Is anyone NOT getting the vaccine?

[JC2021]

Anyone on here choosing not to receive the covid-19 vaccine?

I am undecided, but resistant.

My reasons; you can still become infected and spread the virus. How sick you might become would depend on your immunity, your age/health.

So, in my mind the only good the vaccine 'may' do (no guarantees) is prevent you getting very ill. Although, even this is still not guaranteed.

So the vaccine may reduce the change of you becoming really ill.

Fully vaccinated people can still spread the virus unknowingly to others, the same as unvaccinated.

Views?

@OriginalTaste

I'm a 'no' for now.

I had Covid November last year, I am also on long-term (talking over 4 years) immunosuppression. My decision has been acknowledged and respected by my medical team.

I also do not have the flu jab.

I am happy to have a vaccine that irradicates a disease/virus, that stops you catching it in the first place. At the moment, I am not happy to have a jab that just masks symptoms and does not stop you passing it on.

That is my choice for the moment. I respect those who have chosen to have it, and hope that respect for my decision will be returned.

but it doesn't just mask symptoms. It makes your body attack and kill the virus reducing your viral load which makes you and everyone else safer.

I bet your medical team didn't tell you that all its does is mask symptoms!

@godmum56 no, they didn't only tell me that. I am not happy having a 'vaccine' that doesn't stop you from contracting the virus it is to protect you against. I have been very well versed, working for the University of Oxford, so have followed the development of the vaccine closely.

Having contracted the virus in November, my antibody level is currently higher than the Consultant I work for, who is of course double jabbed (Second jab in February), and as such, I feel happier about not having the vaccine. I am also awaiting the outcome of a couple of trials involving people on my medication and with my medical condition. My medical team are respectful of that.

I follow all of the other rules and precautions and am happy to continue wearing a mask for as long as is necessary.

It was your choice to have the vaccine, as it is mine not to. I am aware of the facts, figures, percentages etc., and have made an informed decision for myself. I would not attempt to sway anyone either way, I think having any kind of medical treatment is a personal choice, and you can take medical advice, from medical professionals, but the decision is ultimately one for each individual to make.

I suspect the medical team suggested you should wear a mask @OriginalTaste, is that where you got confused?

I am happy to have a vaccine that irradicates a disease/virus, that stops you catching it in the first place. At the moment, I am not happy to have a jab that just masks symptoms and does not stop you passing it on.

There are no vaccines that prevent 100% of infections.

These vaccines prevent the majority of infections. That means for the majority, it stops you catching it and prevents the virus from becoming established in your body.

For the minority who do catch it, the vaccines stop onward transmission by about half. That means it stops you from passing it on in those cases.

It sounds like there are a lot of factors bound up in your decisions, and I respect that. But I didn’t want anyone reading your post to have the impression that the vaccines don’t have a really significant impact in preventing infection and transmission. They do.

I am not happy having a 'vaccine' that doesn't stop you from contracting the virus it is to protect you against.

But again, even with Delta, our vaccines prevent the majority of infections. Once adapted for Delta I think you’d expect to see those infection prevention levels back to the really high levels observed with Wuhan and Alpha. That will hopefully be where boosters come in.

[quote OriginalTaste]@godmum56 no, they didn't only tell me that. I am not happy having a 'vaccine' that doesn't stop you from contracting the virus it is to protect you against. I have been very well versed, working for the University of Oxford, so have followed the development of the vaccine closely.

Having contracted the virus in November, my antibody level is currently higher than the Consultant I work for, who is of course double jabbed (Second jab in February), and as such, I feel happier about not having the vaccine. I am also awaiting the outcome of a couple of trials involving people on my medication and with my medical condition. My medical team are respectful of that.

I follow all of the other rules and precautions and am happy to continue wearing a mask for as long as is necessary.

It was your choice to have the vaccine, as it is mine not to. I am aware of the facts, figures, percentages etc., and have made an informed decision for myself. I would not attempt to sway anyone either way, I think having any kind of medical treatment is a personal choice, and you can take medical advice, from medical professionals, but the decision is ultimately one for each individual to make.[/quote]
so are you a virologist or lab technician....?

because whatever your choice (separate issue) you are wrong about covid vaccine only masking symptoms.

@MRex no, they did not, and I am not confused.

And this attitude towards freedom of choice is what is the matter with the world. You would be hugely offended if I called you a sheep for having the jab, no? How about the double jabbed people who have since contracted the virus and died? What was the point in them having it? What a waste, no? Of course not. It is your choice to have it, and your choice has no bearing on me.

I have not tried to belittle you for having a jab, so please do not attempt to belittle me for deciding not to.

I have underlying health conditions and as such am waiting until there is a clearer indication of any long-term health implications for people with my condition and on my medication, as explained in my previous post.

@JassyRadlett thank you for your response, I agree with you. Unfortunately, as with any virus, there are mutations and variants that, as we see with the flu jab each year, just cannot be accounted for in one vaccine. I am just frustrated with people who seem to think it is a cure-all and feel it is Ok to utterly belittle anyone who has made a decision that differs from their own.

That’s why the analogy more or less works. Seat belts aren’t risk-free but they are a lower risk than not wearing one in a crash, which is an unpredictable event.

Vaccines aren’t risk free, but they are a lower risk than not having a vaccine in the park event of being exposed to or getting Covid, which is an unpredictable event

I know. I'm just so disappointed that the anti vaxxers on here just don't seem to understand statistics and risk vs benefit.

@godmum56 I won't disclose my job title but yes, I do work in medical research. I will accept that 'mask' was the wrong term, lessen is probably closer to the mark.

@RampantIvy I'd also just like to say that just because a person has decided not to have this vaccine, doesn't make them an anti-vaxxer. I can't be doing with the 'microchip in the jab' gang, either!

@OriginalTaste - read my other post, I've explained for you in more detail how it works. Stating the fact that you're wrong and hypothesising how you might have got to that incorrect statement isn't "belittling" you, it is correcting you. You are entitled to make decisions about whatever you do with your own body, but when you make untrue statements then you have to expect to be called out on them, that's how forums work.

[quote OriginalTaste]@RampantIvy I'd also just like to say that just because a person has decided not to have this vaccine, doesn't make them an anti-vaxxer. I can't be doing with the 'microchip in the jab' gang, either![/quote]
I am talking about anti vaxxer not those who can't have the vax.

@MRex Thank you - so please could you tell me: if you can still contract the virus having had the vaccine, but can be asymptomatic or have very low-level symptoms, how would you describe that? Are those symptoms then lessened (or masked, heaven forbid) due to the fact you have had the vaccine? Is your immuno-response reduced because you have had the vaccine? If yes, then why is saying the vaccine lessens symptoms wouldn't be totally incorrect, would it?

I would assume that "antibodies from the vaccine help reduce severity" could also be interpreted as "having the vaccine lessens symptoms".

Very aware of how antibodies and the immune system work, and I feel we are falling into a pit of how a sentence is worded rather than its content.

And as previously mentioned, my antibodies from contracting the virus (despite being immunosuppressed myself) are actually higher than colleagues who have had both jabs. Hence my decision, at this time, to decline the vaccine.

I will accept that 'mask' was the wrong term, lessen is probably closer to the mark.

But the vaccines we are lucky enough to have don’t ‘just’ do that. Why did you suggest it did?

You speak of your frustration. I understand that. I am similarly frustrated with those who continue to misrepresent these vaccines and their huge impact in terms of preventing infection and transmission, as you have.

As I said, there is no vaccine I’m aware of that prevents infection in every single person. So it becomes about the degree to which infection is prevented. It’s honest to say ‘I don’t like that it doesn’t prevent more than 90% of infections’ (though I’d think your expectations were ridiculously high tbh). It’s not honest to say ‘it just masks symptoms’ because with respect, that’s absolute bollocks.

@OriginalTaste -
"Mask" in that context means to conceal; it can be true of painkillers for example that they conceal the pain; the issues causing pain remain.
Low viral load causing low-level symptoms, the virus is not hidden but actually reduced.
Imagine this to visualise the difference between the terms. Say you pour a pint of water in a drawer and close the drawer. Still a pint of water, hidden in a drawer, the water is "masked". Next pour a pint of water down the sink; a few splashes remain on the bottom and round the sides, plainly visible but not an issue; the amount of water has "reduced".

Thank you @JassyRadlett, noted.

It is my opinion (and therefore not fact and not to be taken by anyone else reading this as medical advice), that the vaccine is not right for me at this moment. It is also my opinion that it reduces symptoms, rather than prevents you from contracting the virus altogether, which I think is another common misconception a lot of people have. This is the same reason why I, as a personal choice, do not have the annual flu jab.

I am perfectly respectful of anyone else's beliefs, opinions and personal choices. At the present time, this particular vaccine just isn't right for me.

@MRex happy to concede the word 'mask' was incorrect. So the vaccine reduces symptoms (if you are unlucky enough to contract the virus following the jabs).

Most of who choose not to have the vaccination d not misrepresent anything. We simply choose not to have it. Our choice. I don't expect to change anyone's views and those who have had it are unlikely to change mine. Nor have I ever said I will never have the vaccine.

@Xenia

Most of who choose not to have the vaccination d not misrepresent anything. We simply choose not to have it. Our choice. I don't expect to change anyone's views and those who have had it are unlikely to change mine. Nor have I ever said I will never have the vaccine.

this simply isn't true of most of the posts and here and a quick flick through this thread will demonstrate that

I respect everyone's choice to have/not have the coronavirus vaccine, but not when they feel the need to justify it with misinformation (be that about vaccine safety, efficacy or minimising the impact of COVID)

I honestly can’t believe there is so much angst about people choosing not to get the vaccine. I know 6 people who chose not to have it and it wouldn’t even occur to me to be bothered by it.

Everyone is entitled to make their own choice.

Tbh I have been amazed how many of the people posting about declining the vaccine are doing so on the basis of inaccurate information.

@Xenia - one rather big difference between you and some others is that they are not all real posters, some are individuals posting only to propagate an agenda. (Not @OriginalTaste as far as I can tell, just to clarify as she happens to be on this page too.)

@Mum21031608

I honestly can’t believe there is so much angst about people choosing not to get the vaccine. I know 6 people who chose not to have it and it wouldn’t even occur to me to be bothered by it.

Everyone is entitled to make their own choice.

Maybe you should let Macron know he shouldn't be bothering his head about low rates of vaccination in France.

Are you not able to understand that we need as many people as possible in the UK to take the vaccination? Or would you prefer endless yo-yoing in and out of restrictions?

Are you not able to understand that we need as many people as possible in the UK to take the vaccination?

Of course I’m aware of that and I’m sure an extremely high percentage of those offered the vaccination have taken it.

And as for those who haven’t, they have made their own choice based on their own their own circumstances and I cannot fathom why there is so much anger towards those individuals.

I am perfectly respectful of anyone else's beliefs, opinions and personal choices. At the present time, this particular vaccine just isn't right for me.

And as I said, I respect that choice. I just ask that you not spread misinformation about the vaccine while you’re explaining that choice - we are all entitled to our own opinions, but truth matters.

Nsmum14
I'm not having it. Have had covid recently, I've had worse colds

Well done you 👏👏👏

I wonder where we would be now if we all took your attitude? 🙄