Mandatory vaccination

[amsadandconfused]

So I am not anti vac and have had my two doses and booster booked for next week. I do genuinely understand why a lot of my work colleagues are reluctant..Drs ,nurses ,carers etc . They are young people in their 20s/30s who are scared about the long term side effects ie infertility,blood disorders ..it’s very easy for people who are not in a job involving health care to be so critical of these lovely people .
Yes hepatitis B jab is mandatory for some but the hep jab has had many years of trials.
Can I ask everyone reading my post if you would be 100% happy if their 20 something children had this vaccine?

At the time mandates were being proposed in the UK, there was good evidence that vaccination both signficantly prevented infecion (and if you are not infected you cannot transmit), and that it reduced the liklihood of onward transmission in the case of breakthrough infections.

There was no such ”good evidence” and everybody knew it. Promoting a vaccine that doesn't work 100% against infection, transmission, grave illness and death is one thing; mandating it is not.
My dad, I and my husband were fully (?) vaccinated; then dad went to a medical clinic (vaccinated people only, all wearing masks), he got infected, I caught covid from him and passed it to my husband. Dad was very ill with covid, stayed in hospital, needed oxygen and antivirals. Now of course someone will come up with one of these canned responsed:

1. well, maybe one of you was vaccinated too many months before, so you're irrelevant for our statistics (but how many months are too many? do we need jabs every 3 months? 2 months? 1 month?)
2. well, maybe one of you was just vaccinated and this was a ”breakthrough” infection, so you're irrelevant for our statistics (but when does this vaccine start being effective? 2 weeks? 1 month?)
3. well, all of you are still alive, so it must be the vaccine that saved you; maybe without jabs you'd be dead! (Because this is how science and public policies works, based on ”what if” and ”maybe”.)

I'm not bothered if DS has it or not, as far as I know he had the first 2 but past that I don't know if he had any booster, its none of my business, I hadn't really thought to ask.

There was no such ”good evidence” and everybody knew it.

Yes, there was. I will never understand how someone can claim to be a free thinker and open minded, yet so closed minded when it comes to the evidence in front of them @Terzani

As I said, at the time mandates were being proposed in the UK, there was good evidence that vaccination both signficantly prevented infecion (and if you are not infected you cannot transmit), and that it reduced the liklihood of onward transmission in the case of breakthrough infections. By "good evidence" I mean replicated robust studies demonstrating evidence for these statements.

This was the rationale for introducing an immunity pass - on a population level it would make a significant difference to infection rates. As I said, I was pro this because it included the option to show a negative test OR a recent infection, as an alternative to vaccination.

Unfortunately, attempting to apply policy in such a rapidly changing situation was always going to be problematic, and it quickly became apparent that vaccine efficacy was reduced substantially due to mutation rate of SARS-COV-2, hence there not being a strong rationale to go ahead.

As I've said, I'm anti mandates for the general population, but am also anti people who try and claim things about vaccination that aren't true to push an agenda.

My dad, I and my husband were fully (?) vaccinated; then dad went to a medical clinic (vaccinated people only, all wearing masks), he got infected, I caught covid from him and passed it to my husband. Dad was very ill with covid, stayed in hospital, needed oxygen and antivirals. Now of course someone will come up with one of these canned responsed:

well, maybe one of you was vaccinated too many months before, so you're irrelevant for our statistics (but how many months are too many? do we need jabs every 3 months? 2 months? 1 month?)

well, maybe one of you was just vaccinated and this was a ”breakthrough” infection, so you're irrelevant for our statistics (but when does this vaccine start being effective? 2 weeks? 1 month?)

well, all of you are still alive, so it must be the vaccine that saved you; maybe without jabs you'd be dead! (Because this is how science and public policies works, based on ”what if” and ”maybe”.)

Evidence based medicine doesn't rely on anecdotes, and yes all science is caveated with a level of uncertainty @Terzani

We know that vaccinated people are less likely to get infected, and have better outcomes. Thus it is likely your Dad would have been worse off had he not be vaccinated, but obviously no one can say for sure in an individual case unless you had a paralell universe where he was unvaccinated to compare to.

As epidemiologists know this is the issue they're trying to get around - inferring causality when you are not able to repeat a study in the parallel universe when the event did not occur (the "counterfactual").

I know someone who died despite having chemotherapy for a specific type of breast cancer. That doesn't mean if I developed the same type of cancer I wouldn't have chemo - because evidence from large samples of people are used to recommend this course of treatment.

We know that vaccinated people are less likely to get infected

Do we?

Ive seen lots of evidence to the contrary. Particularly as time (and boosters) have gone on

Cherry picking statements to misinterpret seems to be your classic vaccine thread style @hamstersarse

You've been spamming vaccine disinformation for the last two years, it's frustrating that you simply copy & paste claims made by various anti-vaccine groups, rather than looking at the evidence in front of you in an open minded manner.

You post something, someone will explain why the claims are not true or are not backed by robust evidence, yet you continue.

There are many reports now showing vaccinated are more likely to be infected with covid now. There is even an article this week out of there suggesting mass vaccination is causing new variants been the way they are now. It’s pointless to provide any links to them as you’ll dismiss them on a basis of them being Mis or disinformation. The truth is coming out. You want a jab? Have it, but you cannot hide ie Phiset admitting themselves their vaccine was never tested for stopping covid admission. So why they tried to introduce mandatory vaccination?

Phizer not Phiset 😂

Well, obviously more people who have been vaccinated have Covid now. That's how mass vaccination works. If you have 10 people, none of whom are vaccinated, then more unvaccinated people will be infected, obviously. If you have 10 people, 9 of whom are vaccinated, more vaccinated people will be infected.
Unless you believe that vaccines are 100% effective at stopping transmission which would make you look silly.
If you can post a link which shows scientific fact, then of course it won't be dismissed as lies, because it won't be lies, will it?

www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-vaccine-variants-idUSL2N2NL1M2

www.healthline.com/health-news/no-vaccines-do-not-cause-new-sars-cov-2-variants

www.umms.org/coronavirus/covid-vaccine/facts/strain

www.science.org/content/blog-post/vaccines-will-not-produce-worse-variants

So everyone incl Biden, Fauci and the rest are silly? 😂 they used to say mass vaccination will stop transmission.

I am opened to info from various sources so I am aware of those links. Have a nice day!

Biden isn't a scientist so I haven't given any more thought to anything he may have said than I would Johnson.
I can't find anything where Fauci (or any other scientist) has said that vaccination stops transmission. That it slows transmission, and helps people avoid infection, but stopping transmission totally, no. It's interesting to read the Qanon type attacks on Fauci though and how he's been misquoted throughout. Even some of this plain English sentences "if enough people take up the vaccine, we might be in a position to state we have herd immunity" etc. It's almost as if they are blind to that "might" word, isn't it?
Anyway, I'm just an amateur who reads stuff and looks at the sources it comes from. There are actual scientists on this thread and others who are far more able to explain vaccines to those who are still not getting it.

@PAFMO thanks for your unwavering contribution to this matter. Time will tell. That’s all.
There are enough scientists who disagree with everything you stand for, also backed by science. We will see eventually. Everything you’ve convinced yourself of, many other qualified people have put forth arguments against. No point of trying to convince the masses when history and present times continue to show us how much the “experts” can be wrong, when other “experts” are right.

Thanks again.

So why they tried to introduce mandatory vaccination?

Pfizer never tried to introduce mandatory vaccination, how could they, they are a pharma company. Governments made decisions about whether to mass vaccinate or not according to what their own scientific representatives decided was the best way forward to protect people against the virus.

You want a jab? Have it, but you cannot hide ie Phiset admitting themselves their vaccine was never tested for stopping covid admission. So why they tried to introduce mandatory vaccination?

@Hiheyho

Many posters have already pointed this out to you before, but of course Pfizer (and others) did not test onward transmission in trials. They never said they had done, because it would have been impossible to do so.

In trials, the vaccines had incredibly high efficacy. Barely any one in the treatment arm got COVID. If no-one gets COVID you obviously cannot test whether a vaccinated person is less likely to transmit. Does this make sense?

If someone does not get COVID, they cannot pass it on, hence statements about reducing transmission.

After the vaccines were approved, and there was enough data, observational studies were used to test vaccination on onward transmission, finding evidence of effect. Hence futher statements about onward transmission.

The fact that you are so focussed on Pfizer demonstrates you are just repeating claims you've heard rather than thinking for yourself, because for some reason that is the drug company that anti-vaccine groups have decided to base their narrative on.

Im on the fence tbh, I quite like the Canadian mandatory vaccines to access public childcare system. Seems like a sensible scheme when things like measles/ German measles are making a comeback.

That said I was Quite ill after a Covid vaccine with stroke like effects. Possibly a coincidence or just unlucky with an over enthusiastic immune response. I can’t afford to be ill or hospitalised again and so I’m not having anymore boosters. Honestly if I’d been that ill after flu vaccine I wouldn’t chance it either.

this tread is about mandatory vaccination, which was presented to us as a tool to stop mass covid transmission. It’s recorded in media. I only mention Phizer as they admitted they didn’t test for this, Astra Z been dropped now. It’s a fact.
I am not an antivaxxer, I had covid jabs myself so stop your antovaxxer narrative

Funny though how you were vaccine hesitant (to put it mildly) and all over the boards with your nonsense, including telling people that you'd had Covid twice while unvaxxed, then blamed your low iron levels on the vaccine you had and have continued to scattergun anti-vax rubbish ever since.

Odd reply, I haven't referred to you as an anti-vaxxer. I've said multiple times if someone does not want to get vaccinated that's fair enough, and I disagree with mandates.

That doesn't mean people won't point out that you are saying things about vaccinated that aren't true. This doesn't help informed decision making and it's frustrating when you keep repeating the same fake claims and ignoring any evidence based response.

I've already explained that of course Pfizer/moderna/AZ/sinopharm did not test onward transmission in trials. They never said they had done, because it would have been impossible to do so. There is no "admitted" as you keep saying - the trial protocols have been available publicly since 2020.

As described, the vaccines had incredibly high efficacy. Barely any one in the treatment arm got COVID. If no-one gets COVID you obviously cannot test whether a vaccinated person is less likely to transmit.

This seems disengenous.

I'm very happy to update my opinion on anything if there's robust evidence demonstrating what I currently think is untrue.

If you are convinced the coronavirus vaccines are unsafe/ineffective then share this evidence, making up stories about yourself or friends seems unhelpful and doesn't really contibute in a productive manner.

Excuse me?

Easy @PAFMO ! I was agreeing with you that it seems disengous for posters to make stuff up.

*disengenous

😂Thought you were confusing me with Schroedinger. 😆