If you didn't get the jab, would you consider having it now?

[AreYouVeryAnti]

You'd better be quick if you're healthy and under 50...

"The Telegraph understands the Government is also preparing to wind down the open offer of the first two doses over the coming months. The move will mean unvaccinated healthy under-50s will soon not be able to get a Covid jab unless one is recommended by a medical professional."

btw there was a consensus that there are no major side effects with the covid jabs, that they didn’t cause myocarditis or blood clots. And the longest consensus was that they don’t affect women’s periods!

and I remember very well in the first few days of jabbing, when 2 people in london (I think or uk anyway) had a serious Anaphylaxis reaction, the very first consensus was that this was exceptional, an extremely rare side effect. Then more had this and the consensus was updated to 1:1 million and they said that was on apr with other vaccines (true). Then more ppl had it and a month or so later the new consensus was 1:100,000, which has held for some time, but don’t know if recently. The articles are still there, for all these stages.

this regurgitating of what the current consensus is with proper amnesia of the previous consensus is mind boggling to me, how can you pull the wool over ppl’s eyes so easily? What gives?

how are ppl comfortable not knowing why extremely serious side effects like myocarditis) that have never been seen with other vaccines and with pharma and the gov not knowing either but, but still saying they are safe. These are only the big singlans com8mg through. It’s reasonable to assume smaller damages are going undetected, you can only dismiss nothing else going on when you know how and why these major side effects happen.

it’s absolutely amazing to watch the falling in line, mind and body, recalling only what fits, etc.

@CristinaNov182

I don’t think I’ve thrown about any insults - certainly not to the extent of inferring that anyone ‘thinks like a sheep’.

What I feel safest with is consensus opinion. Because it is the basic tenet of science. Whether it’s cancer treatment, sending a rocket to the moon - it would always be safer to go with what the majority of experts think : and not a niche study that has no backing.

Nothing is ever 100% correct all the time - and of course you will be able to find historical examples of where science has failed. But for every example where it has gone wrong, you have to balance that out by the many, many, many times that it has gone right.

The global situation now is that 13 billion doses of vaccine have been administered. 70% of the work is vaccinated. There is more than sufficient data and the advice in every single country around the globe is that the vaccine is safe and effective.

If I want safe advice on the possible injuries you describe, I need to look at the full range of publications on the issue. Not just a niche, politically biased, often highly controversial publication like unherd or an uncensored bit chute video. It’s a bit like going to an unregulated back street clinic for advice v’s a properly qualified doctor. Is the safety of the global population likely to be safer in the former or the latter?

why extremely serious side effects like myocarditis) that have never been seen with other vaccines

This is entirely untrue @CristinaNov182

There are many vaccines which have a far greater side effect profile including those considered "extremely serious" (carditis does not necessarily fall into that category, hence why most often it's reported as self-limiting), and carditis is an established side effect of other vaccines.

Covid affects periods too though
I tested positive and started my period 2 weeks early, the day I tested positive. Then I bled continuously and heavily for 18 days and a lot of my friends were similar

Today is my first one since covid and I've been on the floor trying not to pass out, crying in pain and vomiting. That's only since covid whereas I was fine after my vaccines 🤷🏽‍♀️

To me it's the lesser evil, I really needed the vaccines and I already take medication with side effects like an increased cancer risk, anaphylaxis, hair loss etc

And I don’t even want a “small” damage to my heart thank you very much.
If you don’t want even a small damage to your heart, then getting covid twice was a bit careless. Especially given that myocarditis is more common from covid than vaccination and more severe if you do get it.

it does come across that either you are not particularly well informed about the risks or your ability to weigh up the risk benefit ratio is perhaps a bit questionable.

@CristinaNov182

and I remember very well in the first few days of jabbing, when 2 people in london (I think or uk anyway) had a serious Anaphylaxis reaction, the very first consensus was that this was exceptional, an extremely rare side effect. Then more had this and the consensus was updated to 1:1 million and they said that was on apr with other vaccines (true). Then more ppl had it and a month or so later the new consensus was 1:100,000, which has held for some time, but don’t know if recently. The articles are still there, for all these stages.

this regurgitating of what the current consensus is with proper amnesia of the previous consensus is mind boggling to me, how can you pull the wool over ppl’s eyes so easily? What gives?

So you're suggesting here the risk of any side effect - then, at least - was 0.001%? That's incredibly tiny.

I used to regularly get anaphylaxis from a monthly injection I self-administered at home. This was due to the fact the mixture got into my bloodstream rather than stay intra-muscular - so my fault. It never occurred to me to blame anyone else.

What annoys me so much about posts like this is scientists across the globe worked so hard to find a way out of this pandemic, but people like you would prefer to see criminal behaviour in them. That I don't quite understand.

@FieldsOfRoses

I see now that decisions like these have been incredibly difficult for more people than I'd imagined.

BTW - you omitted the keyword' coercion'.

@FieldsOfRoses

You experienced it mildly, others were not so fortunate. Many others. Six and a half million others died globally. And many millions had their health compromised.

So now that 70% of the global population is vaccinated Covid is not such as risk and we are living freely in the UK again.

If you look at consensus data over safety - (and not niche studies where data may have been misinterpreted or omitted or misquoted to suit an agenda) the advice in every country around the globe is that the vaccine is safe an effective.

Thrre is no evidence that the vaccine effects fertility.

There is some evidence that Covid itself can cause fertility issues (in males), heart problems and death (over 6 and a half million deaths globally) and other health complications.

So on balance of risks - for the vast majority of the global population - it’s far safer to get vaccinated.

1. When you are looking at the global death toll - and possibly millions more who died in India, WHO actually believe Covid deaths are undercounted.

“The COVID-19 pandemic directly or indirectly caused 14.9 million deaths in 2020 and 2021, the World Health Organization said on Thursday, in its newest attempt to quantify the outbreak's terrible toll.

That's around 2.7 times more than the 5.42 million COVID-19 deaths the WHO says were previously reported through official channels in the same 2-year period.”

2. Some types of vaccines require boosters - such as the flu vaccine. Widespread vaccination reduces the viruses ability to mutate into new variants. Do you also think the flu vaccine is pointless as it needs boosters?

3). The official guidelines state ‘safe and effective’. I would say that your bias against the vaccine is causing you to overestimate cases of serious side effects. Plus you are not taking into account serious side effects from Covid itself including heart conditions and death.

@FieldsOfRoses

And your last paragraph doesn’t make any sense at all.

Consensus science :is the whole weight of the vast majority of peer reviewed, most robust evidence. Globally there are no guidelines stating anything other than :safe and effective. True that consensus science is not rigid - it changes when sufficient evidence becomes available to challenge a belief. The fringe studies you are perhaps favouring are not holding up
to peer scrutiny. And that message of : safe and effective is not changing.

Fringe science : from an article “For all their qualifications, fringe scientists fail to uphold this basic tenet of science. Lack of evidence for their position is airily dismissed as a cover-up by everyone from the WHO to the entire medical establishment. But this performative outrage is so much sound and fury to distract from the inescapable reality that their positions are completely contradicted by the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence. This is scientifically reprehensible, and staggeringly irresponsible, conduct.”

A friend died of a heart attack just before the vaccines were rolled out. His death certificate records one of the reasons for his death as Covid as Covid triggered a massive heart attack

What on earth is this? A reference "from an article" with a daft word salad?!

Someone told me there was going to be a name and shame campaign of the people who worked on all the Covid messaging - putting their faces on posters all over London so they have to atone for the damage they caused.

Wonder if that will happen to the bully posters on here, if they will get found and hounded for the damage they are doing?

Oh my goodness!

Who is this great ‘generally accepted’??

This isn’t a thread about masks/lockdowns we are talking about vaccines.

Tell me one country globally where the advice doesn’t not stipulate ‘safe and effective’.

If your delusions were true - 1 country, somewhere would be thinking….hmmmm, maybe something’s up..

Even Sweden, your favourite country for any anti lockdown argument - has one of the highest % vaccinated.

I think you need to turn off bit chute and try the real world for a bit.

And bullying?? Mumsnet are deleting posts from one side of this argument - and it’s certainly not my side!

I see we’ve reached the point where the enlightened have started quoting Nabarro out of context again. His point was we shouldn’t be locking down because we should have an effective test and trace system, masking in crowded indoor places at least and should isolate when ill.

And yes there is plenty of evidence that masks do work in reducing the likelihood of getting infected before we start on that.

Nabarro himself said he’d been misrepresented. The key phrase in the quote is primary response? And it was Nabarro himself that listed the test&trace, masks and isolating when unwell in relation to that quote and how to avoid lockdowns asa primary response.

If you didn’t want those things you shouldn’t use Nabarro to make a point about WHO doing a u turn and not expect to be pulled up on it.

@FieldsOfRoses

Here is Mumsnet’s stance :

Our overall aim is to make parent's lives easier and we moderate with this in mind. Clearly, 'fake news' or bad science isn't helpful for anyone, least of all parents - though we do find this kind of thing is quickly and robustly challenged on the boards - and we'll also remove links to dubious sources when reported.

So if I report your misrepresentation of science, Mumsnet deletes the post.

They make the choice of whether or not your post goes against their standards. Not me. So clearly their view is that you are promoting ‘bad science’. And I agree.

Free speech is fine until it harms others. And it sounds to me like you are more than happy to cancel anyone who disagrees with your views. What was it? Posters? Outing people as bullies??

@HelpfulMonkey

*Someone told me there was going to be a name and shame campaign of the people who worked on all the Covid messaging - putting their faces on posters all over London so they have to atone for the damage they caused.

Wonder if that will happen to the bully posters on here, if they will get found and hounded for the damage they are doing?*

This is peak insanity. For the side who shriek "It's so 1984!" all the time, this is so ... Orwellian.