Risky business?

[ethariel]

Originally Posted by SV650rules;

There is conjecture as to whether some patient will show up for the second dose anyway if they have bad effects from the first jab, as it seems the reaction to second jab can be worse than the to the first.

[URL

https://bgr.com/2020/08/27/coronavirus-deaths-men-vs-women-immune-response/[/URL]

https://towardsdatascience.com/covid...m-7d185bd6cfe2

Absolutely correct, often a first dose or course with a medication will offer up limited to no side effects in most (tho not all) cases, it's the second dose/course where all the nasties pop up.

I took an antibiotic for an abscess all good, 6 months later, same antibiotic same reason and it destroyed all the bacteria, good or bad in my digestive tract and that took 2 and a half years of hell to recover.

For the Covid Jab - A single dose is massively less probable at any kind of adverse reaction but where I'm unhappy is that the manufacturer says 21 days, there is limited data on the longevity of a full course and none on a half course. Of course the drug companies could just be padding it out that '2 doses are needed' from a profit point of view but if they are not, and are right about the 21 day gap being the only way it works properly, then I hope the good old Government is ready for the wrath of litigation for bolloxing it all up and killing millions.

[svenrico]

Originally Posted by Red Herring;31 24035

I do however see the bigger picture. If, for example, half the population follow your view and elect not to receive the vaccine where does that leave the country? Do we continue with Lockdown in order to protect you, or allow life to resume and expose you to infection and the NHS to having to deal with the consequence?

I agree, the vaccine is the way to get out of the restrictions and avoid lockdowns , but won't be effective if a lot of people refuse to have it.

[svenrico]

My wife and son no longer have a job and the sooner the vaccine is rolled out to as many people as possible the better as far as I am concerned so that things can get back to something more normal .
As far as the comments on civil unrest are concerned , I can see people becoming more intolerant of people whose behaviour risks spreading this virus or prolonging the restrictions.

[ethariel]

The simple way of raising the acceptance rate is to link your vaccination status to your passport in regards foreign travel, no jab, no leave UK. While it's possibly on the cards at this end it's more probable on the cards at the destination end.

There will however be holdouts regardless of what carrot/stick methods are used to get people to have the jab, unfortunately nature will take it's course amongst them over time.

[SV650rules]

The Vaccine companies, the NHS and presumably the government have been protected from legal action for any adverse affects of the vaccine because it is an 'emergency' medicine and they have not really had time to test it properly....

https://www.cityam.com/pfizer-given-...uk-government/

[DJ123]

Originally Posted by ethariel

The simple way of raising the acceptance rate is to link your vaccination status to your passport in regards foreign travel, no jab, no leave UK. While it's possibly on the cards at this end it's more probable on the cards at the destination end.

There will however be holdouts regardless of what carrot/stick methods are used to get people to have the jab, unfortunately nature will take it's course amongst them over time.

How are you going to enforce a policy for something that isn't mandatory . . . .

Similar to the Flu vaccine it's to help protect the vulnerable, not everybody. The same will happen with the CV Vaccine, limited numbers to protect the vulnerable.

"Not all deaths are a tragedy" Is a quote from a speech made in Parliament regarding those who succumb to Covid. The premature of a death of a Child, or young Adult who's lives have yet to start are a tragedy. The passing of someone much older (70+) is not, they have lived a life. It is not to suppress any emotions to the older Generations who are Parents, Grandparents or even Great Grandparents.

[DJ123]

Originally Posted by SV650rules

The Vaccine companies, the NHS and presumably the government have been protected from legal action for any adverse affects of the vaccine because it is an 'emergency' medicine and they have not really had time to test it properly....

https://www.cityam.com/pfizer-given-...uk-government/

Correct. Immunity has been granted for the companies producing the Vaccine, and probably the Government too.

[svenrico]

Originally Posted by DJ123

Similar to the Flu vaccine it's to help protect the vulnerable, not everybody. The same will happen with the CV Vaccine, limited numbers to protect the vulnerable.

"Not all deaths are a tragedy" Is a quote from a speech made in Parliament regarding those who succumb to Covid. The premature of a death of a Child, or young Adult who's lives have yet to start are a tragedy. The passing of someone much older (70+) is not, they have lived a life. It is not to suppress any emotions to the older Generations who are Parents, Grandparents or even Great Grandparents.

As a 71 year old I resent these comments.
The CV vaccine is initially being rolled out to protect the most vulnerable but in time is intended to protect everybody .
Even older people don't deserve to die just because they might have underlying health conditions , when they would have carried on living if they hadn't caught Covid.

[Biker Biggles]

Originally Posted by svenrico

As a 71 year old I resent these comments.
The CV vaccine is initially being rolled out to protect the most vulnerable but in time is intended to protect everybody .
Even older people don't deserve to die just because they might have underlying health conditions , when they would have carried on living if they hadn't caught Covid.

Agreed!
When we start to think of any section of society as vaguely expendable we sail very close to a very nasty philosophy. Best resisted before it becomes acceptable.

[DJ123]

I think i have probably not represented what i meant to say in the best manner. Let me try and find the speech that was made, as it was not about the Elderly being expendable.

I will clarify, that i'm not for letting anyone die unnecessarily regardless of age or any other factors.