Current Affairs Coronavirus Thread - Serious stuff !!!

[peteblue]

I see that certain people within the EU are now trying to blame Astra Zeneca, the same firm that they rubbished and put everyone off taking their jabs…what goes around comes around……

 

[Joey66]

Is there a reason why?

It's obviously your choice to make, but they are proven to protect you. I'm not sold on needing a booster yet myself but I don't have that choice to make anyway for at least another few months. If I end up needing to, I'll go and get it. I'd definitely say get your first two. Having had COVID, like many in here I'm, sure, when I was partially vaccinated, I can tell you it's not nice, and neither are the potential long-term effects that I'm still getting over 4 months later (my second jab played a part in that, btw, but to me it was worth taking still). I can't know for sure if I'd have been worse without the vaccine or not, but I'm glad I had at least one dose when I got ill.

Think about yourself first and foremost without getting into the debate about it being a selfless act, because ultimately the vaccine is just about giving your body an extra wall of protection against this thing.

The booster gives you approximately 95 percent protection I had it last week less side effects than the first two which were very mild ......
I am aware some people have had side effects - bare in mind is that worse than a dose of Covid leading to long term Covid ?

Plus the variants that may come to this country as Covid mutates ......

 

[BlueToff]

The booster gives you approximately 95 percent protection I had it last week less side effects than the first two which were very mild ......
I am aware some people have had side effects - bare in mind is that worse than a dose of Covid leading to long term Covid ?

Plus the variants that may come to this country as Covid mutates ......

Yeah, I'm only 26, fit and well, had COVID in July and had my second dose of vaccine in September, so I can't get a booster until at least March. I'm not convinced they should be banging the drum for younger people to definitely get the booster just yet, as I don't see there being tons of evidence that the vaccines or natural immunity wanes so much more in younger groups. But if that's changed by March time then sure thing, I'll get my booster.

 

[Ghost Rider]

What side effects did your wife get mate if you dont mind me asking?

Without going into too much details.

That thing that women do once a month, well the next time it happened after the jab , it lasted 2 months before it had to be forcably stopped by medication. But imagine a worst case scenario with that sort of thing like a horror story and you get the idea, and the knock on effects of it happening every day for so long.....

Only kicked off after the second one , nothing like it happened after the first. The booster she was (and still is) on medication for it.

That is tremendously unlucky and so statistically unlikely that it isn't a reason for anyone to not take the vaccine.

Your personal experience doesn't translate to the big picture.

As I've said previously, the only legit reason is something like known allergies.

You also cannot dismiss the fact these things exist though. These things exist, they just get removed online for being 'false informstion' on whatever platform they are posted. After all an algorithm cannot tell the difference between a conspiracy theory and a genuine experience when it's programmed to promote the vaccine.

So if my wife chose not to ever get the vaccine ever again, should other people be telling her there is no reason to get it? Just because somebody who didn't have a side effect wants to call them a moron on the internet?

You can't rule out personal experiences just because you don't hear about them. That's not how this should work. Promote the jab all you want but you can't dismiss people's personal experience either like they don't matter. It's not in this case but if others chose not to have the jab based on my wife's experience then they would have good reason not to, it really was a horrible experience for her.

The only reason she had her booster was because I did , if I hadn't have bothered I think the fear would have stopped her.

 

[Hickson9]

Without going into too much details.

That thing that women do once a month, well the next time it happened after the jab , it lasted 2 months before it had to be forcably stopped by medication. But imagine a worst case scenario with that sort of thing like a horror story and you get the idea, and the knock on effects of it happening every day for so long.....

Only kicked off after the second one , nothing like it happened after the first. The booster she was (and still is) on medication for it.


You also cannot dismiss the fact these things exist though. These things exist, they just get removed online for being 'false informstion' on whatever platform they are posted. After all an algorithm cannot tell the difference between a conspiracy theory and a genuine experience when it's programmed to promote the vaccine.

So if my wife chose not to ever get the vaccine ever again, should other people be telling her there is no reason to get it? Just because somebody who didn't have a side effect wants to call them a moron on the internet?

You can't rule out personal experiences just because you don't hear about them. That's not how this should work. Promote the jab all you want but you can't dismiss people's personal experience either like they don't matter. It's not in this case but if others chose not to have the jab based on my wife's experience then they would have good reason not to, it really was a horrible experience for her.

The only reason she had her booster was because I did , if I hadn't have bothered I think the fear would have stopped her.

She has a legitimate medical reason to not take it.

That doesn't mean that people should suggest to others that they not take it. Any risk is miniscule and far outweighed by the benefits.

So yes, when it comes to understanding profiles of risk, one can dismiss these things for the general population.

 

[Ghost Rider]

She has a legitimate medical reason to not take it.

That doesn't mean that people should suggest to others that they not take it. Any risk is miniscule and far outweighed by the benefits.

So yes, when it comes to understanding profiles of risk, one can dismiss these things for the general population.

She doesn't have a legit medical reason though, she has a medical issue resulting from the vaccine. There is a massive difference there , if she was an anti vaxxer, she wouldn't have ended up in hospital , on daily medication and probably wouldn't have covid as she doesn't go many places since the pandemic started.

So what value is public information if you dismiss the parts that don't fit? That is actually quite a dangerous attitude to have , dismissing anything negative to suit a purpose rather than an open and honest viewpoint pointing out the benefits over the negatives.

Because it's not about telling people not to take it, it's about weighing up all options and having personal choice to take the risk , no matter how small it is. The fact that 50 million people have took the risk is fine but if someone has a bad experience and someone else chooses not to get it as a result, not from a Facebook post, then how can you justify telling them they are wrong?

 

[Amw79]

She doesn't have a legit medical reason though, she has a medical issue resulting from the vaccine. There is a massive difference there , if she was an anti vaxxer, she wouldn't have ended up in hospital , on daily medication and probably wouldn't have covid as she doesn't go many places since the pandemic started.

So what value is public information if you dismiss the parts that don't fit? That is actually quite a dangerous attitude to have , dismissing anything negative to suit a purpose rather than an open and honest viewpoint pointing out the benefits over the negatives.

Because it's not about telling people not to take it, it's about weighing up all options and having personal choice to take the risk , no matter how small it is. The fact that 50 million people have took the risk is fine but if someone has a bad experience and someone else chooses not to get it as a result, not from a Facebook post, then how can you justify telling them they are wrong?

Only problem with this type of view, is that it conflates anecdote with data.

Ideally we want the public to make evidence based decisions, that is to say, decisions made on the totality of the evidence. However, realistically, we can’t expect the public to know or understand all the evidence, as people just don’t have the time, bandwidth or expertise, to be fully informed on everything.

People are generally more receptive to anecdote, so one harrowing experience sticks with them longer and on a more emotional level, than cold, hard data.

Coupled with this, you have massive distrust in institutions and experts, so it leaves much of the public primed to reject solid, evidence based conclusions from experts, and accept isolated rare cases as being more frequent and likely than they actually are in reality.

Best wishes to your missus though, sounds like she’s been extremely unlucky, and hope she returns to full health soon.

 

[peteblue]

Covid is 'no longer a disease for the vaccinated'​

Professor Sir Andrew Pollard wrote in the Guardian the pandemic is "still regarded as a silent pestilence" among the general public.
But he said: "This ongoing horror, which is taking place across ICUs in Britain, is now largely restricted to unvaccinated people."
Professor Pollard added that Covid "is no longer a disease for the vaccinated" and most people who are double-jabbed will experience only "mild infections" that are "little more than an unpleasant inconvenience".

 

[Bruce Wayne]

Funny isn't it? My mum is convinced that by going to CZ this week we're entering a plague pit, despite infection levels there now at broadly similar levels that we've had in the UK all autumn.

 

[tsubaki]

Funny isn't it? My mum is convinced that by going to CZ this week we're entering a plague pit, despite infection levels there now at broadly similar levels that we've had in the UK all autumn.

That’s what everyone has been told, not least by the PM when he warned everyone of the rising tide of cases in Europe whilst he was 100 fathoms down himself.

 

[Bruce Wayne]

That’s what everyone has been told, not least by the PM when he warned everyone of the rising tide of cases in Europe whilst he was 100 fathoms down himself.

She is one of those who likes him for being a "bit of a lad".

 

[grandjoeblue]

Covid is 'no longer a disease for the vaccinated'​

Professor Sir Andrew Pollard wrote in the Guardian the pandemic is "still regarded as a silent pestilence" among the general public.
But he said: "This ongoing horror, which is taking place across ICUs in Britain, is now largely restricted to unvaccinated people."
Professor Pollard added that Covid "is no longer a disease for the vaccinated" and most people who are double-jabbed will experience only "mild infections" that are "little more than an unpleasant inconvenience".

A 100% vaccinated society with appropriate boosters doesn't struggle with the virus thats definitely a fact.

After seeing the reaction of these anti vaxxers its going to be a difficult few months. Some of these people have been brainwashed, it's almost cult like.

 

[peteblue]

A 100% vaccinated society with appropriate boosters doesn't struggle with the virus thats definitely a fact.

After seeing the reaction of these anti vaxxers its going to be a difficult few months. Some of these people have been brainwashed, it's almost cult like.

As the German health minister said ‘they will be vaccinated, recovered or dead’…..

 

[LinekersLegs]

 

[peteblue]

She is one of those who likes him for being a "bit of a lad".

You should listen to your mum…..