Will you be taking the jab?

[Inka]

That sounded very selfish, the way I phrased it! Of course, I also care about passing it on to others, including members of my own family who are vulnerable, and people in my wider community.

I also want Covid gone - well as ‘gone’ as it can be - and I think vaccination will help us get back to normal. I presume that Covid vaccination will become an annual thing like the flu vaccination.

 

[Robin]

Hi Reece,

It's a very good question and I; like many (even without diabetes), have probably been asking the same question over the past few months.

I'm in favour of vaccines as they can offer a lot of protection against many very dangerous diseases. However, these new mRNA "vaccines" had never been allowed to be tested on humans until now (for a good reason i'd suppose).

It's for each of us to weigh up our own risk vs benefit. The risks of catching the virus are low, and the risk of anything serious happening is very low if one is under the age of 70. To me, for the the majority of us, the risk of dying or being very ill from covid19 is so small that it “would normally be deemed an acceptable part of life”.

There are also many unanswered questions about the new vaccines, which one also has to also weigh up if undecided about going ahead.

I've been hearing this "anyone can catch it" and "anyone can pass it on" almost every day (including today) since the very beginning of the campaign, but if it that is true, it doesn't say much for the vaccines does it?

I've got lots of questions yet to be answered, before I could even be in an informed position to be able to make a decision about these novel mRNA vaccines.

These are my questions so far:

1. If vaccines are fully tested and safe, why are governments indemnifying them and if the new vaccines are not safe and not fully tested why are governments indemnifying them?

2. Why is it that vaccine companies are not liable (when things go wrong) for their vaccines, but the public are being held liable if they don't get the vaccine because they are being told that they "may infect others" if they pass on the virus? Hardly seems logical or fair to put pressure/coercian (lockdowns etc) on to the public to take a vaccine when the vaccine manufacturers themselves aren't liable for their own vaccines.

3. I keep hearing covid19 can affect anyone, but surely if one has had a full vaccination, this won't be the case or would it?

If a vaccine doesn't prevent transmission of covid19, is it a vaccine? if not, what is it? Isn't that what vaccines have always done....prevent infection and prevent transmission?

If a vaccine doesn't stop infection, is it a vaccine? if not, what is it? Isn't that what vaccines have always done....prevent infection and prevent transmission?

4. What about pathogenic priming...has this been looked into with the new vaccines?

5. What percentage of adverse reactions aren't being reported? 1/10? 9/10?

6. How long do the vaccines give immunity for?

7. Do vaccines give longer immunity than naturally aquired immunity (proven to be at least be 6 months after 6 months of study)

8. Are the mRNA vaccines safe for pregnant women? (unborn babies)

9. What is known about interaction with all other prescribed drugs?

10. What is the relative risk reduction after having the vaccine compared to not having the vaccine?

11. What are the risks/effects of mixing 2 different vaccines?

12. If the vaccines only reduce the symptoms, for the vast majority, wouldn't that only mean more taste in their food and a bit less coughing as most people don't even know they have it?

13. Will the vaccines bring life back to pre-covid19 days, life as we all know it? If not, why not?

Here goes...
1. Even if a vaccine was 100% safe, drug companies are vulnerable to incurring huge legal costs if a group of people who think their symptoms (which may be unrelated) came about from having the vaccine decide to bring a class action to sue.
2. The U.K. government decided to carry the risk. The EU didn't, so the vaccine companies are liable in some countries, depending on what was negotiated. Where the vaccine companies are bearing the risk, they will be charging a higher price for the vaccines.
3. Even the best vaccine only professes a 90-95% cover rate, which amounts to quite a few people when you are talking about millions of vaccines, and you don’t know who the 5-10% for whom the vaccine didn’t 'take' are. So anyone could be vulnerable and we don’t know who.
Vaccines don’t stop infection surely? You get infected, and the vaccine has taught your body to recognise and mount an attack against it. It is theoretically possible to shed the virus while your body is fighting it.
4. Don’t know what this means.
5-11. The answers to these all basically boil down to the fact that you can’t say anything long term about a vaccine that has only been used for 6 months. Scientists won’t speculate. If someone still has immunity after 6 months, the chances are they’ll continue, but scientists won’t say that because it hasn’t been measured. Similarly, it was unethical to trial it on pregnant women, so we just don’t know.
11. Unknown, and we don’t know if it’s going to happen yet. They have started a trial, but the results won’t be known til the end of it.
12.Yes. For the mild cases. But there are a lot of severe cases, and it’s not possible to predict who will get it seriously. Reference one of our members who reported this morning that their friend died at 50 with no preexisting conditions.
13. No. At least not til we get to a point where we know who needs an annual booster, the virus isn’t circulating much any more because of the vaccine programme, and because some people now have natural immunity. But things might be a bit more relaxed as we know more.
Phew! Sorry if I’ve missed anything. For me, it boils down to the fact that if I waited til all the trials had been done, (possibly over a period of years), and all questions could be answered, I’d probably have caught it or died of old age.
Hope this helps, I’m going for a coffee! (And I’m going for my vaccination as soon as I’m called!)

 

[Amity Island]

Here goes...
1. Even if a vaccine was 100% safe, drug companies are vulnerable to incurring huge legal costs if a group of people who think their symptoms (which may be unrelated) came about from having the vaccine decide to bring a class action to sue.
2. The U.K. government decided to carry the risk. The EU didn't, so the vaccine companies are liable in some countries, depending on what was negotiated. Where the vaccine companies are bearing the risk, they will be charging a higher price for the vaccines.
3. Even the best vaccine only professes a 90-95% cover rate, which amounts to quite a few people when you are talking about millions of vaccines, and you don’t know who the 5-10% for whom the vaccine didn’t 'take' are. So anyone could be vulnerable and we don’t know who.
Vaccines don’t stop infection surely? You get infected, and the vaccine has taught your body to recognise and mount an attack against it. It is theoretically possible to shed the virus while your body is fighting it.
4. Don’t know what this means.
5-11. The answers to these all basically boil down to the fact that you can’t say anything long term about a vaccine that has only been used for 6 months. Scientists won’t speculate. If someone still has immunity after 6 months, the chances are they’ll continue, but scientists won’t say that because it hasn’t been measured. Similarly, it was unethical to trial it on pregnant women, so we just don’t know.
11. Unknown, and we don’t know if it’s going to happen yet. They have started a trial, but the results won’t be known til the end of it.
12.Yes. For the mild cases. But there are a lot of severe cases, and it’s not possible to predict who will get it seriously. Reference one of our members who reported this morning that their friend died at 50 with no preexisting conditions.
13. No. At least not til we get to a point where we know who needs an annual booster, the virus isn’t circulating much any more because of the vaccine programme, and because some people now have natural immunity. But things might be a bit more relaxed as we know more.
Phew! Sorry if I’ve missed anything. For me, it boils down to the fact that if I waited til all the trials had been done, (possibly over a period of years), and all questions could be answered, I’d probably have caught it or died of old age. Hope this helps, I’m going for a coffee!

Hi Robin,

Thanks for your reply! I hope you had a well deserved cup of coffee. 🙂

I think your answers draw to the same conclusion?.... that there are a lot of unknowns, hence why I raised those questions. I'd actually say there are currently more unknowns than knowns?

Personally, I'd of like to of had more knowns before they were released en-masse. I understand why it was done that way, but that's no help in making a decision. That's only my opinion on it, each to their own.

 

[Barbie1]

And of course there’s always the issue of the tracking devices from some millionaire in the US and the government’s plans to subdue us all into Stepford wives
Best not methinks

 

[Reece Sargent]

Thanks for all the messages. A lot of differing opinions! I will go through them all and do some research and will come to my own conclusions. Again, thank you.

 

[K_B]

Thanks for all the messages. A lot of differing opinions! I will go through them all and do some research and will come to my own conclusions. Again, thank you.

Hey Reece! I can see you've had loads of responses to this but I just thought I'd say I'm 30 (type 1) and got my Pfizer jab 2 weeks ago - it was totally fine! A very mild headache the next day and that was it. Hope that helps put your mind at ease a bit!

 

[everydayupsanddowns]

Hey Reece! I can see you've had loads of responses to this but I just thought I'd say I'm 30 (type 1) and got my Pfizer jab 2 weeks ago - it was totally fine! A very mild headache the next day and that was it. Hope that helps put your mind at ease a bit!

I’ve had the AZ jab, with the merest hint of fuzzy headedness, just enough to convince me that my immune system was busy 🙂

 

[Midnightcatpatrol]

There are now several studies that demonstrate all the vaccines, including the pfizer mrna vaccine, prevent transmission. That this remains a debatable point - concept even - I find staggering, and our media do merit some blame for scare mongering about this. Lower viral loads result in less transmission. It may indeed result in lower mortality directly but that is of less concern. You are trying to mimic the herd immunity derived from the disease rampaging through the population unabated.

By pathogenic priming I am going to assume to mean early death from severe AI reactions. All this data is publically available on gov.uk. as of yet, the phase 4 data isn't concerning, not were any phase prior. Sure, younger people have better immune systems and might have a higher risk of that. There is a group of predominantly young people who have been vaccinated. Healthcare workers. We haven't been dropping down dead from the vaccine.

Long term we don't know and to level that question is a little unfair. Given what we know if other SARS 1 i think the estimate of 'about a decade' doesn't sound unreasonable.

Whether it's safe in pregnant women. Unfair question I'm afraid old chap. Good luck trying to test anything new on pregnant women (and sometimes women in general). Ethics board just don't go for it. Your pills and potions you take every day, yeah, they quite probably were not tested on women.

With the indemnity, they just wanted to roll it out. They know the economic impact is enormous and personally I dread what's coming. Further, it was politically expedient for them to get a 'win'. Ultimately someone in whitehall decided that the probability of x number of people dying from adverse events was low enough to outweigh all other risks. Let me emphasize, this is an everyday occurrence. Everyday someone somewhere in either the public, private or third sector play stats with your existence. As do you.

As an example of blanket cover, Crown indemnity covers docs for all practice that isn't criminally negligent basically.

In my view, you'll be fine. I had the pfizer one, as did all the other hospital staff I know. If you don't want it, get another type, there's a lot of choice now!

 

[goodybags]

I had it just over 2 weeks ago, hardly any side effect other than a sore shoulder 24 hrs after
I would recommend everyone have it as soon as it’s offered, but appreciate its everybody’s choice

I’ve Friends & Family members who had Covid
I have one friend in hospital right now

Plus lost my Mother (pneumonia) last spring, but due to COVID we still haven’t had a wake nor hugged family following a brief private service for close family only at the crematorium, that’s why I had my Jab as soon as it was available to me.

 

[NotWorriedAtAll]

I went with my husband yesterday and we both had our first jab of AstraZeneca.
It was the first time I had been in a building other than my own home for a year and the first time I had been near strangers.
I had a major panic attack and went non-verbal. But I got it done. I am a bit snuffly today and my arm is a bit sore. My husband is feeling quite ropy but we both believe it was the right thing to do. I am hoping we will be able to see my 89 year old mum in a couple of months and help organise her vaccination. She hasn't left her home for nearer two years so we are hoping we will be able to get her a home visit to be vaccinated.