Us and them- the vaccine. So much pressure

[ToTheLetter01]

Before i begin, i am not an anti vaxxer. Me and my DS have had all our jabs and we also have annual flu jabs.
However i feel such hostility and pressure from people who have had their vaccine for me to have it. The reason i do not want it at this moment is just because its still in the experimental stage until 2023 and i would like to know more long term data.
This is my choice, its my body and everyone should have the choice. Choice to have the vaccine and choice to not. I do not shame nor ridicule anyone for having it or not.
However i have felt so much pressure from friends and others in the wider public, media, government.

I feel like the nation is becoming split between us and them. ( vaccinated and unvaccinated). With things becoming unfair for people. Eg. may be able to travel and not quarantine if had vaccines, care home workers may be forced to have the vaccine. Now i get the point of view of they have had it and may be more "safe". But how is the ok in a freedom and rights point of view. As i stated freedom to do what you want with your body.

I feel like this world is becoming some kind of dystopian world. I miss my old life, i took all the freedom for granted. Its true that you don't realise how good it was until it's gone.
I don't want people to be hostile to me because of my choice to wait for long term data on the vaccine. Half of me wants to lie to people i've had it so they will not be stand off towards me.

1958-61. At least do some basic bloody research.

You done it for me bless you. I couldn't be bothered its a Friday night.

Thalidomide was a capsule not a jab. And many many lessons have been learnt from that tragedy. It wouldn’t happen now.

@Dustyboots
Just spectacularly missed my point.
It’s a bloody good job millions have chosen to have it. Or there’d be thousands more dead and we’d all be in lockdown for the foreseeable.
BUT What if none of them had chosen to have the vaccine? What if everyone had made the same choice as the OP? In this hypothetical scenario what is the answer?

You done it for me bless you. I couldn't be bothered its a Friday night.

Almost like you're talking out your arse about vaccines then, isn't it?

@Cafeaulait27

Thalidomide was a capsule not a jab. And many many lessons have been learnt from that tragedy. It wouldn’t happen now.

also a drug, not a vaccine

trials and the roll out all happened last year, obviously there is no longer term data than from then onwards, it couldn't possibly exist

That's exactly what Egeegogxmv was meaning and referring to.

as with all new vaccines, they will be monitored for the next 2 years This is precisely what she meant and precisely why people say that it's an experiment or a trial ...

You say you are a scientist?

@paddingtonbearmeetsdeadpool

1958-61. At least do some basic bloody research.

You done it for me bless you. I couldn't be bothered its a Friday night.

And thalidomide was a drug not a vaccination. Neither was it injected AFAIK.

@AppleCrumbleForBreakfast - I don’t understand what you mean about the vaccinated being tracked. The article you linked doesn’t say that, can you clarify?

The lessons from the thalidomide disaster have been incorporated into testing for decades.

@Dustyboots please can you tell us how you would deal with the pandemic instead of the vaccines?

@paddingtonbearmeetsdeadpool

If only there was a vaccination for stupidity.

How would you feel that after taking these vaccines there was no end to lockdowns. What if we were the stupid ones let's not forget what happened back in the 70's or 80's when they were giving pregnant women anti sickness jabs.

The question is what did we learn from this and whether its relevant to the covid vaccination programme? How has the science moved on from there? Does modern science pick up on problems like this better, through modelling and general greater levels of understanding how things work? Injecting drugs is fundamentally different to injecting the antidote to a virus - they are not the same type of thing. Being sick in pregnancy isn't infectious for starters and thus doesn't pose an extential threat to the entire community (it shouldn't have happened to those women and babies, but ultimately the damage remains confined to those direct victims).

These are the type of question we should be asking, rather than just spouting off about a medical scandal that can be awkwardly just about shoehorned into the conversation as a 'gotcha' rather than a credible arguement once you scratch the surface of it.

Well your post has made me consider getting the vaccine more than anything I've ever read or heard RTB. Thank you for that very respectful and reasoned post.

Of all the things you have researched and read is there anything you think would be good for me to read that show the other side of the story (the other side meaning the opposite of the side I'm currently on which is fundamental distrust).

@RedToothBrush

very fair points but important to we're not injecting the antidote to a virus though which would be classified as a drug

a vaccine is not the same as a drug, it's literally just a little piece of the virus (or genetic instructions to code for such) that the immune system responds to and is quickly degraded.

there is no precedent for non-live vaccines causing either long term effects or issues in pregnancy

[quote SecretKeeper1]@AppleCrumbleForBreakfast - I don’t understand what you mean about the vaccinated being tracked. The article you linked doesn’t say that, can you clarify?[/quote]
re tracking I think @AppleCrumbleForBreakfast linked the wrong article by accident, and was thinking of this

metro.co.uk/2021/05/23/thousands-had-phones-unwittingly-tracked-after-getting-vaccine-14630732/

there is no precedent for non-live vaccines causing either long term effects or issues in pregnancy

How can there be a precedent when this type of vaccine(MRNA) has never been used before?

@Dustyboots

trials and the roll out all happened last year, obviously there is no longer term data than from then onwards, it couldn't possibly exist

That's exactly what Egeegogxmv was meaning and referring to.

as with all new vaccines, they will be monitored for the next 2 years This is precisely what she meant and precisely why people say that it's an experiment or a trial ...

You say you are a scientist?

No.

HOWEVER

All the information we know about previous vaccines is decades old. And we have long term data from that.

The predictions / hopes for the vaccine are modelled based on this information and the data we have for the new vaccines can be matched against historical data to see how well the new vaccines are performing in comparison.

We have a signicant amount of research into other coronaviruses (what we know about SARS in particular has been useful). We haven't started from point zero. We have started from a point of knowledge which is much further along than that.

We can see if anything different / out of the ordinary is occurring (so far so good - even with the blood clot issue which is an usual side effect occurring at levels which would be normal in at population level). So far the vaccines are performing within the boundaries of expectation - indeed an efficacy of 60% was deemed good. Pfizer and AZ are out performing this, and even with the newer variants they are still out performing this marker.

We don't know lots of things. But equally we do know lots of things too.

[quote speckledostrichegg]@RedToothBrush

very fair points but important to we're not injecting the antidote to a virus though which would be classified as a drug

a vaccine is not the same as a drug, it's literally just a little piece of the virus (or genetic instructions to code for such) that the immune system responds to and is quickly degraded.

there is no precedent for non-live vaccines causing either long term effects or issues in pregnancy[/quote]
I'm paraphrasing.

BUT important to note the MSM made it sound a lot more alarming than it was

the vaccinated were not tracked - group-level cell phone data was shared by providers which is not identifying. Modelling was used to predict vaccinated versus non-vaccinated based on movements. The full manuscript is published online so the methods can be looked at by anyone.

*The lessons from the thalidomide disaster have been incorporated into testing for decades.8

That doesn't mean that other mistakes can't happen. When something has been rushed through so quickly - when something cannot be withdrawn or questioned due to an urgency to keep going at speed - mistakes can and will happen.

The timescales for the COVID vaccine trials were shortened but the number of people working on the trials and the study groups were far greater than normal.

@Dustyboots

Well your post has made me consider getting the vaccine more than anything I've ever read or heard RTB. Thank you for that very respectful and reasoned post.

Of all the things you have researched and read is there anything you think would be good for me to read that show the other side of the story (the other side meaning the opposite of the side I'm currently on which is fundamental distrust).

Do this. On your own terms.

Look for the things that bother you and see if you can find the answers. Properly. Don't just read the stuff you agree with. Read the stuff you distrust and pick it apart properly

No 'right' or 'wrong' answer as such. Just a properly informed one

I spent a long time challenging my own fears on birth rather than making an emotional decision. Its hard but its an important process to almost distance yourself from that emotion and put your logical and rational head on.

Fear and mistrust of doctors should be taken a lot more seriously in my book because it has impacts on other areas of our health (not just covid but stuff like making us less likely to seek medical help when we know we really need it but don't wish to because we think we will be dismissed / treated poorly).

@Dustyboots

*The lessons from the thalidomide disaster have been incorporated into testing for decades.8

That doesn't mean that other mistakes can't happen. When something has been rushed through so quickly - when something cannot be withdrawn or questioned due to an urgency to keep going at speed - mistakes can and will happen.

Oh they absoluetely do. I don't deny that.

But its about on balance arguments and understanding the degree of risk involved

And what the counter point to that particular risk is too (in this case the long term effects of having covid even mild covid)

We are only just beginning to find and recognise the long term effects its had on people who have had covid (significant damage to the lungs even in milder cases is one which isn't looking too pretty and may have long term implications for health care provision and those affected).

As I say, its not a neutral position to decide not to have the vaccine. Unfortunately.

We don't know the long term effects of the alternative either.

Anyway I'm off to bed, but emotion versus rational is where this should be

To an extent I find the 'but other people' argument to be an emotive one - even though relevant to an infectious disease as it can be manipulative and almost blackmailing which undermines our ability to consent freely.

I think it should be pointed out, but avoiding the emotional stuff (like the killing grannies phrase for example) I find particularly unhelpful in this debate.

If you stick to the dry boring rational stuff it tends to be a stronger arguement (for either side making the point)

I will research RTB - although have no idea whether what I'm reading is legitimate/ who it is/ where it's come from. I'll have to research that too I suppose.

I see what you mean about taking the emotional part out of making a decision - but my gut instinct/emotion has always been the best guide and when I've ignored it things have often gone spectacularly wrong.

I also know that research and money is put into places that are funded by those who are not always the most trustworthy.

Andrew Wakefield has been talked about a bit in this thread. He's been struck off etc I don't know much about him and have no opinion on him - other than that I wonder whether he was struck off because his opinion threatened people in high places/people who make money out of vaccines etc I don't know. But I don't believe he was evil or his work discounted because it was a load of rubbish. I work with kids with autism - I have a child with SN myself and know that vaccines have had an immediate effect on kids' development. There's no way his work should have been discredited in the way that it was. If anything more research should have been put in.

But that's another story - and clearly I do have an opinion on him.

My struggle with this is that you say it’s still in the experimental phase but all the scientists and medical experts say it’s not.

I don’t understand why you think your perception of what is experimental is more important than the experts and why you expect that jot to be challenged?
Fair enough if that’s how you live your entire life eg you don’t eat processed food until you’ve checked all the Data about the impact on your health, made sure that’s past the experimental phase.

But if you’ve singled out this vaccine to decide that you want more research, can’t rely on experts then I think people are right to question you.