Fed up of being labelled an ‘anti-vaxxer’

[WilsonMilson]

Just that. I’ve expressed some concerns about the vaccines, AZ in particular.

I’m very glad we have vaccines for the elderly and vulnerable, as covid can be deadly. But, as yet we simply do not have the data on longer term outcomes from vaccines and that concerns me when we start jabbing the young and the healthy. We are already seeing blood clots with AZ becoming a serious issue.

I’d consider myself an educated and informed person. My ds has had all his routine vaccinations to now and I am not a tin foil hat wearer, flat earthier, or conspiracy loon of any description. Yet, whenever trying to initiate a sensible discussion based on science and reason, it gets shot down as conspiracy or am labelled an ‘anti-vaxxer’, which I am emphatically not.

Why is is so difficult, here and elsewhere to have a sensible discussion about this?

How strange, Portugal requires a negative PCR test for entry.

Germany also accepts PCR tests for entry, so hardly banned as "not fit for purpose".

www.dw.com/en/traveling-germany-coronavirus/a-54124541

[quote AUserName12345]@ilovesooty

somgreatapollo

I've read a few things about this vaccine on all sorts of forums. Honestly though to describe people not having it as leeching - it's a new low. You ought to be both embarrassed and ashamed of yourselves.

"Why? If they're riding on the back of other people's willingness to take up the vaccine that's what they're doing. I specifically only attached that to those who are vaccine refusers, not those for whom it is medically contraindicated or haven't yet been offered it."

The "leeching"

Does that include pregnant women now who may not want to take ti?

And CHILDREN when they are "offered" it?[/quote]
Did you bother to read that I specifically excluded pregnant women - twice?

@ilovesooty I’m not ‘riding on the back’ of anyone. I’m happy to take my chances with covid, have been all year.

[quote bumbleymummy]@ilovesooty no, my attention span isn’t short, thanks - they’re on different pages. Your first comment is the last one at the end of page 1 and I replied to it when I read it. So apologies that I didn’t think to first turn to page 2 to read your correction before I replied.[/quote]
That explains it thanks - apologies. I've got everything on one page.

[quote AUserName12345]@ilovesooty

" I specifically only attached that to those who are vaccine refusers, not those for whom it is medically contraindicated or haven't yet been offered it."

Not here you didnt which is why I pointed it out[/quote]
Yes I did - consistently.

@somgreatapollo

Sooty to call anybody not having the vaccine a leach or say they are leaching is vile. It is also incredibly toxic. Seriously you should consider keeping such bile to yourself.

I wasn't the person who originally used the term. However in my view people who are refusing the vaccine are benefiting from those who are able to take it and do so. What term would you use for that?

And those who take their chances are very possibly risking being more ill if they get it, which places greater potential strain on the NHS.

As another question, when going for the vaccine does the person administering it advise on the chance of mortality from covid 19 in thier age group? If someone was told they have less than 1% or fractions of a percent of dieing from it they might decide to wait or decline

Conversely, they could show them videos of covid patients experiencing hypoxia and struggling to breathe to show them what a good decision they've made.

It's not just risk of death that drives the decision to vaccinate, it's also a desire to lower the risk of serious illness.

I did mention pregnant women later I agree.

I haven't expressed a view on the age groups you asked about and would have to think about it.

Ive provided sources to what I have said and aske questions.

Have you provided a source to verify that Portugal and Germany have banned the PCR test as not fit for purpose, as I did to prove that Germany accepts the PCR test as proof of negative covid status for entry?

You can believe what you like. I'm not being harangued into forming an opinion on something because you want an immediate response.

Have the vaccine, don’t have the vaccine. Why is necessary to make a big song and dance over it? We’ve had so many threads on this.

@AUserName12345

” By everyone taking tha vaccine (as I detailed earlier) you put selective pressure on teh virus to mutate to a more deadly form.”

I’ve seen no reputable evidence that this is true.

My response remains unchanged.

@WilsonMilson

Exactly, it seems that anyone questioning or concerned about vaccines is lumped into the category of conspiracy theorist or anti vaxxer. It makes having a rational discussion almost impossible.

You are a victim of some of the weirdest posts I have read here, ever.

Qestioning is fine. Problem is that those who start or respond a thread like this often then leap nipple deep into the abyss - many quoting very scary yet utterly false statistics - as you can see here already.

Which leads many others to respond with facts and figures to disprove the madness, give a more balanced view, help posters see the real RR of a vaccine, and it all starts to feel stifling.

Blame the posters of scary crap. If they didn't leap in with utter bollocks thenyou/we could all discuss the real facts and figures without having to defend against idiocy.

@paddyk

Just be pleased that those of us who have chosen to have it, will be offering a degree of protection for those of you who don't. One friend who's not having it was telling me the same stuff about long term effects etc, all while eating a KFC and puffing on a fag.

Yeah but we all know the affects of kfc and fags lol but no one knows the long term affects. The short term are bad enough and by the way the trials for this vaccine are not even finished. Once upon a time they told us smoking was good for you. The problem is I’m not an experiment and when it’s been safety tested like other vaccines I will stick to my KFC 😉