[Misc] Will we have another lockdown ?

[Albion in the north]

A reasonable and well written reply with some fair challenge. A contrast to some of the childish ramblings from one of the giant ego fuelled bell ends on here in particular.

I never said anyone should take the risk on behalf of others I just don’t understand the obsession of having to force every last person to take it. If vaccines protect those that have had it and wanted to why the concern about those that haven’t? The bigger picture is that if things are allowed to continue on this path of control I 100% promise you that you will be forced to take the vaccine boosters for the rest of your life and it will be about big business and control much more than health and vaccines will be the tip of the iceberg.

Looks like I’ve triggered a few that have conveniently ignored the mirror of a society clearly descending into facism. Maybe the truth just hurts. Maybe it’s easier to pretend it’s not happening.

Ok. Much to my disgust Ill actually join in with this. Its been a while since somebody quoted me on here. You do realise that being "Vaxxed" doesnt stop you from getting it, it only makes the symptoms in most cases, less extreme? So, if Im double jabbed, it doesnt stop me from giving you the virus, it just stops me from getting it so badly and possibly you not getting it so badly. However, if you were also vaxxed, then the severity would just decrease on every infection.

 

[Commander]

Give it some thought - clinical trails take years, yet now they aren’t needed. Scientists were under pressure to produce something quickly, so have used new UNPROVEN methods of delivering these vaccines where the long term effects aren’t understood.

Take your head out of your ar**.

As someone who runs a company in the clinical trial industry, can I just reiterate that this post is utterly and profoundly wrong. Just because you don't understand (haven't bothered to properly find out) how clinical trials work, doesn't mean that this vaccine has not been put through clinical trials. It is ASTONISHING that people are still claiming this.

In fact, I'd argue that it has had to jump through more safety hoops than 99% of drugs in human history, as modern clinical trials are set to such strict safety protocols. The only argument against the safety is the lack of long term effects, but that is the same with any new drug, as it has to be.

As a comparison, paracetamol would not get approval today, due to the toxicity of the drug. Never in a million years would it. But people are happy to munch on those when they have a headache, and I've never met anybody who's said "I don't want the Pfizer paracetamol, I want the GSK one" for example.


(I realise this post was days ago but I just saw it, and couldn't let it slide).

 

[dazzer6666]

As someone who runs a company in the clinical trial industry, can I just reiterate that this post is utterly and profoundly wrong. Just because you don't understand (haven't bothered to properly find out) how clinical trials work, doesn't mean that this vaccine has not been put through clinical trials. It is ASTONISHING that people are still claiming this.

In fact, I'd argue that it has had to jump through more safety hoops than 99% of drugs in human history, as modern clinical trials are set to such strict safety protocols. The only argument against the safety is the lack of long term effects, but that is the same with any new drug, as it has to be.

As a comparison, paracetamol would not get approval today, due to the toxicity of the drug. Never in a million years would it. But people are happy to munch on those when they have a headache, and I've never met anybody who's said "I don't want the Pfizer paracetamol, I want the GSK one" for example.


(I realise this post was days ago but I just saw it, and couldn't let it slide).

Great post. Incredible that some still think it's not been properly tested.

 

[zefarelly]

Great post. Incredible that some still think it's not been properly tested.

There is no logical explanation for some people train of thought.

Or if they even can or do think independently.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

As someone who runs a company in the clinical trial industry, can I just reiterate that this post is utterly and profoundly wrong. Just because you don't understand (haven't bothered to properly find out) how clinical trials work, doesn't mean that this vaccine has not been put through clinical trials. It is ASTONISHING that people are still claiming this.

In fact, I'd argue that it has had to jump through more safety hoops than 99% of drugs in human history, as modern clinical trials are set to such strict safety protocols. The only argument against the safety is the lack of long term effects, but that is the same with any new drug, as it has to be.

As a comparison, paracetamol would not get approval today, due to the toxicity of the drug. Never in a million years would it. But people are happy to munch on those when they have a headache, and I've never met anybody who's said "I don't want the Pfizer paracetamol, I want the GSK one" for example.


(I realise this post was days ago but I just saw it, and couldn't let it slide).

Well done for responding. When cretins propagate bullshit myths this can have only negative consequences. The Andrew Wakefield case proves how harmful this can be.

 

[Commander]

There is no logical explanation for some people train of thought.

Or if they even can or do think independently.

Or that they believe some Youtube video by somebody with no credentials rather than an expert in their field who has dedicated their life to research of the subject.

Actually there is an explanation- people hear what they want to hear. We all do, to a certain extent.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

As someone who runs a company in the clinical trial industry, can I just reiterate that this post is utterly and profoundly wrong. Just because you don't understand (haven't bothered to properly find out) how clinical trials work, doesn't mean that this vaccine has not been put through clinical trials. It is ASTONISHING that people are still claiming this.

In fact, I'd argue that it has had to jump through more safety hoops than 99% of drugs in human history, as modern clinical trials are set to such strict safety protocols. The only argument against the safety is the lack of long term effects, but that is the same with any new drug, as it has to be.

As a comparison, paracetamol would not get approval today, due to the toxicity of the drug. Never in a million years would it. But people are happy to munch on those when they have a headache, and I've never met anybody who's said "I don't want the Pfizer paracetamol, I want the GSK one" for example.


(I realise this post was days ago but I just saw it, and couldn't let it slide).

Do you think the Government have done enough to explain all this?

Ive had both jabs btw - i am just interested to hear what someone in the biz thinks.

 

[Commander]

Do you think the Government have done enough to explain all this?

Ive had both jabs btw - i am just interested to hear what someone in the biz thinks.

Yes, I do personally. It's been explained numerous times, people just choose not to listen.

The problem is, when it is explained, the people who don't want to believe it just repeat the same 'but it hasn't been tested properly' line again. In fact, it seems to only strengthen their belief in their original stance. Cognitive dissonance, basically.

All the people who say they want to trust their own immune system rather than take a vaccine, if they are one of the unlucky ones who's immune system can't cope with the virus and they get admitted to ITU, how would they feel if the Drs said 'We're going to trust your immune system, seeing as you didn't want to trust the vaccine that you were offered'?

 

[zefarelly]

Or that they believe some Youtube video by somebody with no credentials rather than an expert in their field who has dedicated their life to research of the subject.

Actually there is an explanation- people hear what they want to hear. We all do, to a certain extent.

As an engineer I could have a parallel conversation about engine tuning, people believe chat forums, pub talk and glossy magazines about making things go faster, companies like Halfords were built on selling shiny shit

I learned a lot the hard way, but most by using relatively simple science to prove/disprove. to reach the point you're winning things and being consulted by universities is/was not financially rewarding, but I sleep well.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Yes, I do personally. It's been explained numerous times, people just choose not to listen.

The problem is, when it is explained, the people who don't want to believe it just repeat the same 'but it hasn't been tested properly' line again. In fact, it seems to only strengthen their belief in their original stance. Cognitive dissonance, basically.

All the people who say they want to trust their own immune system rather than take a vaccine, if they are one of the unlucky ones who's immune system can't cope with the virus and they get admitted to ITU, how would they feel if the Drs said 'We're going to trust your immune system, seeing as you didn't want to trust the vaccine that you were offered'?

I will admit when it first came out I was bit dubious about how quickly it came out, but after hearing what Sage etc said about it and the reasoning why it made sense.

I personally think they could have had adverts in the same way they had about covid.

But as you say it may not have made any difference.

 

[zefarelly]

Yes, I do personally. It's been explained numerous times, people just choose not to listen.

The problem is, when it is explained, the people who don't want to believe it just repeat the same 'but it hasn't been tested properly' line again. In fact, it seems to only strengthen their belief in their original stance. Cognitive dissonance, basically.

All the people who say they want to trust their own immune system rather than take a vaccine, if they are one of the unlucky ones who's immune system can't cope with the virus and they get admitted to ITU, how would they feel if the Drs said 'We're going to trust your immune system, seeing as you didn't want to trust the vaccine that you were offered'?

I've had to keep my mouth shut . . .try not to laugh . . .but my brother and sister in law haven't had jabs . . . . . they (foolishly IMO) went to watch football at a bar in Btn, met a few friends, got it. Brothers fine, sister in Law has just got out of hospital . .this is her FB post


I actually thought I was going to have a mild case. I've been in hospital a week. I am starting to feel better and breathe with less help now but it has shocked me to my core. I meditate, practice yoga, cycle have cold showers all lung strengthing stuff. Yeah right! This last 2 weeks I've not known how to breathe by myself . . . .

 

[Albion Dan]

Yes, I do personally. It's been explained numerous times, people just choose not to listen.

The problem is, when it is explained, the people who don't want to believe it just repeat the same 'but it hasn't been tested properly' line again. In fact, it seems to only strengthen their belief in their original stance. Cognitive dissonance, basically.

All the people who say they want to trust their own immune system rather than take a vaccine, if they are one of the unlucky ones who's immune system can't cope with the virus and they get admitted to ITU, how would they feel if the Drs said 'We're going to trust your immune system, seeing as you didn't want to trust the vaccine that you were offered'?

Out of interest where did the clinical trial fail this poor lady?

https://news.sky.com/story/lisa-sha...ing-oxford-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-12318667

 

[Commander]

I will admit when it first came out I was bit dubious about how quickly it came out, but after hearing what Sage etc said about it and the reasoning why it made sense.

I personally think they could have had adverts in the same way they had about covid.

But as you say it may not have made any difference.

I totally understand why people had reservations initially. But once it was explained how it was done, I don't understand why people don't then say "Oh OK, that makes sense now". I guess people don't like to admit they were wrong.

The AZ vaccine was 50% made already, before this virus even existed in humans. The Oxford labs had developed it for a hypothetical coronavirus that would get into humans at some point, which is pretty incredible. Although I expect the conspiracy theory nuts will take that as proof that Covid was somehow deliberately manufactured to control us.

 

[Commander]

Out of interest where did the clinical trial fail this poor lady?

https://news.sky.com/story/lisa-sha...ing-oxford-astrazeneca-covid-vaccine-12318667

View attachment 138839

Have you seen the numbers of blood clots linked to the vaccine compared to the numbers of blood clots linked to the contraceptive pill? Which has been around for decades.

There is an element of risk in EVERY single drug you take. That's why we have clinical trials, to establish the level of risk versus reward. It's just not that hard to understand really.

It's an incredibly week argument to show one person who has died as a result of a complication potentially linked to the vaccine when literally millions of people have died worldwide from the virus.

 

[sydney]

i'm sorry chaps but yes .

 

[Audax]

As someone who runs a company in the clinical trial industry, can I just reiterate that this post is utterly and profoundly wrong. Just because you don't understand (haven't bothered to properly find out) how clinical trials work, doesn't mean that this vaccine has not been put through clinical trials. It is ASTONISHING that people are still claiming this.

In fact, I'd argue that it has had to jump through more safety hoops than 99% of drugs in human history, as modern clinical trials are set to such strict safety protocols. The only argument against the safety is the lack of long term effects, but that is the same with any new drug, as it has to be.

As a comparison, paracetamol would not get approval today, due to the toxicity of the drug. Never in a million years would it. But people are happy to munch on those when they have a headache, and I've never met anybody who's said "I don't want the Pfizer paracetamol, I want the GSK one" for example.


(I realise this post was days ago but I just saw it, and couldn't let it slide).

Thank you. I posted something similar earlier in this thread, but you can do so from a position of far more authority (having said that - my knowledge comes via my wife, who works with one of the regional NHS Clinical Research Networks and thus has knowledge of the trials that have taken place, not just for the vaccines but also for the various drugs that have been proven to work / not work for Covid treatment).

I'm surprised the anti-vaxxers (yes, that's how I see it) in this thread haven't tried the "Covid is from the same family of viruses as the common cold. If it was so easy to create a vaccine for Covid in less than a year, why haven't we had a cold vaccine for years?" argument yet. To pre-emptively answer that question: because no one had a reason to fund a vaccine for the common cold, so there was no money to get it done.

 

[Papa Lazarou]

Thank you. I posted something similar earlier in this thread, but you can do so from a position of far more authority (having said that - my knowledge comes via my wife, who works with one of the regional NHS Clinical Research Networks and thus has knowledge of the trials that have taken place, not just for the vaccines but also for the various drugs that have been proven to work / not work for Covid treatment).

I'm surprised the anti-vaxxers (yes, that's how I see it) in this thread haven't tried the "Covid is from the same family of viruses as the common cold. If it was so easy to create a vaccine for Covid in less than a year, why haven't we had a cold vaccine for years?" argument yet. To pre-emptively answer that question: because no one had a reason to fund a vaccine for the common cold, so there was no money to get it done.

In relation to your last point, do you think the work that been done on Covid19 can be easily used to vaccinate against the Coronavirus versions of the common cold?

It would be nice to remove some of the numerous cold viruses our there.

 

[rippleman]

Yes, I do personally. It's been explained numerous times, people just choose not to listen.

The problem is, when it is explained, the people who don't want to believe it just repeat the same 'but it hasn't been tested properly' line again. In fact, it seems to only strengthen their belief in their original stance. Cognitive dissonance, basically.

All the people who say they want to trust their own immune system rather than take a vaccine, if they are one of the unlucky ones who's immune system can't cope with the virus and they get admitted to ITU, how would they feel if the Drs said 'We're going to trust your immune system, seeing as you didn't want to trust the vaccine that you were offered'?

Appreciate your insightful posts on this issue of testing.

Hopefully it will help focus the minds of the remaining daft buggers who "don't trust the vaccine".

 

[dsr-burnley]

In relation to your last point, do you think the work that been done on Covid19 can be easily used to vaccinate against the Coronavirus versions of the common cold?

It would be nice to remove some of the numerous cold viruses our there.

I suspect that might not be a good idea. Dealing with cold viruses probably keeps the immune system in practice for when something more serious comes along.

 

[Bozza]

All the people who say they want to trust their own immune system rather than take a vaccine, if they are one of the unlucky ones who's immune system can't cope with the virus and they get admitted to ITU, how would they feel if the Drs said 'We're going to trust your immune system, seeing as you didn't want to trust the vaccine that you were offered'?

"Many of our admissions have not been vaccinated, however. Some want to achieve “natural immunity”; it is unclear whether they realise that the only way to do this is to get the disease instead. Another wants “to see some real data”, as if all the information assessed by the regulatory authorities before approval, and the clear real-world data about the reduction in cases, is somehow fabricated. Someone’s friend got some side-effects from the vaccine so she didn’t have it; guess which one of them ended up in hospital. Most of these people have the decency to look sheepish, or to describe themselves as “one of those idiots”."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/19/i-work-in-an-nhs-covid-ward-and-i-feel-so-angry