Vaccine Progress, Approval, and Deployment

[kez19]

Full fact say exactly the same as both me and the programme - this flyer was false, not a true representation of the the Yellow Card scheme, and not issued by the Yellow Card scheme. GMB were entirely justified in highlighting the existence of these hoax flyers, as would any other channel have been - including RT.

That it has provoked complaints is not a measure of whether it was or was not legitimate, but of the reaction it has provoked. In this case, my suspicion is that the complaints are from those who support the hoax, and who are trying to use weight of numbers to put pressure on GMB, but as I haven’t seen the complaints, I can’t be sure.

I stand by my view that this was responsible journalism, done in a tabloid way by a tabloid programme. It was factually correct and served a legitimate public interest.

You say that you want the media to be responsible, yet you then complain about them when they are responsible. That confuses me.

So how do you know complaints are from people thinking it’s a hoax? You can’t can you? You are tarring people you have no idea about with the same brush - who to say it wasn’t or was or how about we say 50:50? Let’s not judge others but I guess that’s how the media has played us all like a fiddle.

I want all media responsible, how about a balanced view on all topics than one sided? All I see is a one sided debate - if you don’t like you are name called but if you believe everything media say everything is ok? I’m sorry but what? I’m open minded to everything going on but still some would just call me a conspiracy theorist which in actuality isn’t true but still if media had there way that be true wouldn’t it?

I’m pointing out to you, that on one of the other threads you doubted my sources being RT and that I should consider not watching them due to being Russia state propaganda, now ask yourself the way ITV has conducted itself you be screaming it’s Tory TV propaganda.

In short the way you think is, BBC/ITV - good regardless but be RT/Al Jazzera - bad

 

[35B]

So how do you know complaints are from people thinking it’s a hoax? You can’t can you? You are tarring people you have no idea about with the same brush - who to say it wasn’t or was or how about we say 50:50? Let’s not judge others but I guess that’s how the media has played us all like a fiddle.

I want all media responsible, how about a balanced view on all topics than one sided? All I see is a one sided debate - if you don’t like you are name called but if you believe everything media say everything is ok? I’m sorry but what? I’m open minded to everything going on but still some would just call me a conspiracy theorist which in actuality isn’t true but still if media had there way that be true wouldn’t it?

I’m pointing out to you, that on one of the other threads you doubted my sources being RT and that I should consider not watching them due to being Russia state propaganda, now ask yourself the way ITV has conducted itself you be screaming it’s Tory TV propaganda.

In short the way you think is, BBC/ITV - good regardless but be RT/Al Jazzera - bad

You need to read what I wrote. The story presented was true, and would have been true if presented that way on any channel - including RT.

I have mused on why the complainants will have complained; I remain open to evidence if my musing is wrong - that's what "I suspect" means. But where issues are highly politicised, it is not unusual for complaints processes to be used by supporters of one side of the debate - and as the piece was identifying a hoax, I think it reasonable to presume that those supporting the hoax would be the ones offended.

That is nothing to do with believing ITV or disbelieving RT, but checking the facts associated with the story. And let's recall, that story was that there are flyers being circulated that present hoax information about vaccines, and that those flyers shouldn't be believed. That story was checked by independent fact checkers and found to be correct.

 

[kez19]

You need to read what I wrote. The story presented was true, and would have been true if presented that way on any channel - including RT.

I have mused on why the complainants will have complained; I remain open to evidence if my musing is wrong - that's what "I suspect" means. But where issues are highly politicised, it is not unusual for complaints processes to be used by supporters of one side of the debate - and as the piece was identifying a hoax, I think it reasonable to presume that those supporting the hoax would be the ones offended.

That is nothing to do with believing ITV or disbelieving RT, but checking the facts associated with the story. And let's recall, that story was that there are flyers being circulated that present hoax information about vaccines, and that those flyers shouldn't be believed. That story was checked by independent fact checkers and found to be correct.

I do read what you write as I stated you however pointed out to me in another thread that I should check sources as an example RT (this topic aside), but fair enough but I’ll give you an example for RT a bulletin a few days ago was actually more factual (and it was about COVID and the Sputnik V vaccine as well as the new variant but guess what? It wasn’t overblown claptrap of spreading fear to the viewer and they had confidence in the vaccine - strange that as wasn’t the likes of Sky and BBC championing the vaccines to what we have now is constantly negative stories?) maybe the likes of BBC/ITV need to take a lesson from RT? Also how about we drop the pettiness of being scared of the likes of RT maybe there is some facts that the mainstream fail to cover?

Again you are assuming those that complained are that so ok then where is evidence to prove it is or not?? People are quick to judge others without thinking but then again the way media has been acting in general overall is exactly that but I’ll say no more.

 

[35B]

I do read what you write as I stated you however pointed out to me in another thread that I should check sources as an example RT (this topic aside), but fair enough but I’ll give you an example for RT a bulletin a few days ago was actually more factual (and it was about COVID and the Sputnik V vaccine as well as the new variant but guess what? It wasn’t overblown claptrap of spreading fear to the viewer and they had confidence in the vaccine - strange that as wasn’t the likes of Sky and BBC championing the vaccines to what we have now is constantly negative stories?) maybe the likes of BBC/ITV need to take a lesson from RT? Also how about we drop the pettiness of being scared of the likes of RT maybe there is some facts that the mainstream fail to cover?

Again you are assuming those that complained are that so ok then where is evidence to prove it is or not?? People are quick to judge others without thinking but then again the way media has been acting in general overall is exactly that but I’ll say no more.

Ok, so your complaint about the ITV piece is what precisely? It reports facts accurately and provides clear public information that allows viewers to make informed decisions about the credibility of information that they may encounter - why is there a problem with that?

Regardless of channel, that is surely what the media ought to be doing.

 

[kez19]

Ok, so your complaint about the ITV piece is what precisely? It reports facts accurately and provides clear public information that allows viewers to make informed decisions about the credibility of information that they may encounter - why is there a problem with that?

Regardless of channel, that is surely what the media ought to be doing.

My complaint was basically how overblown the situation was and once again you missed my point - rip a bit of paper that’s fake for figures, yes people can make their own minds up on where they stand

Once again you missed my other point, I believe it may have been in the media thread I said stuff about RT you then told me I be better at looking at other sources, so if I understand you correctly you now seem to take the stance that RT is ok with it’s reporting? None of this claptrap misinformation?

So you understand that the media should be doing it’s job regardless of station that’s good, maybe OFCOM should get it’s finger out and deal with issues regardless of channel then, you then agree that there is 2 sides to every story? Well then let’s have all the networks properly debate all things COVID on both sides than the one side?

I also found this: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....orning-doctor-cut-during-crucial-21291136.amp

This isn’t the first time ITV has done something but this relates to This Morning a few months back in short - had to go to weather as doctor was to explain vaccines and in relation to blood clots (this might be for another thread), but you expect to give the doctor time (or was it done on purpose not to talk about it), again needs to be 2 sides to the story.

 

[MikeWM]

Interesting, but not surprising. Until recently, relatively few people knew the yellow card scheme existed. If you went to your GP with what looked like it might be an adverse reaction, they would submit a report. Now, many more people have heard of the scheme, and that they can submit reports direct. Combine standard hypochondria with Covid concerns and a surge in reports was probably entirely predictable.

What I am not sure about is whether the scheme was always open for patients to submit reports direct, without going via a medical practitioner. If I remember a training course I went on many years ago correctly, it was introduced in the aftermath of thalidomide.

Taking those statistics at face value, I’m less surprised - especially given the way that some are misrepresenting what the scheme is*. The scale and publicity associated with this vaccination programme will be driving awareness of both symptoms and reporting mechanisms.

* - American anti-vaxxers have apparently mounted concerted campaigns of reporting in VAERS (the US equivalent) to try to create a narrative of vaccine harm, especially of childhood vaccination causing autism. I would be surprised to find that nothing of the sort has happened with Covid.

Both these points are fair, though I suspect the effect of American anti-vaxxers is not that substantive.

I think that all we can really do is compare what we know from our own experience with whether we think such schemes are reporting accurately or not. All I can say on the matter is that I know two people who had serious side-effects from the vaccines, there are posters on this forum that had serious side-effects from the vaccines, there are other posters here who know people that have had serious side-effects from the vaccines, there are (verified) people on social media that have had serious side-effects from the vaccines, there is even the occasional report in the legacy media of people that have had serious side-effects from the vaccines (including death). We know there are a lot of footballers and other athletes suffering mysterious collapses at a rate that is statistically off the charts. We know there has been a *lot* of non-Covid excess death this year (though there may be a number of reasons for that). We know that hospitals were full in the summer when they shouldn't be, and not with Covid patients (though again there may be a number of reasons for that).

I'd also add that I'm hearing about a *lot* of otherwise-healthy friends and colleagues reporting unusual and/or new ailments that have only appeared over the last year, which may or may not be coincidental.

So I suspect given the empirical evidence we have that the evidence in the yellow card scheme, VAERS, etc. is probably a reasonable reflection of the truth.

 

[bspahh]

I think that all we can really do is compare what we know from our own experience with whether we think such schemes are reporting accurately or not. All I can say on the matter is that I know two people who had serious side-effects from the vaccines, there are posters on this forum that had serious side-effects from the vaccines, there are other posters here who know people that have had serious side-effects from the vaccines, there are (verified) people on social media that have had serious side-effects from the vaccines, there is even the occasional report in the legacy media of people that have had serious side-effects from the vaccines (including death).

https://blog.ons.gov.uk/2021/10/04/how-many-people-have-died-as-a-result-of-a-covid-19-vaccine/ is an article by Sarah Caul, Head of Mortality Analysis at ONS wrote that through to August 2021 there were "9 deaths in the UK that involved the vaccine (meaning the vaccine contributed to the death), of which 5 had the vaccine as the underlying cause (meaning the vaccine initiated the chain of events directly leading to the death)."

Between January 1st 2021 and August 1st 2021, https://ourworldindata.org/ says there were 55,777 "confirmed COVID-19 deaths" in the UK with the note that "Due to limited testing and challenges in the attribution of the cause of death, confirmed deaths can be lower than the true number of deaths."

From my personal experience, the worst side effects from people that I know from a COVID vaccine meant spending a day in bed. I know of 2 people who have died from COVID.

The effects of COVID are worse than the side effects from the vaccines.

 

[jumble]

https://blog.ons.gov.uk/2021/10/04/how-many-people-have-died-as-a-result-of-a-covid-19-vaccine/ is an article by Sarah Caul, Head of Mortality Analysis at ONS wrote that through to August 2021 there were "9 deaths in the UK that involved the vaccine (meaning the vaccine contributed to the death), of which 5 had the vaccine as the underlying cause (meaning the vaccine initiated the chain of events directly leading to the death)."

Between January 1st 2021 and August 1st 2021, https://ourworldindata.org/ says there were 55,777 "confirmed COVID-19 deaths" in the UK with the note that "Due to limited testing and challenges in the attribution of the cause of death, confirmed deaths can be lower than the true number of deaths."

From my personal experience, the worst side effects from people that I know from a COVID vaccine meant spending a day in bed. I know of 2 people who have died from COVID.

The effects of COVID are worse than the side effects from the vaccines.

You are probably overall correct but these statistics could be way out
You do not know how many people who died of Covid would have died from the effects of having the vaccine.
Also it depends on what anyone means by a "confirmed Covid-19 Death" as surely no one is so stupid as to believe that all of these 55,777 people would be alive had Covid-19 not existed

 

[MikeWM]

The effects of COVID are worse than the side effects from the vaccines.

Those who have died from the vaccines (however many they turn out to be when coroners catch up) may disagree, if they could.

But yes, *on average* this may well be true, though in the absense of long-term data it is currently rather a guessing game, and that balance depends on the individuals personal risk from Covid.

As ever, what *should* be happening is that each person should do the best to assess their own risk on the data that is available to them, which admittedly is far from easy for a number of reasons.

 

[bspahh]

You are probably overall correct but these statistics could be way out
You do not know how many people who died of Covid would have died from the effects of having the vaccine.

An easy comparison for COVID deaths before and after the vaccine is by comparing this year and last year. There were more deaths last year than this

COVID-19 Data Explorer

Explore global data on COVID-19.

ourworldindata.org

Also it depends on what anyone means by a "confirmed Covid-19 Death" as surely no one is so stupid as to believe that all of these 55,777 people would be alive had Covid-19 not existed

This is a plot from the weekly report of excess mortality https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/excess-mortality-in-england-weekly-reports


When there has been a big peak of deaths from COVID-19, there has then been a shallow depression with fewer deaths in the following months. However, overall more people died than in a normal year.

COVID-19 is a nasty disease. The current vaccines make it better.

 

[35B]

Both these points are fair, though I suspect the effect of American anti-vaxxers is not that substantive.

I think that all we can really do is compare what we know from our own experience with whether we think such schemes are reporting accurately or not. All I can say on the matter is that I know two people who had serious side-effects from the vaccines, there are posters on this forum that had serious side-effects from the vaccines, there are other posters here who know people that have had serious side-effects from the vaccines, there are (verified) people on social media that have had serious side-effects from the vaccines, there is even the occasional report in the legacy media of people that have had serious side-effects from the vaccines (including death). We know there are a lot of footballers and other athletes suffering mysterious collapses at a rate that is statistically off the charts. We know there has been a *lot* of non-Covid excess death this year (though there may be a number of reasons for that). We know that hospitals were full in the summer when they shouldn't be, and not with Covid patients (though again there may be a number of reasons for that).

I'd also add that I'm hearing about a *lot* of otherwise-healthy friends and colleagues reporting unusual and/or new ailments that have only appeared over the last year, which may or may not be coincidental.

So I suspect given the empirical evidence we have that the evidence in the yellow card scheme, VAERS, etc. is probably a reasonable reflection of the truth.

There's a lot of "knowing" in that, yet very little evidence coming through in the data. I'm curious - for or against vaccines - whether we are also seeing a confirmation bias effect, where people with strong views one way or the other are interpreting events in terms of that view, and finding it reinforcing their prior belief. And, yes, I include myself in that.

 

[MikeWM]

There's a lot of "knowing" in that, yet very little evidence coming through in the data. I'm curious - for or against vaccines - whether we are also seeing a confirmation bias effect, where people with strong views one way or the other are interpreting events in terms of that view, and finding it reinforcing their prior belief. And, yes, I include myself in that.

Oh, I think that is definitely the case. I'm trying to avoid it, but it probably can't be avoided entirely.

(However, I think I should point out one more time that I'm not 'against the vaccines'. I hoped as much as everyone else that they would be extremely effective (like the measles vaccine is) and totally safe. But I must admit that I *expected* they wouldn't be, and I do appreciate I may be encountering some degree of confirmation bias as to that expectation).

 

[35B]

My complaint was basically how overblown the situation was and once again you missed my point - rip a bit of paper that’s fake for figures, yes people can make their own minds up on where they stand

Once again you missed my other point, I believe it may have been in the media thread I said stuff about RT you then told me I be better at looking at other sources, so if I understand you correctly you now seem to take the stance that RT is ok with it’s reporting? None of this claptrap misinformation?

So you understand that the media should be doing it’s job regardless of station that’s good, maybe OFCOM should get it’s finger out and deal with issues regardless of channel then, you then agree that there is 2 sides to every story? Well then let’s have all the networks properly debate all things COVID on both sides than the one side?

I also found this: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www....orning-doctor-cut-during-crucial-21291136.amp

This isn’t the first time ITV has done something but this relates to This Morning a few months back in short - had to go to weather as doctor was to explain vaccines and in relation to blood clots (this might be for another thread), but you expect to give the doctor time (or was it done on purpose not to talk about it), again needs to be 2 sides to the story.

So you object to a bit of theatre? There are various ways of making points, and that programme chose one such way. That's their right - and, no, they shouldn't invite the liar who put out those flyers to "debate" the point - just as you wouldn't invite a fraudster to debate whether their fraud was actually ok.

 

[The Ham]

All I can say on the matter is that I know two people who had serious side-effects from the vaccines,

Define serious side effects?

So ill they had to take time off work, so ill they had to seek medical advice, so I'll they needed medical treatment or some other method of measurement?

Oh, I think that is definitely the case. I'm trying to avoid it, but it probably can't be avoided entirely.

(However, I think I should point out one more time that I'm not 'against the vaccines'. I hoped as much as everyone else that they would be extremely effective (like the measles vaccine is) and totally safe. But I must admit that I *expected* they wouldn't be, and I do appreciate I may be encountering some degree of confirmation bias as to that expectation).

As someone from the (if I am reading your posts correctly) sceptical side (not opposed, just sceptical) on the vaccines what's your interpretation of the comparison I posted the other day comparing cases/hospitalisations/deaths this year with last; where it appears to show a x6 reduction in people in hospital and a x15 reduction in deaths for a given number of daily cases?

As I'd like to understand where I may be bringing confirmation bias into my thinking when looking at those numbers.

To be honest I don't mind who points it out to me, it could be someone very pro vaccine or someone very anti.

However I suspect that even if I had exaggerated the numbers one way or the other it would still show a fairly favourable outcome in reduction of deaths for a given number of daily cases.

 

[MikeWM]

Define serious side effects?

So ill they had to take time off work, so ill they had to seek medical advice, so I'll they needed medical treatment or some other method of measurement?

Both required medical treatment. One was potentially life-threatening and required very strong steroids to resolve (which then caused various other issues) though happily they are fine now. The other eventually required surgery (although also fine now, as far as I know).

As someone from the (if I am reading your posts correctly) sceptical side (not opposed, just sceptical) on the vaccines what's your interpretation of the comparison I posted the other day comparing cases/hospitalisations/deaths this year with last; where it appears to show a x6 reduction in people in hospital and a x15 reduction in deaths for a given number of daily cases?

I think it is clear that the vaccines have been effective (so far) in significantly reducing hospitalisations and deaths. To a rather lesser degree than the original claims, but still very significant. I've never disputed that.

My concern is that we don't ignore the balance between reduced risk from Covid against the other issues the vaccines can cause - which I acknowledge are difficult to evaluate.

 

[kez19]

So you object to a bit of theatre? There are various ways of making points, and that programme chose one such way. That's their right - and, no, they shouldn't invite the liar who put out those flyers to "debate" the point - just as you wouldn't invite a fraudster to debate whether their fraud was actually ok.

Aah for such a serious subject then yes, if we are to be serious about it but hey I guess that’s what the media likes is exactly that it’s just theatre, no wonder the likes of Kyle got cancelled we now have breakfast tv doing that now.

It still doesn’t provide balance or enough evidence though is it if it’s just a one way street on a subject, that’s their own narrative

So why not invite the fraudster on? They did pretty well when Piers Morgan ran the show - invite people on then humiliate them that’s what makes good tv to the likes of ITV, On the flip side I could say ever since ITV cancelled Kyle they still haven’t learnt from the past everything is for shock value and nothing more.

 

[35B]

Aah for such a serious subject then yes, if we are to be serious about it but hey I guess that’s what the media likes is exactly that it’s just theatre, no wonder the likes of Kyle got cancelled we now have breakfast tv doing that now.

It still doesn’t provide balance or enough evidence though is it if it’s just a one way street on a subject, that’s their own narrative

So why not invite the fraudster on? They did pretty well when Piers Morgan ran the show - invite people on then humiliate them that’s what makes good tv to the likes of ITV, On the flip side I could say ever since ITV cancelled Kyle they still haven’t learnt from the past everything is for shock value and nothing more.

And your preferred channels offer that right of reply in the same form? There are a variety of ways of presenting information; debate is not the only format.

 

[kez19]

And your preferred channels offer that right of reply in the same form? There are a variety of ways of presenting information; debate is not the only format.

Actually yes heard of Crosstalk on RT? If not maybe watch, come to think about RT offers more discussions on their shows as much as I know of and topics vary be COVID or non COVID.

So what you suggest then?

 

[35B]

Actually yes heard of Crosstalk on RT? If not maybe watch, come to think about RT offers more discussions on their shows as much as I know of and topics vary be COVID or non COVID.

So what you suggest then?

No - but good to know they offer that as an option. However, you ignore my suggestion that there may be other ways to present information than debate.

 

[kez19]

No - but good to know they offer that as an option. However, you ignore my suggestion that there may be other ways to present information than debate.

I wasn’t ignoring I asked you what would you suggest as bringing information

Ok then like podcasts? Look up things on YouTube? (oh wait that might not fit anyones narrative or argument because regardless what is said people will conclude it’s false or true), read a book?

There is stats charts etc I originally followed travellingtabby for stats in uk and Scotland for figures but that’s all I can think of for time being.

 

[brad465]

This is nothing short of outrageous - tomorrow's Guardian front page is reporting a proposal that Ministers will allow GPs to stop monitoring millions of patients with underlying health conditions in order to free up space for future booster jabs until 2023:



If ever there was proof that nothing but covid matters now, look no further than this. If I was one of those "millions" I'd be extremely annoyed and worried about serious health implications going forward. These are also probably the people who we all sacrificed our liberties to protect and also made sacrifices themselves beyond the rest of the population through shielding; now they're being thrown under a bus to keep our covid dogma up.

 

[kristiang85]

This is nothing short of outrageous - tomorrow's Guardian front page is reporting a proposal that Ministers will allow GPs to stop monitoring millions of patients with underlying health conditions in order to free up space for future booster jabs until 2023:

If ever there was proof that nothing but covid matters now, look no further than this. If I was one of those "millions" I'd be extremely annoyed and worried about serious health implications going forward. These are also probably the people who we all sacrificed our liberties to protect and also made sacrifices themselves beyond the rest of the population through shielding; now they're being thrown under a bus to keep our covid dogma up.

This is absolutely insane. The government has gone COVID-nuts.

 

[The Ham]

This is absolutely insane. The government has gone COVID-nuts.

Indeed, the current vaccine delivery has currently given us significant protection, there is no evidence that the latest modification to the virus is going to cause much of an issue.

Chances are that there could be testing (within labs) to see the impact of the new variant vs vaccinated people. Given that we'd maybe not able to ramp up quite as much for 2 weeks whilst that testing is done, at most it would add a week's delay to the end of the third dose if we waited to see (as whilst there would be scope to do more if we ramped up it would have to be by more than 50% for it to need more than one extra week).

Even then those towards the bottom of the priority list would likely be of low risk anyway.

 

[yorkie]

A breakthrough has occurred in the investigation to discover the cause of rare side effects in the Oxford AZ vaccine:

Covid: Trigger of rare blood clots with AstraZeneca jab found by scientists

Researchers in Cardiff and the US work out how the Covid jab may be linked to the extremely rare clots.

www.bbc.co.uk

Scientists believe they have found "the trigger" that leads to extremely rare blood clots after the Oxford-AstraZeneca Covid vaccine.
The team - in Cardiff and the US - have shown in exquisite detail how a protein in the blood is attracted to a key component of the vaccine.
They think this kicks off a chain reaction, involving the immune system, that can culminate in dangerous clots.

It's important to bear in mind that the vaccine has likely saved over a million lives, and 73 deaths is absolutely tiny in comparison, but it's great news that this figure can be driven down even further, hopefully to zero.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Dec 2021 ==

Both required medical treatment. One was potentially life-threatening and required very strong steroids to resolve (which then caused various other issues) though happily they are fine now. The other eventually required surgery (although also fine now, as far as I know).

It's incredibly unlucky to know two people who have suffered from vaccines in this way. If your experience was representative of the population you would know far more people who suffered similar or worse outcomes from the virus itself.

Of course to the vast majority of younger people, the risks from the virus and the vaccines are both miniscule. But remember everyone needs to gain good immunity to this virus and there are only two ways to achieve that: immunity through natural infection and immunity through vaccination. In fact, for most people, in time we will have both, as we are going to all be exposed to the virus multiple times in our lives. There is no way for anyone to avoid that unless they lived as a hermit.

Not getting vaccinated is a choice people have and should continue to have. But this is a choice to go into battle without training that, in the vast majority of cases, will make that battle much easier.

 

[Bantamzen]

This is nothing short of outrageous - tomorrow's Guardian front page is reporting a proposal that Ministers will allow GPs to stop monitoring millions of patients with underlying health conditions in order to free up space for future booster jabs until 2023:

View attachment 106384

If ever there was proof that nothing but covid matters now, look no further than this. If I was one of those "millions" I'd be extremely annoyed and worried about serious health implications going forward. These are also probably the people who we all sacrificed our liberties to protect and also made sacrifices themselves beyond the rest of the population through shielding; now they're being thrown under a bus to keep our covid dogma up.

This is absolutely outrageous, and yet there is barely is whisper of protest. The NHS is being closed by stealth to concentrate on boosters that the majority of people probably don't need against a variant that as yet appears no more dangerous than any of the others.

Meanwhile, in a boardroom somewhere in Manhattan, Dr Albert Bouria CEO of Pfizer is happily planning for his company to sell the vaccine for years to come. And no doubt only the very best Champagne is also being ordered for the shareholder events...

 

[davews]

As somebody who has annual reviews for blood pressure this hits home how ridiculous it has got. OK, I have my own blood pressure monitor but that is not the point.

Yorkie states a million lives saved and 73 deaths from AZ. Surely that 'millon' is way over the top since there have only been 50k or so deaths from covid since the vaccination campaign began. And the yellow card scheme reports 1,127 deaths from Astra Zeneca. Some on here want to dismiss the Yellow Card data as fake news but it remains the only official route for reporting virus side effects so must have some credibility.

 

[DelayRepay]

Yorkie states a million lives saved and 73 deaths from AZ. Surely that 'millon' is way over the top since there have only been 50k or so deaths from covid since the vaccination campaign began.

I am sure someone will correct me, but I think that's a global figure.

 

[MikeWM]

It's incredibly unlucky to know two people who have suffered from vaccines in this way. If your experience was representative of the population you would know far more people who suffered similar or worse outcomes from the virus itself.

Perhaps it is unlucky, but I note that @davews yesterday and @Red Onion a few pages back relate similar (actually, rather worse) experiences. All we really have to go on here is our own experience and/or the official statistics from the yellow card system etc.

For 'balance' I'd add that I do know one (middle-aged, otherwise healthy) person who was very ill with Covid - on a ventilator for a while, happily fully recovered now - and a few (very elderly and already rather fraile and ill) people who have died with/of Covid.

Of course to the vast majority of younger people, the risks from the virus and the vaccines are both miniscule. But remember everyone needs to gain good immunity to this virus and there are only two ways to achieve that: immunity through natural infection and immunity through vaccination. In fact, for most people, in time we will have both, as we are going to all be exposed to the virus multiple times in our lives. There is no way for anyone to avoid that unless they lived as a hermit.

Not getting vaccinated is a choice people have and should continue to have. But this is a choice to go into battle without training that, in the vast majority of cases, will make that battle much easier.

I agree. But 'informed consent' to any medical procedure requires knowing the risks as well as the benefits.

 

[Red Onion]

Yup, I have suffered some really quite nasty side effects (mostly neurological, cardiac and gastric) from AZ dose one which was 9 months ago, they are still plaguing me. And they ARE linked to the vaccine, I have this in writing. A friend went blind in one eye after Pfizer dose 1 and another collapsed and rushed to hospital with cardiac issues after pfizer dose 2.

Perhaps unlucky but these side effects are very real and very dangerous. Whilst they don’t happen to everyone, there needs to be a frank and honest discussion about the side effects instead of denial. People should be fully informed of the risk.

I am in no way anti-vax (or I wouldn’t have had the first) but I am growing increasingly alarmed at the denial of and hiding away from the fact there are a not insignificant number of people who have suffered greatly or, tragically, died from these vaccines.

 

[35B]

Yup, I have suffered some really quite nasty side effects (mostly neurological, cardiac and gastric) from AZ dose one which was 9 months ago, they are still plaguing me. And they ARE linked to the vaccine, I have this in writing. A friend went blind in one eye after Pfizer dose 1 and another collapsed and rushed to hospital with cardiac issues after pfizer dose 2.

Perhaps unlucky but these side effects are very real and very dangerous. Whilst they don’t happen to everyone, there needs to be a frank and honest discussion about the side effects instead of denial. People should be fully informed of the risk.

I am in no way anti-vax (or I wouldn’t have had the first) but I am growing increasingly alarmed at the denial of and hiding away from the fact there are a not insignificant number of people who have suffered greatly or, tragically, died from these vaccines.

I'd be interested in your definition of "significant number".