Jump to content

Don't Miss a Beat

Join the UK's most passionate festival community. Keep up with the latest conversations, line-up rumours, and music news.

250,000+ Members

Connect with a massive network of fellow festival-goers.

Lively Discussions

Thousands of active topics on music, campsites, and tips.

Hot Rumours & News

Hear about secret sets and lineup drops before anyone else.

Create Free Account
OR
  • Sign Up!

    Join our friendly community of music lovers and be part of the fun 😎

When will this shit end?


Chrisp1986

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, SwedgeAntilles said:

The Ignore function is worth the price of Gold membership alone by the way.

And non gold members can use it. I didn't realise quite how bad the thread was until someone pointed it out. 

I tend to find anything of use from the trolls is quoted in another post. It really improves my mood when I can choose to engage in content by viewing specific posts rather than having their shit just appear everywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Ryan1984 said:

Should us in the UK be concerned about the amount of countries now suspending the AstraZeneca vaccine? @Toilet Duck?

It seems the right thing to do if there are genuine concerns but it seems odd they are not reflected in our roll out (so far).

We've had more deaths after Pfizer than after AZN...

 

 

We have a different regulatory ideology really! Europe wants evidence of no harm, whereas we want evidence of harm (in a simplistic sense)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, zahidf said:

We've had more deaths after Pfizer than after AZN...

 

 

We have a different regulatory ideology really! Europe wants evidence of no harm, whereas we want evidence of harm (in a simplistic sense)

 

I think realistically this country would only withdraw the route to normality if there were thousands of deaths or long term reactions. We're a long way off the risk/reward being anywhere near enough to stop it. 

It could even be argued that hundreds or low thousands of adverse reactions would be acceptable. I  think there is an almost religious fervour around these vaccines that even talking about being worried about side effects is seen as some kind of blasphemy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

I think realistically this country would only withdraw the route to normality if there were thousands of deaths or long term reactions. We're a long way off the risk/reward being anywhere near enough to stop it. 

It could even be argued that hundreds or low thousands of adverse reactions would be acceptable. I  think there is an almost religious fervour around these vaccines that even talking about being worried about side effects is seen as some kind of blasphemy

It's single digit deaths after millions of doses in a few countries. That's a massive exaggeration from you 

Edited by zahidf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, efcfanwirral said:

I think realistically this country would only withdraw the route to normality if there were thousands of deaths or long term reactions. We're a long way off the risk/reward being anywhere near enough to stop it. 

It could even be argued that hundreds or low thousands of adverse reactions would be acceptable. I  think there is an almost religious fervour around these vaccines that even talking about being worried about side effects is seen as some kind of blasphemy

I think there’s also the opposite where any slight hint of a side effect creates a huge negative reaction and a “see, they’re not safe” response.

As with everything in life, the answer is to just take a balanced approach and keep an even keel. There’s bound to be side effects when you’re rolling out a vaccine to 50m people, and news of it shouldn’t provoke extreme reactions one way or another. Just examine the findings, draw conclusions and go from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, zahidf said:

We've had more deaths after Pfizer than after AZN...

 

 

We have a different regulatory ideology really! Europe wants evidence of no harm, whereas we want evidence of harm (in a simplistic sense)

 

Looks equal to me. 1 and 1 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, zahidf said:

It's single digit deaths after millions of doses in a few countries. That's a massive exaggeration from you 

I'm not saying there are, just saying that even if there were that's not a good enough reason to stop them. Kind of agreeing that it's being blown out of all proportion. Just keep going, whatever happens happens. It's VERY unlikely we'd ever see a proportional issue that should undermine what the vaccines are there for 

But if I talk about the potential of needing to clear my calendar the day after mine due to some struggling to my dad he calls me a conspiracy theorist...

Edited by efcfanwirral
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

I'm not saying there are, just saying that even if there were that's not a good enough reason to stop them. Kind of agreeing that it's being blown out of all proportion. Just keep going, whatever happens happens. It's VERY unlikely we'd ever see a proportional issue that should undermine what the vaccines are there for 

But if I talk about the potential of needing to clear my calendar the day after mine due to some struggling to my dad he calls me a conspiracy theorist...

You know what's even more stupid about all these AZ suspensions. That EVEN if, after detailed analysis, it was concluded that there was a small potential risk/causal link between the vaccine and blood clots then the likely outcome would be that the programme would be restarted... with an additional potential side effect added of possibility of blood clots!

 

It is extremely unlikely (somebody more knowledgeable correct me if i'm wrong) that the outcome would be the banning of the vaccine. Because the rewards would clearly be assessed as outweighing the risks. There are other medical products that list blood clots as theoretical possible side effects in a minute number of cases (somebody suggested the morning after pill?).

It just doing the anti-vaxxers work and undermining confidence piece by piece (which is the REAL danger to comprehensive vaccine rollout). So stupid and sad. The irony is that AZ is using a proven technology. The real experiment going on is Pfizer/Moderna.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, zahidf said:

You know what's even more stupid about all these AZ suspensions. That EVEN if, after detailed analysis, it was concluded that there was a small potential risk/causal link between the vaccine and blood clots then the likely outcome would be that the programme would be restarted... with an additional potential side effect added of possibility of blood clots!

 

It is extremely unlikely (somebody more knowledgeable correct me if i'm wrong) that the outcome would be the banning of the vaccine. Because the rewards would clearly be assessed as outweighing the risks. There are other medical products that list blood clots as theoretical possible side effects in a minute number of cases (somebody suggested the morning after pill?).

It just doing the anti-vaxxers work and undermining confidence piece by piece (which is the REAL danger to comprehensive vaccine rollout). So stupid and sad. The irony is that AZ is using a proven technology. The real experiment going on is Pfizer/Moderna.

Or there is an issue with a specific batch, that batch is discarded and the manufacturing issue that contributed to the blood clots is resolved, preventing further deaths caused by the vaccine.

Given UK vaccines are not from that batch, I'm comfortable with our programme continuing, but it's not ridiculous to pause in other countries. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, stuartbert two hats said:

Or there is an issue with a specific batch, that batch is discarded and the manufacturing issue that contributed to the blood clots is resolved, preventing further deaths caused by the vaccine.

Given UK vaccines are not from that batch, I'm comfortable with our programme continuing, but it's not ridiculous to pause in other countries. 

Pausing from that batch is more reasonable. Some countries are pausing all AZN vaccines though which seems an over reaction

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Latest Activity

    • Just listened to the new Madonna album, it would be a catastrophe if that isn't played on the pyramid!
    • Restore getting more than Lib Dems is not good.
    • https://x.com/amirtibon/status/2083054470871535853   Some thoughts on the Gaza agreement announced overnight, which despite my reservations and concerns, I hope will be implemented. 1. Donald Trump is trying to collect "wins" and "achievements" ahead of the midterm elections. His party is entering that election at a disadvantage, but because Democrats may choose weak and unpopular candidates in specific states, much like Republicans did in 2022, there's a reason for Trump to at least try achieving a surprising result like the one Biden secured four years ago.   2. The will to provide Trump such a "win" was an important motivation for all sides involved in this agreement: Hamas, Netanyahu, Qatar, Egypt, UAE and Turkey. All of them hope, each for their own reasons, that the transactional president will remember their role in the agreement and the positive media coverage it has generated and will continue to generate. You can like it or not, but that's the nature of diplomacy, especially in the Middle East, under Trump.   3. Netanyahu and his band of liars in the Israeli media (and the last few suckers in the American media still buying his spin) are already trying to oversell the agreement and present it in terms that contradict the Board of Peace statements and briefings. Of course, the October 7 Prime Minister can't just say the truth on this one, which goes something like: "I'm trying to stay on good terms with Trump ahead of an election here in Israel that will determine my personal fate and whether or not I go to jail in 2027."   4. For Hamas, the agreement is a way to buy time and survive, which is basically the organization's overarching goal since October 7. They lost most of their leadership and thousands of their fighters; they will also, I believe, give up some of their weapons to the new Gaza-based Palestinian government, which is a good thing. But at the bottom of all their decisions is a simple calculation: being able to say, "we committed the most deadly and humiliating attack against Israel since the start of the conflict, and survived as a movement and an organization to tell about it."   5. Hamas was able to say that yesterday, before the agreement was signed, and it can also say that today, after the conclusion of the negotiations. So in that regard, the agreement is preferable to the murky post-war reality that preceded it, in which Hamas was recruiting again thousands of young fighters, holding on to all its weapons, and controlling 99% of Gaza's population, making money off people buying fuel and cigarettes. Changing even a part of that terrible reality, by collecting some of the weapons and allowing progress on reconstruction under a non-Hamas government, is better. It means coming to terms with the fact that Israel under this government failed to dismantle Hamas and allowed its survival even before this agreement was signed.   6. Do I think the agreement will be fully implemented over the next 300 days, as I understand the timeline? I'm highly skeptical. But I'm also asking: what are the alternatives? Netanyahu, in his quest for political survival at all costs, ignored David Ben-Gurion's national security strategy of seeking short and decisive wars, which was based on Israel's unique internal and external challenges that make it dangerous for this country to have long wars of attrition. The result is an Israel that is hated, isolated and denounced around the world like never before, and is totally reliant on the support of one man (TRUMP) to avoid crushing international sanctions. Going to war in Gaza once again based on the same promise of "finishing Hamas," which this government failed to achieve after three long years, would have been suicidal unless Trump promised his full backing. And Trump, for good reasons, can't give such a commitment after his bitter experience with Netanyahu in Iran and Lebanon.   7. For me and my family, these are all very personal, not only political, questions. My six-year-old daughter will start school on the Gaza border in exactly one month, as we rebuild our life in the same home where Hamas tried to murder us on October 7. We've learned over the years to be highly skeptical of premature victory announcements and diplomatic celebrations. When these things collapse under the cynical realities of the conflict, most of those announcing them are not around to face the consequences. Still, I don't see a better alternative to the 20-Point Plan that Trump presented last year, at least not with Israel's current position of isolation and exhaustion under this government. So I have some hope that the agreement will succeed, even partially, and deliver a period of quiet. For us on the border, that would be significant after three years of war and trauma. And maybe in the long run, with different Israeli and Palestinian leadership, this will become a first step in a broader positive change for the region.
    • Until they're through the first round of votes there's no point believing any reports about who'll win.
    • David Byrne’s obviously got a few hits to play, but he’s not cheesy enough for the Legend Slot. Other headliner perhaps?
  • Featured Products

  • Hot Topics

  • Latest Tourdates

×
×
  • Create New...