When will this shit end?

[efcfanwirral]

4 minutes ago, JBarbour said:

The questions I have:

What does the Government do if there is slow uptake in the under 30s/40s? Do they just apply more peer-pressure via passports? Will they just leave it to herd-immunity? Will herd-immunity amongst the young and healthy be enough to suppress the virus if there is slow uptake? I understand not being able to convince antivaxxers but how can the scientific and medical community reassure people and get the messaging right. Can this / will this vaccine be eventually like the flu jab and be given at a certain age / existing health issues? How often will the vaccine need to be taken? Would it be better to build up natural immunity rather than regular vaccines? 

Well Israel's Green passes apparently expire after 6 months until they take a top up, and they said we'll look at how other countries are doing things so I'm assuming that's where we'll end up 

[steviewevie]

30 minutes ago, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

As the other poster I'm more worried of adverse effects of a vaccine than I am Covid.

For me the answer is time or until I'm more worried or scared of Covid than I am a vaccine. At 35 I feel I have time on my side and I don't need to make a choice right now. All these tactics from the government with things like vaccine passports are actually making me more determined not to have the vaccine because I don't approve of bullying which is exactly what this is becoming.

My other half had a spare jab two weeks ago, felt like shit for the best part of a week, has just summed it up nicely for me after the press conference, 'I had this jab so I and everyone else could back to something like normal, now I'm being told I will have to have a test if I want to go to the theatre. That's not normal - I'd probably have been no worse off having had covid and I'd not have the worry about clots caused by the vaccine. I might even have had it but I'll never know because there is no mention of anti body tests anymore'

yeah, but the greater good....

[Billy Corgan's Ego]

MHRA considering stopping AZ jab in younger people. Not great news is this transpires 

[steviewevie]

Maybe they should just stick all under 30s in an army and go to war with China.

[efcfanwirral]

2 minutes ago, Billy Corgan's Ego said:

MHRA considering stopping AZ jab in younger people. Not great news is this transpires 

We don't have much supply coming for first doses, younger was always going to have to be covered by new ones novavax, j and j, moderna) to meet deadlines. Not the disaster it sounds 

[Ozanne]

 

 

[steviewevie]

Just now, efcfanwirral said:

We don't have much supply coming for first doses, younger was always going to have to be covered by new ones novavax, j and j, moderna) to meet deadlines. Not the disaster it sounds 

yeah, one jab J&J's...shoot them when they're all in the park.

[scatteredscreens]

29 minutes ago, RobertProsineckisLighter said:

Short term no which is great. 

You and many others have no real grasp about the history of vaccines. The human body doesn't work like many think it does, 5 years wont pass and then people will start obtaining numerous illnesses or bodily function failures. This isn't the first nor last vaccination that's been rolled out, we've given out much more sceptical vaccines in a much less advanced society without any dodgy affects in the past. The first flu jab didn't mess anyone up for example.

Edited April 5, 2021 by scattered_screens

[scatteredscreens]

Edit: double post

Edited April 5, 2021 by scattered_screens

[Billy Corgan's Ego]

1 minute ago, efcfanwirral said:

We don't have much supply coming for first doses, younger was always going to have to be covered by new ones novavax, j and j, moderna) to meet deadlines. Not the disaster it sounds 

The dent to public confidence is what concerns me

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, Ozanne said:

 

 

Stupid fucking EU.

Oh, we're not in it anymore.

[JBarbour]

12 minutes ago, HalfAnIdiot said:

Taking the vaccine early protects wider society sooner. Taking it later reduces the benefit to society (increased risk of you catching covid and passing it on to someone else who might die). Oh, and increased  long-covid risk to yourself too too. 

Your actions have consequences

There 'might' be a long term issue with the vaccine. Do all the research you like but it won't help. It's in the future. No one has a crystal ball 

Why on earth do you need the approval of strangers on the Internet anyway?  Do whatever makes you comfortable. 

 

So the young and healthy should just take the chance? Its unlikely/slim chance of long term side effects but we dont have a crystal ball, thats in the future. Do your own research, but there are consequences to your actions, so we'll peer-pressure you to have it in our time-frame for the "greater-good" and wider society.   

You see what I mean about being reluctant or scared of taking the vaccine but there is society wide peer pressure.   

[efcfanwirral]

4 minutes ago, Billy Corgan's Ego said:

The dent to public confidence is what concerns me

I don't think thats a good enough reason to knowingly put people at risk of a rare autoimmune response if they believe that's what's happening, however few people that is happening to. No excuses to ignore that when there are other vaccines available 

[gizmoman]

5 minutes ago, scattered_screens said:

You and many others have no real grasp about the history of vaccines. The human body doesn't work like many think it does, 5 years wont pass and then people will start obtaining numerous illnesses or bodily function failures. This isn't the first nor last vaccination that's been rolled out, we've given out much more sceptical vaccines in a much less advanced society without any dodgy affects in the past. The first flu jab didn't mess anyone up for example.

It's the first mRNA "vaccine" (it's not even a vaccine in the usual sense), and the first time an experimental vaccine has been used on such a large scale, there are theoretical long term dangers, hopefully they won't come to pass, but as the blood clotting issue shows, not all the possible side affects were realised during the limited trials, anyone who thinks this isn't an ongoing experiment is naive.

[Billy Corgan's Ego]

1 minute ago, efcfanwirral said:

I don't think thats a good enough reason to knowingly put people at risk of a rare autoimmune response if they believe that's what's happening, however few people that is happening to. No excuses to ignore that when there are other vaccines available 

I absolutely agree its not a good enough reason and if the data backs it up, it should happen. I'm simply saying that if it is the case, it's a blow. 

[Toilet Duck]

5 minutes ago, JBarbour said:

The questions I have:

What does the Government do if there is slow uptake in the under 30s/40s? Do they just apply more peer-pressure via passports? Will they just leave it to herd-immunity? Will herd-immunity amongst the young and healthy be enough to suppress the virus if there is slow uptake? I understand not being able to convince antivaxxers but how can the scientific and medical community reassure people and get the messaging right. Can this / will this vaccine be eventually like the flu jab and be given at a certain age / existing health issues? How often will the vaccine need to be taken? Would it be better to build up natural immunity rather than regular vaccines? 

So, there isn’t a straight answer to much of that! Personally, I don’t agree with mandatory vaccination for the most part (I do agree with mandatory vaccination in healthcare, but not with emergency use vaccines). I expect uptake to drop off significantly in younger age groups, however, if some form of health certification becomes required for international travel, it may change some minds. Is that coercion? Or is it countries protecting themselves from importing infection while they are still not fully protected? (I can’t answer that!).
 

The data on the longevity of immunity following natural infection suggests that in terms of picking up the virus, there’s probably some protection for 6-8 months and likely cellular immunity that would protect from more severe disease for a good bit longer than that. But the vaccines induce a far greater immune response with much stronger sterilising immunity. If we don’t vaccinate kids, then the virus stays with us, becomes a disease of early childhood and they probably catch it seasonally (with hopefully the same range of symptoms we currently see, ie not much). Should this also be the approach in under 30s? There’s certainly an argument in favour of it, and indeed, this cohort has already had a greater number of infections. One of the arguments against this is the emergence of variants, but I’ve yet to see a nightmare variant scenario. The other argument against this is that we now have solid evidence that the vaccines suppress transmission. So, if enough people are vaccinated, the virus could actually be eliminated. Not eradicated (ie gone forever), but gone most of the time with flare-ups here and there from time to time. This is a fairly desirable scenario and one that can’t be achieved by letting the virus seasonally circulate in extremely low risk populations. 
 

What we don’t know is how long the immunity from natural infection itself lasts or whether we will forever be chasing our tails if we do pursue elimination. My own expectation is that the virus will circulate seasonally, younger people will catch it and get a cold (or nothing) most of the time, older people will get regular vaccinations (maybe seasonally, maybe longer than that, we still don’t know). Until the world settles into this, I expect some form of vaccine cert, positive antibody test or negative antigen test to be required for travel (I think it’s almost pointless at this stage for much else, it was needed last year, not now, or at least, it has some merit in the short term til the vaccination campaign is completed, but after that, not so much)...

[efcfanwirral]

Just now, Billy Corgan's Ego said:

I absolutely agree its not a good enough reason and if the data backs it up, it should happen. I'm simply saying that if it is the case, it's a blow. 

It could to be fair encourage more people on the fence because its clear they're following safety procedures and actually acting on them? 

[sjseabass]

1 hour ago, JBarbour said:

I've already mentioned I've not been speaking about blood clots. I've been speaking about the unknown and how young , healthy people maybe reluctant. I'm more scared of the vaccine and the unknown than of dying of covid (0.0006% chance of dying ). People have a choice its their health and body. No where have I said I'm anti vax and not taking the vaccine but that's want I get labelled with because I don't just fall in line. 

I've used previous examples how we've been told vaccines safe. UK Health Protection Agency (now Public Health England) undertook a major study of 4- to 18-year-olds and found that around one in every 55,000 Pandemrix jabs led to narcolepsy. Can people not have access to that information and make a choice based on that information. I don't understand how I'm anti vax for bringing that up. 

Why do you use a percentage for the chance of death from Covid, but a fraction for the chance of getting narcolepsy from a completely different vaccine? 1 in 55,000 is 0.0018%.

So only three times more likely than *literally dying*. There’s hospitalisation and long Covid to consider as well.

[Billy Corgan's Ego]

1 minute ago, efcfanwirral said:

It could to be fair encourage more people on the fence because its clear they're following safety procedures and actually acting on them? 

I'd be amazed if the result from any ban would be a net gain as opposed to a net loss. 

[efcfanwirral]

4 minutes ago, Billy Corgan's Ego said:

I'd be amazed if the result from any ban would be a net gain as opposed to a net loss. 

True though could fall in the middle. Equally imagine what would happen if they did a few million under 40s with it and it was proved to be true whkke the rollout was ongoing 

Edited April 5, 2021 by efcfanwirral

[scatteredscreens]

@eFestivalsplease shut this dumb thread, probably the worst thread in efests history

[efcfanwirral]

10 minutes ago, Barry Fish said:

FFS this thread is being taken over by anti vaxx w*nkers

Even if we suspend it in younger people it will still be a risk barely worth registering and only because we have alternatives

Ffs

Well yes we have alternatives. That's the point- the MHRA aren't making a decision based on us not

Edited April 5, 2021 by efcfanwirral

[steviewevie]

2 minutes ago, scattered_screens said:

@eFestivalsplease shut this dumb thread, probably the worst thread in efests history

best fred ever

[efcfanwirral]

1 minute ago, scattered_screens said:

@eFestivalsplease shut this dumb thread, probably the worst thread in efests history

To be fair it's the single most important thing to affect festivals - though I think it probably would be better without those of us who can sometimes slip into alternative views! 

[JBarbour]

Just now, theevilfridge said:

Why do you use a percentage for the chance of death from Covid, but a fraction for the chance of getting narcolepsy from a completely different vaccine? 1 in 55,000 is 0.0018%.

So only three times more likely than *literally dying*. There’s hospitalisation and long Covid to consider as well.

I was using that as an example as a recent vaccine role out. 

9 minutes ago, Toilet Duck said:

So, there isn’t a straight answer to much of that! Personally, I don’t agree with mandatory vaccination for the most part (I do agree with mandatory vaccination in healthcare, but not with emergency use vaccines). I expect uptake to drop off significantly in younger age groups, however, if some form of health certification becomes required for international travel, it may change some minds. Is that coercion? Or is it countries protecting themselves from importing infection while they are still not fully protected? (I can’t answer that!).
 

The data on the longevity of immunity following natural infection suggests that in terms of picking up the virus, there’s probably some protection for 6-8 months and likely cellular immunity that would protect from more severe disease for a good bit longer than that. But the vaccines induce a far greater immune response with much stronger sterilising immunity. If we don’t vaccinate kids, then the virus stays with us, becomes a disease of early childhood and they probably catch it seasonally (with hopefully the same range of symptoms we currently see, ie not much). Should this also be the approach in under 30s? There’s certainly an argument in favour of it, and indeed, this cohort has already had a greater number of infections. One of the arguments against this is the emergence of variants, but I’ve yet to see a nightmare variant scenario. The other argument against this is that we now have solid evidence that the vaccines suppress transmission. So, if enough people are vaccinated, the virus could actually be eliminated. Not eradicated (ie gone forever), but gone most of the time with flare-ups here and there from time to time. This is a fairly desirable scenario and one that can’t be achieved by letting the virus seasonally circulate in extremely low risk populations. 
 

What we don’t know is how long the immunity from natural infection itself lasts or whether we will forever be chasing our tails if we do pursue elimination. My own expectation is that the virus will circulate seasonally, younger people will catch it and get a cold (or nothing) most of the time, older people will get regular vaccinations (maybe seasonally, maybe longer than that, we still don’t know). Until the world settles into this, I expect some form of vaccine cert, positive antibody test or negative antigen test to be required for travel (I think it’s almost pointless at this stage for much else, it was needed last year, not now, or at least, it has some merit in the short term til the vaccination campaign is completed, but after that, not so much)...

Thanks for your reply. I suppose I've got another few months before I get a jab anyway. So things may change again, more data, more info on passports.