Sugar Babies
Shemales

Author Topic: A Covid-19 vaccine at last!  (Read 96115 times)

Offline winkywanky

External Link/Members Only

Rolling out from next week. Fantastic news.

If all goes well we should all start to see a much normal life by the start of Spring.

Keep the faith, and in the meantime, stay careful  :thumbsup:


Online Waterhouse

External Link/Members Only

Rolling out from next week. Fantastic news.

If all goes well we should all start to see a much normal life by the start of Spring.

Keep the faith, and in the meantime, stay careful  :thumbsup:
I hope so, I really do, but truth to tell I honestly don’t see it being the “silver bullet” everyone is expecting it to be. 

For starters around 25-30% of people are unable to have live vaccines due to other underlying conditions, then there will be the anti-vaccine brigade refusing to get inoculated, followed by the conspiracy theory loonies who think the governments are trying to “chip” them.  I’m guessing this will be a further cause for concern and debate.

Online GingerNuts

I hope so, I really do, but truth to tell I honestly don’t see it being the “silver bullet” everyone is expecting it to be. 

For starters around 25-30% of people are unable to have live vaccines due to other underlying conditions, then there will be the anti-vaccine brigade refusing to get inoculated, followed by the conspiracy theory loonies who think the governments are trying to “chip” them.  I’m guessing this will be a further cause for concern and debate.

Are any of the vaccines live vaccines?

Offline winkywanky

I hope so, I really do, but truth to tell I honestly don’t see it being the “silver bullet” everyone is expecting it to be. 

For starters around 25-30% of people are unable to have live vaccines due to other underlying conditions, then there will be the anti-vaccine brigade refusing to get inoculated, followed by the conspiracy theory loonies who think the governments are trying to “chip” them.  I’m guessing this will be a further cause for concern and debate.


I don't think this is a 'live vaccine' in the conventional sense. It's the one which contains the RNA of the virus.

The Anti-Vax brigade can fuck off, this is one time where those that choose not to have the vaccine lose out, unlike when they refuse to have their kids vaccinated. With Covid kids are virtually unaffected, this vaccine means that adults can choose to protect themselves and others by having it, and those that choose not to will lay themselves open to infection. Of course ultimately they will also benefit because those that do take the vaccine will essentially gradually kill off the virus. But I think the vast majority that take it up will be enough to make the change.

Online Waterhouse

Are any of the vaccines live vaccines?
I believe the Oxford vaccine is. Haven’t read up on the Pfizer’s one yet.  The US one in development apparently doesn’t use the live virus though.

Online Waterhouse


I don't think this is a 'live vaccine' in the conventional sense. It's the one which contains the RNA of the virus.

The Anti-Vax brigade can fuck off, this is one time where those that choose not to have the vaccine lose out, unlike when they refuse to have their kids vaccinated. With Covid kids are virtually unaffected, this vaccine means that adults can choose to protect themselves and others by having it, and those that choose not to will lay themselves open to infection. Of course ultimately they will also benefit because those that do take the vaccine will essentially gradually kill off the virus. But I think the vast majority that take it up will be enough to make the change.
I’m hopeful of this too and am sure it will help move us away from the awful mess we’re in now.

Online GingerNuts

I believe the Oxford vaccine is. Haven’t read up on the Pfizer’s one yet.  The US one in development apparently doesn’t use the live virus though.


If it is a live vaccine then presumably your 25-30% can have one of the others.

Offline winkywanky

I believe the Oxford vaccine is. Haven’t read up on the Pfizer’s one yet.  The US one in development apparently doesn’t use the live virus though.

I don't think 'live vaccine' is the correct term, I think you're referring to vaccines which contain a 'disabled' version of an actual virus?

In any case as I said, the Pfizer vaccine doesn't work that way, it alerts the body to the genetic code of the virus, or something along those lines.

Oh, and it also contains microchips which will make our heads explode when the 5G gets turned on  :lol:

Offline Kinkylondongent

None are live vaccines . They either contain parts of the virus or like the Oxford vaccine contain a virus (chimpanzee cold) that has been altered to trigger an immune response , but the virus cannot replicate .

Online Hobbit

Fully agree with WW. At last, there is some light at the end of the tunnel and by mid next year, things should start to become much better. I myself don't have any issues with the vaccine as long as it works and doesn't have any major side effects.



Offline alabama1

Regarding the priority list of people getting the vaccine, it only includes people 50 and older. Does that mean people under 50 will not be offered it, or at least not be offered it for free ?. I know people under 50 are classed as low risk, but if the vaccine could potentially stop people re-infecting others, as has been talked about, surely everyone eventually needs to be vaccinated, regardless of age. Nothing was mentioned about this at the press conference earlier, unless i missed it. Anybody shed some light  :unknown:

Offline winkywanky

Regarding the priority list of people getting the vaccine, it only includes people 50 and older. Does that mean people under 50 will not be offered it, or at least not be offered it for free ?. I know people under 50 are classed as low risk, but if the vaccine could potentially stop people re-infecting others, as has been talked about, surely everyone eventually needs to be vaccinated, regardless of age. Nothing was mentioned about this at the press conference earlier, unless i missed it. Anybody shed some light  :unknown:


No it doesn't.

The last category was 16-65, without underlying health conditions, or something like that. Everyone is included.

Offline mr.bluesky

Over 80's and health and care staff first

Online GingerNuts

Regarding the priority list of people getting the vaccine, it only includes people 50 and older. Does that mean people under 50 will not be offered it, or at least not be offered it for free ?. I know people under 50 are classed as low risk, but if the vaccine could potentially stop people re-infecting others, as has been talked about, surely everyone eventually needs to be vaccinated, regardless of age. Nothing was mentioned about this at the press conference earlier, unless i missed it. Anybody shed some light  :unknown:

No it doesn't.

The last category was 16-65, without underlying health conditions, or something like that. Everyone is included.

The first phase is:

1 - Residents in a care home for older adults and their carers
2 - All those aged 80 and over. Frontline health and social care workers
3 - All those aged 75 and over
4 - All those aged 70 and over. Clinically extremely vulnerable individuals
5 - All those aged 65 and over
6 - All individuals aged 16-64 with underlying health conditions which put them at higher risk of serious disease and mortality
7 - All those aged 60 and over
8 - All those aged 55 and over
9 - All those aged 50 and over

The second phase is 16-50 year olds possibly with some occupational prioritisation.
« Last Edit: December 02, 2020, 06:12:08 pm by GingerNuts »

Offline winkywanky

The first phase is:

1 - Residents in a care home for older adults and their carers
2 - All those aged 80 and over. Frontline health and social care workers
3 - All those aged 75 and over
4 - All those aged 70 and over. Clinically extremely vulnerable individuals
5 - All those aged 65 and over
6 - All individuals aged 16-64 with underlying health conditions which put them at higher risk of serious disease and mortality
7 - All those aged 60 and over
8 - All those aged 55 and over
9 - All those aged 50 and over

The second phase is 16-50 year olds possibly with some occupational prioritisation.


That was it  :thumbsup:.

I saw the announcement live this morning and managed to remember some of it. And that explains my position halfway down the first phase  :P.

But the main thing is that ultimately EVERYONE over 16 will be offered it, with strict prioritisation in the early stages, which will account for about 99% of potential deaths from Covid.

Offline alabama1

Cheers chaps for enlightening me  :hi:

Offline RogerBoner

If possible I'd rather elect to have the Oxford vaccine. I imagine someone covering up if the recently approved one doesn't stay super cold during transit.
It's definitely good news and I'd be prepared to remain in lockdown until I'm vaccinated.

I will start to go to pubs regularly but will cease dining out there times a week. Restaurateurs seem to have been highlighted at the expense of so many other sectors and always struggle with the city centre rents. I always hated luke warm steak served on cold plates and the palaver (not pavlova) of settling the bill.
Michael Winner  :hi:

Offline winkywanky

If possible I'd rather elect to have the Oxford vaccine. I imagine someone covering up if the recently approved one doesn't stay super cold during transit.
It's definitely good news and I'd be prepared to remain in lockdown until I'm vaccinated.

I will start to go to pubs regularly but will cease dining out there times a week. Restaurateurs seem to have been highlighted at the expense of so many other sectors and always struggle with the city centre rents. I always hated luke warm steak served on cold plates and the palaver (not pavlova) of settling the bill.
Michael Winner  :hi:


Unless you're in one of the higher categories I suspect this vaccine will have run out by the time they get to you anyway Roger.

The logistics are indeed challenging for this one, and I suspect even with big efforts there'll be a fair degree of wastage because once it goes into a fridge, it has a life of five days and no more.

AFAIK the standard 'box' has 975 shots in it (presumably 25 out of 1000 are used for QC purposes) so to make sure you have every one of those 975 covered within the allotted timeframe will be tricky.

Offline RogerBoner

I was worried that you had caught it during your brief absence ww  :cry:

Offline winkywanky

I was worried that you had caught it during your brief absence ww  :cry:


Good Lord no, just mainly other un-Covid-related shit which all seemed to come at once. All the restrictions and general worldwide feeling of eeuurghhhh didn't help either  :(.

Offline JamesKW



For starters around 25-30% of people are unable to have live vaccines due to other underlying conditions, then there will be the anti-vaccine brigade refusing to get inoculated, followed by the conspiracy theory loonies who think the governments are trying to “chip” them.  I’m guessing this will be a further cause for concern and debate.

Yes,but the biggest group are those that are in favour of vaccines generally but think this has been rushed through with no proper checks, they will wait to see what effect it has on the first guinea pigs.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2020, 10:01:58 am by JamesKW »

Offline Squire Haggard

Hopefully everything about it will be OK. If not too bad.  :)

''The government has granted Covid-19 manufacturer Pfizer a legal indemnity protecting it from being sued, enabling its coronavirus vaccine to be rolled out across the country as early as next week.

The Department of Health and Social Care has confirmed the company has been given an indemnity protecting it from legal action as a result of any problems with the vaccine, the Independent reported.''

External Link/Members Only


Offline winkywanky

Yes, but the biggest group are those that are in favour of vaccines generally but think this has been rushed through with no proper checks, they will wait to see what effect it has on the first guinea pigs.


Nothing is 100% failsafe, even the yearly flu vaccine. Even a vaccine which has undergone the more usual 10yr development.

But are you suggesting that every time a different scientist/senior administrator of scientific regulatory body which oversees the development of the vaccine, comes on the telly and says with conviction that the vaccine has undergone all the usual rigorous checks, that they are simply lying in an organised and concerted way? Because if what you're saying is true, they'd have to be wouldn't they?  :unknown:

And they are waiting to see who drops dead/develops hideous side-effects, before issuing the final stats on efficacy? Or perhaps they'll just quietly sweep it under the carpet in full view?

The problem is, that if enough people think that then uptake will be low, and they'll be mistakenly thinking that everyone else can take the vaccine, and they will reap the benefit of that.

Offline winkywanky

Hopefully everything about it will be OK. If not too bad.  :)

''The government has granted Covid-19 manufacturer Pfizer a legal indemnity protecting it from being sued, enabling its coronavirus vaccine to be rolled out across the country as early as next week.

The Department of Health and Social Care has confirmed the company has been given an indemnity protecting it from legal action as a result of any problems with the vaccine, the Independent reported.''

External Link/Members Only


On the face of it that might sound alarming to those who are suspicious, or even wish to be alarmed. But what is the actual context behind this? Is this something to be suspicious of, or does it simply mean that normally with a brand new vaccine, after all the scientific-based trials and checks are complied with, there's normally all the legal 'paperwork' to be done before a vaccine hits the market, and this in itself can take months if not years?

So in effect, in the same way that clinical trials and checks were fast-tracked, so shall the legal framework behind it?

I guess time will tell. Certainly these are extraordinary times.

Online Doc Holliday

It's important to point out that the vaccines has been approved for emergency use. Unfortunately this means it has not completed all the trials that a vaccine (or any other drug) would undergo before receiving a full licence. The main one is that those who have received the vaccine need to be followed up for a minimum of six months.

The decision to approve under emergency use is taken when the risk of the disease outweighs any possible side effects. In the case of Covid that would include the elderly etc.

Eventually in time that could be extended to all those least at risk (eg under 50s) when the vaccine hopefully achieves a full licence.

That said I would suggest that there is some dodgy ground relating to all healthcare workers being vaccinated? Whilst I understand the rationale behind it, I think this may be stretching emergency use criteria?

That said this is all very new ground ...  emergency use of drugs is a little more common, but there is little history of vaccines being approved for emergency use. Ebola is the only one that springs to mind.

Separately much is quite rightly being discussed about the logistics concentrating on the -70 degrees etc but to me one of the real problems is this is a two stage vaccination with a set time interval and that is very challenging as people are notoriously unreliable with appointments. We shall see.

« Last Edit: December 03, 2020, 01:52:08 pm by Doc Holliday »

Offline JamesKW


The problem is, that if enough people think that then uptake will be low, and they'll be mistakenly thinking that everyone else can take the vaccine, and they will reap the benefit of that.

The vast majority dont need the vaccine most either have no symptoms or minor symptoms,why rush to pump something into you which will not make any difference.The vaccine is maybe 95% effective which means 5% will still die or end up in hospital,this isnt much different to the current stats.Most flu vaccines are not that effective with over 80s anyway (the same group COVID effects)A vaccine doesnt stop you getting COVID or passing it on, it just means your body is better able to fight it.It leads to a false sense of security because people with vaccines think they are safe and take greater risks,they are only asymptomatic.
« Last Edit: December 03, 2020, 02:18:44 pm by JamesKW »

Online Doc Holliday

The vaccine is maybe 95% effective which means 5% will still die or end up in hospital,this isnt much different to the current stats.

That's wrong and not how vaccines work. Cannot be bothered explaining it to you. :hi:

Online lostandfound

The vast majority dont need the vaccine most either have no symptoms or minor symptoms,why rush to pump something into you which will not make any difference.The vaccine is maybe 95% effective which means 5% will still die or end up in hospital,this isnt much different to the current stats.Most flu vaccines are not that effective with over 80s anyway (the same group COVID effects)A vaccine doesnt stop you getting COVID or passing it on, it just means your body is better able to fight it.It leads to a false sense of security because people with vaccines think they are safe and take greater risks,they are only asymptomatic.

Just on that math - conditional probability -  5% of 5% = 0.25%

Offline JamesKW

Just on that math - conditional probability -  5% of 5% = 0.25%

What makes you think it is 5% of 5% the tests were carried out on a cross section of the public not just those most likley to get seriously ill or die from it.

Online lostandfound

What makes you think it is 5% of 5% the tests were carried out on a cross section of the public not just those most likley to get seriously ill or die from it.

Just quoting the principle - a small proportion of a small proportion quickly becomes very small.

Offline winkywanky

It's important to point out that the vaccines has been approved for emergency use. Unfortunately this means it has not completed all the trials that a vaccine (or any other drug) would undergo before receiving a full licence. The main one is that those who have received the vaccine need to be followed up for a minimum of six months.

The decision to approve under emergency use is taken when the risk of the disease outweighs any possible side effects. In the case of Covid that would include the elderly etc.

Eventually in time that could be extended to all those least at risk (eg under 50s) when the vaccine hopefully achieves a full licence.

That said I would suggest that there is some dodgy ground relating to all healthcare workers being vaccinated? Whilst I understand the rationale behind it, I think this may be stretching emergency use criteria?

That said this is all very new ground ...  emergency use of drugs is a little more common, but there is little history of vaccines being approved for emergency use. Ebola is the only one that springs to mind.

Separately much is quite rightly being discussed about the logistics concentrating on the -70 degrees etc but to me one of the real problems is this is a two stage vaccination with a set time interval and that is very challenging as people are notoriously unreliable with appointments. We shall see.


Thanks for that clarification Doc. Seems like the emergency use thing is being downplayed a little. I can see why but I wish they wouldn't  :rolleyes:.

What has pissed me off today is that in another display of gormlessness by our illustrious govt, after allowing the science crowd to set out of how the vaccinations would be prioritised (Care Home workers AND RESIDENTS FIRST) yesterday, there now appears to have been a U-turn because apparently the logistics of delivering the vaccine to Care Homes is too problematic, presumably because of the temperature limitations of this vaccine.

Bearing in mind there have been literally weeks to consider this scenario, it's just another example of the govt appearing to be (if not in actual fact) utterly useless in crisis management  :dash:.

A lot of the public are suspicious of the govt's motives, and this type of useless behaviour simply serves to bolster that doubt and embolden the conspiracy idiots. It will also make a lot of rational people become doubters. I'm staggered at their incompetence  :unknown:

I think in reality so much is at stake that big lies wouldn't be told by the high-ups, the payback would be too severe for them even if they were inclined to, and they know that. But a lot of mistrust will be sown with crap like this continuing to happen  :(.

Offline winkywanky

The vast majority dont need the vaccine most either have no symptoms or minor symptoms,why rush to pump something into you which will not make any difference.The vaccine is maybe 95% effective which means 5% will still die or end up in hospital,this isnt much different to the current stats.Most flu vaccines are not that effective with over 80s anyway (the same group COVID effects)A vaccine doesnt stop you getting COVID or passing it on, it just means your body is better able to fight it.It leads to a false sense of security because people with vaccines think they are safe and take greater risks,they are only asymptomatic.


I see Maths and Statistics wasn't your strong point in school.

If 5% of the vaccinated aren't protected, then statistically 1% of that 5% will die (in line with the current and understood mortality rate of around 1%).

So that means that if everyone were to be vaccinated, instead of 1% of infected people dying, only 0.05% would die.

So instead of one in 100 people dying, one in every 2,000 would die. Twenty times more people would die if there were no vaccine.

Quite worthwhile really?

Offline Steelworker

That's wrong and not how vaccines work. Cannot be bothered explaining it to you. :hi:

+1, Doc. James writes completely inaccurate statements with total confidence.  :dash:

Offline winkywanky

+1, Doc. James writes completely inaccurate statements with total confidence.  :dash:


...sounds a bit like our govt  :lol:

Online Doc Holliday


What has pissed me off today is that in another display of gormlessness by our illustrious govt, after allowing the science crowd to set out of how the vaccinations would be prioritised (Care Home workers AND RESIDENTS FIRST) yesterday, there now appears to have been a U-turn because apparently the logistics of delivering the vaccine to Care Homes is too problematic, presumably because of the temperature limitations of this vaccine.

Bearing in mind there have been literally weeks to consider this scenario, it's just another example of the govt appearing to be (if not in actual fact) utterly useless in crisis management  :dash:.


I have found it utterly depressing. Cannot say any more as it will be deemed politics  :D

However then there is this clown External Link/Members Only

Offline winkywanky

I have found it utterly depressing. Cannot say any more as it will be deemed politics  :D

However then there is this clown External Link/Members Only


 :dash:  :dash:

This is the politics of Trump, and we never voted for Trump (Johnson is only 20% Trump-like, although he appears to be attempting to make up for lost ground with every subsequent missive).

The Russians of course, merely laugh at us now, they'll starkly contrast our current shower of a govt with Shakespeare and Churchill.

And the EU must be somewhat bewildered at our descent into childish playground logic.

It's actually devastatingly sad  :(.

Offline winkywanky

Anyway, no more politics, it's far too depressing currently :Zip It:

Offline myothernameis

''The government has granted Covid-19 manufacturer Pfizer a legal indemnity protecting it from being sued, enabling its coronavirus vaccine to be rolled out across the country as early as next week.

The Department of Health and Social Care has confirmed the company has been given an indemnity protecting it from legal action as a result of any problems with the vaccine, the Independent reported.''

I just wonder if this could be overturned in the courts, if and when Pfize are taken to court, all because of side effects.  My thoughts on this, if Pfize have legal indemnity, are they aware of any problems that might occur

Even on the news, the WHO are urging everyone to take up on the drug, and to ignore any disinformation

Online lostandfound

I just wonder if this could be overturned in the courts, if and when Pfize are taken to court, all because of side effects.  My thoughts on this, if Pfize have legal indemnity, are they aware of any problems that might occur

Even on the news, the WHO are urging everyone to take up on the drug, and to ignore any disinformation

The UK gov assumes the risk in place of Pfizer.

Offline Blackpool Rock


Nothing is 100% failsafe, even the yearly flu vaccine. Even a vaccine which has undergone the more usual 10yr development.

But are you suggesting that every time a different scientist/senior administrator of scientific regulatory body which oversees the development of the vaccine, comes on the telly and says with conviction that the vaccine has undergone all the usual rigorous checks, that they are simply lying in an organised and concerted way? Because if what you're saying is true, they'd have to be wouldn't they?  :unknown:

And they are waiting to see who drops dead/develops hideous side-effects, before issuing the final stats on efficacy? Or perhaps they'll just quietly sweep it under the carpet in full view?

The problem is, that if enough people think that then uptake will be low, and they'll be mistakenly thinking that everyone else can take the vaccine, and they will reap the benefit of that.
Was in the office earlier this week and someone asked if I was going to take the vaccine, I said yes and the other few people present also said yes but the person who asked the question then started to name people who weren't going to have it and still believe that CV19 doesn't exist  :dash:

Notably it did seem as if a lot of the Polish are against it, not sure if that is still a throwback to the bad old days of communism but these people probably aren't even old enough to remember back that far

I believe that very often the flu vaccine is only somewhere like 40-60% effective so if the CV19 vaccines are 90%+ then that's pretty amazing really.

In terms of it being fast tracked in 10 months rather than 10 years and as a result not having been tested properly I did hear that in pure number of tests it's been tested more than normal but what they can't replicate is what effect or side effects it may have over a longer timeframe, hence the emergency use and legal indemnity 

The regulatory authorities like the MHRA simply wouldn't be turning a blind eye if they thought this was going to go tits up, if anything they know how much focus there is on this and that it can't be covered up but more like blown up out of all proportion if something goes wrong.
Let's remember these authorities were set up to safeguard against another disaster like Thalidomide happening which was rushed through without enough checks being made on side effects

My concern is whether we will get herd immunity if enough of the Anti Vaxing brain dead social media followers choose not to take it because it's got a micro chip in it  :dash:
If that is the case then they effectively kill a % of those people for whom the vaccine doesn't work or who can't take it for other medical reasons, cunts  :diablo:

Online lostandfound

One thing I welcome is the broad acceptance of genetic medicine implicit in public support for these new vaccines. When I think of all the palaver there was over GMO crops ...

Offline Blackpool Rock

Sorry in advance for linking to the Daily Fail it was the top of the list from my search, anyway looks like the vaccine has had to be transported in unmarked lorries to secret locations for fear of it being stolen or tampered with in some way.
I guess criminals could try to steal some to sell on the black market perhaps in other countries whose Govts haven't managed to get supplies and some anti vaxers may try to damage it  :dash:
The anti vaxers will go to the end of the earth to disrupt the vaccine roll out which should be pretty east for them as after all it's flat isn't it  :sarcastic:

External Link/Members Only

Online Doc Holliday

Was in the office earlier this week and someone asked if I was going to take the vaccine, I said yes and the other few people present also said yes but the person who asked the question then started to name people who weren't going to have it and still believe that CV19 doesn't exist  :dash:

Notably it did seem as if a lot of the Polish are against it, not sure if that is still a throwback to the bad old days of communism but these people probably aren't even old enough to remember back that far

I believe that very often the flu vaccine is only somewhere like 40-60% effective so if the CV19 vaccines are 90%+ then that's pretty amazing really.

In terms of it being fast tracked in 10 months rather than 10 years and as a result not having been tested properly I did hear that in pure number of tests it's been tested more than normal but what they can't replicate is what effect or side effects it may have over a longer timeframe, hence the emergency use and legal indemnity 

The regulatory authorities like the MHRA simply wouldn't be turning a blind eye if they thought this was going to go tits up, if anything they know how much focus there is on this and that it can't be covered up but more like blown up out of all proportion if something goes wrong.
Let's remember these authorities were set up to safeguard against another disaster like Thalidomide happening which was rushed through without enough checks being made on side effects

My concern is whether we will get herd immunity if enough of the Anti Vaxing brain dead social media followers choose not to take it because it's got a micro chip in it  :dash:
If that is the case then they effectively kill a % of those people for whom the vaccine doesn't work or who can't take it for other medical reasons, cunts  :diablo:

Good post. Still so many unknowns? It has become apparent though that virus transmission cannot be controlled in the majority of countries so vaccination is our best hope.


Offline RedKettle

The vast majority dont need the vaccine most either have no symptoms or minor symptoms,why rush to pump something into you which will not make any difference.The vaccine is maybe 95% effective which means 5% will still die or end up in hospital,this isnt much different to the current stats.Most flu vaccines are not that effective with over 80s anyway (the same group COVID effects)A vaccine doesnt stop you getting COVID or passing it on, it just means your body is better able to fight it.It leads to a false sense of security because people with vaccines think they are safe and take greater risks,they are only asymptomatic.
You are posting complete crap and given the seriousness of the situation that is irresponsible. Please inform yourself before posting. 

Just to pick up one point we do not know yet whether any of these vaccines stops transmission of Covid, likely that they will but not known yet.

Online Doc Holliday

+1, Doc. James writes completely inaccurate statements with total confidence.  :dash:

Indeed. If he doesn't wish to have the vaccine that's fine I fully accept that decision. If people say I'm not sure about it and would prefer to leave it ... that is also fine. It is the grossly inaccurate justification for the decision that he and many others use that annoys me.

Offline winkywanky

Was in the office earlier this week and someone asked if I was going to take the vaccine, I said yes and the other few people present also said yes but the person who asked the question then started to name people who weren't going to have it and still believe that CV19 doesn't exist  :dash:

Notably it did seem as if a lot of the Polish are against it, not sure if that is still a throwback to the bad old days of communism but these people probably aren't even old enough to remember back that far

I believe that very often the flu vaccine is only somewhere like 40-60% effective so if the CV19 vaccines are 90%+ then that's pretty amazing really.

In terms of it being fast tracked in 10 months rather than 10 years and as a result not having been tested properly I did hear that in pure number of tests it's been tested more than normal but what they can't replicate is what effect or side effects it may have over a longer timeframe, hence the emergency use and legal indemnity

My concern is whether we will get herd immunity if enough of the Anti Vaxing brain dead social media followers choose not to take it because it's got a micro chip in it  :dash:
If that is the case then they effectively kill a % of those people for whom the vaccine doesn't work or who can't take it for other medical reasons, cunts  :diablo:


Between April and now I've been down into London three times on public transport, on each occasion I used mainline Rail and some Tube trains. A couple of those times there were groups of EE, definitely Romanian, four or five of them, all blabbering and babbling across the carriage at each other with no masks on, shouting of course because of the noise  :dash:. Obviously the Underground is a multinational/multicultural/multiethnic maelstrom (that's great, London's better for it) but they simply didn't give a shit. people were trying to avoid them, they'd walk in the carriage, see what was going on and then try and go elsewhere - or even change carriages - making it more crowded elsewhere  :thumbsdown:. Similarly, on every occasion, quite a few Black kids, and bearing in mind all the hoo-hah about the Racism of Covid, not very clever  :rolleyes:. Everyone else was complying, various ages, various backgrounds  :unknown:.

I also had a trip to Southend and went on the Pier Railway, there was another group of Roms on a day out, a couple of  mothers with all their kids, again, totaly ignoring the fucking rules. I was with an ageing relative and when they got on I said my piece and we were out of there. Come to our country, obey our fucking rules.

Herd immunity will happen with the coming vaccines, but the lower the take-up the longer it will take to happen. Thankfully they seem to be around 90% effective overall, so even if only 50-60% of people do the right thing, we should be OK I think? And as I've said before, those that don't take the vaccine are fucking themselves and potentially their own families, not so much other people. It's not like MMR and other vaccines which young kids need, where your kids' safety is reliant on other parents doing the right thing, Covid in the vast majority of cases, barely even touches children. Thank God.

Online Doc Holliday


 Covid in the vast majority of cases, barely even touches children. Thank God.

Thank God indeed, but had it affected infants in the same way that eg flu does, might we have seen a vastly different attitude to compliance? We will never know?

Offline winkywanky

Indeed. If he doesn't wish to have the vaccine that's fine I fully accept that decision. If people say I'm not sure about it and would prefer to leave it ... that is also fine. It is the grossly inaccurate justification for the decision that he and many others use that annoys me.


Perhaps worth noting of course, that in the vast majority of cases the preference to leave it is based on no logic or reason  :dash:. On the basis of that I personally don't think it is fine, and when people with that mindset post here or are vociferous elsewhere, and in doing so, spreading discontent and doubt, it does make my blood boil.

I tend to agree with you that if some people are just inherently doubtful or dubious about it, they just have a feeling, then don't do it. It's a free country. But don't justify it to yourself by talking crap and making a load of other doubters go with you.

It's a bit like guys coming on here and saying I reckon other guys are breaking the guidelines, punting or whatever else, therefore why should I bother? Well what about taking responsibility for your own actions, and then when we have another Lockdown because of you and all those other people, perhaps don't be surprised  :rolleyes:.

If you have a strong 'feeling' and you feel you must go with it, then do so, if you fancy breaking guidelines no-one can stop you, but don't come up with bogus bullshit to justify it to yourself, because your actions have implications for others.

Offline winkywanky

Thank God indeed, but had it affected infants in the same way that eg flu does, might we have seen a vastly different attitude to compliance? We will never know?


Interesting. I guess we are inherently more protective of our kids than our old 'uns?