

I asked you to quote a post of mine that met the criteria you ascribed to me as one of ‘the rest of you’.

I mentioned other posters I’d seen who had engaged constructively and in good faith. I did not mention any particular poster. Neither did I say no posters behaves in the way you described.

So I’m quite confused why, rather that engaging with what I actually posted, you are quoting random posts at me.

You can refuse it for any reason. No one else's business. Up to you

*behaved.

Let me cut and paste the relevant part of my post for you again, as you seem to have misread it. I’ll be helpful and bold a bit for you that you may have missed.

However, as you’ve tarred me with the “the rest of you simply dismissed OP as "anti vaxxer" "no logic" "bollocks" "just get the jab"or a "wind up" which is all rather playground and disappointingly nasty^” brush and you’ve gone to the trouble of reading all the posts in detail, I’d be grateful if you could detail which of mine did this.

@pointythings

Your logic is completely upside down. By vaccinating, we give the virus fewer hosts. We do this by reducing people's susceptibility so they have a lower viral load even if they are infected. A lower viral load means they are less likely to spread the virus, so it has fewer hosts still. Ergo fewer opportunities to mutate, not more.

Another apology, I clearly missed your logical explanation as well. The only thing I would add is that reducing the spread and number of hosts does slow the rate mutation but it does not stop it. So the mutation will still occur but over a longer time frame.

The main point I have against OPs view is that if there is a low take up of vaccination of say in the under 40s then any mutation that can more easily overcome the stronger natural immune systems of the under 40s is likely to be more successful (as a virus) leading to a reduction in asymptotic cases.

The only thing I would add is that reducing the spread and number of hosts does slow the rate mutation but it does not stop it. So the mutation will still occur but over a longer time frame.

I’m not sure I quite agree with this - with the potential for so very many different mutations and combinations of mutations, could we ever be sure that a particular mutation that would have arisen in a patient with a high viral load, prevented because that patient was vaccinated, would certainly occur in a longer timeframe?

I know we’ve seen some very similar variations occur spontaneously in different places but I’m not sure it holds true that all possible mutations will eventually occur?

I honestly don’t know the answer but I’m not sure that it’s certain that it’s simply delayed, given the random and spontaneous nature of the mutations. It feels like a maths as well as an epidemiology question.

Thank you. I do agree that name calling people for not vaccinating isn't helpful. It is very frustrating however to see people endlessly repeating misleading or wilfully incorrect statements about the nature of the COVID vaccinations though, so I do understand that people are irritable about it. Especially when the stakes are so very high. OP isn't in that category, however.

backofbeyong50-why are you so rude? Odd. Embarrassing.
@loulouljh
Sorry you find my post odd and think I was rude. It was certainly not my intention but I am not embarrassed.
Lots of people have clearly found the Ops posts odd though.
Incidentally I believe everyone has a right to choose whether they have the vaccine after performing their own risk/ benefit assessment.
What I don't like is either extreme view. I am sure I don't need to spell it out as there are plenty of examples on these forums.
In real life I have experienced lots of anti vax sentiment which was actually quite hurtful especially as I fully respected this person's decision not to be vaccinated as it really it is none of my business.
Time to step away I think.

Thank you @pointythings