You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
I'm thinking more serial killer now
Do you dismiss anything that is not directly from your bum-chum TiRed?
Well not sure that’s a compelling argument or undisputed evidence.
Well if you can’t see the video then here is the support group:
Thats not bad, 8 people who had adverse reaction to the vaccine.
Still a bit less that the 5.6 million who had adverse reactions to not having it.
Why don’t you provide the data to back up your dismissal of my points?
Because we're taking the default position of listening to the scientists. You're the one with the extra-ordinary claims.
Re masks, there are tons of studies showing how they work, with high speed videos and stats and everything. So given that, and how easy it is to wear one, I do so just in case they are right. Because if I'm wrong and wearing one does nothing, no big deal. But if you're wrong, and wearing one DOES limit transmission and you don't wear one - very big deal.
@tpbiker - no, it isn't even remotely harsh. Let's take the drunk driver as an example. It's an evening and one of your party has driven to the pub, again. You have your catch up, a few beers, and you call for a taxi home, or to the Indian, whatever. The one who drove there turns down the taxi and drives home instead. He's made a conscious decision to do something that he knows could cause irreversible levels of damage to others and himself, up to and including death. Maybe he makes it home fine this time, and maybe he's caused a few accidents on his drive home. You'd kick that person out of your drinking group pretty damn quickly because they were obviously a stupid and selfish arsehole. Antivaxxers are effectively the same, except worse, because that decision to drunkenly drive is a decision to unvaccinatedly leave the house. And that's a much more regular occurrence.
Do you dismiss anything that is not directly from your bum-chum TiRed?
I am highly likely to dismiss anything that uses that kind of language though. It makes you look like you are lashing out emotionally rather than having a rational discussion.
You are promoting yourself as an ignorant **** that’s for sure.
Gonna need some evidence for that too.
Thats not bad, 8 people who had adverse reaction to the vaccine.
Heh. Did you read that site's disclaimer distancing themselves from any claims and recommending that people seek actual medical advice, or did you just head straight for their gift shop?
Oh look. That'll be a ban then. Tara, it's been fun. Until next time!
Bye Bye Peter
Clearly the actions of a loser. Too used to having the other weirdos agree with him and when he meets a real challenge has a big tantrum
Well, that was the same pattern again, wasn't it... post the same old stuff, then be abusive about long standing members, then post a photo that has to be pulled.
And the troll is unmasked for what it is - hurrah!!! I’m surprised it took so long tbh.
My eyes. I think I could see lorries with French number plates.
Can we close this thread now then? Keep it to the existing thread?
I wonder if that was his friend.
What was in the photo? Descriptions only please.
Heh. Did you read that site’s disclaimer distancing themselves from any claims and recommending that people seek actual medical advice, or did you just head straight for their gift shop?
I was being sarcastic cougar.
What was in the photo? Descriptions only please.
Boris Johnson.
Maybe Peteykins had a point? He hatez teh gayz bcuz they’re pro-vaccine nEeDLE-fAsCiSTs?
My eyes. I think I could see lorries with French number plates.
🤣🙌🏼
They don’t call it Le Havre for nothing. (Well done mods, it was looking like a close shave…)
What was in the photo? Descriptions only please.
I think it was a self-portrait.
What was in the photo? Descriptions only please.
A lady going for her vaccination and misunderstanding where a little prick would need to be stuck.
Descriptions only please.
Errr! It was a view a gynaecologist mighty see.
I was being sarcastic cougar.
I know, I was commenting about the site, not you.
If we kept the thread on topic it would be great - I get lost in the main thread.
Ooops! Sorry guys not sure why that didn’t delete.
Yep pic still there….. 🤢🤢🤢🤮🤮🤮
If we kept the thread on topic it would be great – I get lost in the main thread.
Yes, although I dubious of the original OPs intentions it has turned into a thread to discuss the vaccine itself and help disable some misinformation.
more able IT'ers than me probably know but is it the same person with multiple logins, and if so isn't it time their original persona is named.
What a knob.
He hatez teh gayz bcuz they’re pro-vaccine nEeDLE-fAsCiSTs?
Is it perhaps intended to work the other way? "Are you a family man that feels queasy (and strangely aroused) around LGBT folk? Then you should also hate the vaccine!"
/s in case it wasn't obvious enough
because that decision to drunkenly drive is a decision to unvaccinatedly leave the house. And that’s a much more regular occurrence.
I think you can make the distinction in that some people do have genuine concerns around vaccination. I don’t think you could say the same about getting a taxi at end of the night
I get the sentiment… but I’m not wholly convinced equating people who don’t want to get the vaccine with pedos is entirely fair
My wrath is reserved for the xxxxs who spread the miss-information and whose nonsense actually costs lives. I have a fair degree of sympathy for those that have been suckered into believing it
more able IT’ers than me probably know but is it the same person with multiple logins, and if so isn’t it time their original persona is named.
Difficult to spot folk using different IP addresses and/or email accounts.
Perhaps it's time for some sort of control on the Chat forum - no posting until a certain number of days/weeks after registration or until a number of posts on the Bike forum.
Anyway, didn't want to mention it whilst Peter was around but as I've said a few times on a number of threads...
My wife had an adverse reactions to the az vaccine - she has lupus an auto immune condition, which has been managed by various drugs for a number of years. She had the az vaccine in Jan last year and a year on is still being monitored for various related issues, I think she's on hospital visit number 6 now.
My wife and I, as laymen, as knew there was a high chance that the az vaccine would cause her issues with basic knowledge of how the az and phzier vaccines work. But no other vaccine was available at the time so she took it. Jan last year BJ was very proudly fronting the az as the way forward for all - no care of previous medical conditions etc etc. Just Oxford is great / British is best.
Her adverse reaction was entirely avoidable if consultation had been given with her consultants and medical advisors within the wider NHS. So in my view was a political rather medical fault. Her consultant has also told her he has had a vastly increased work load since az vaccine was given to a large number of his patients - who are now presenting a range of issues.
My wife is also an active member on a lupus forum, and has been for a number of years. Many of her forum friends have also had a large range of issues and complications that they directly attribute to the az vaccine.
My wife is still pro vaccination - she'll be on no 4 by the end of the month (1az and 3phzier or moderna mRNA based).
She's also been given a flu jab since diagnosis - but again one that is compatible with her condition (she has to check it's the correct one with the Dr each year).
Caution shown by other countries about learning lessons from the early AZ rollout was derided a lot here at the time (it's all in the other thread). Everything done in other countries was said to be "political", and the UK approach was said to be purely science led. As well as having a negative effect on the lives of a small minority of vaccinated people, it's the kind of thing that builds mistrust of our vaccination rollout in the UK, where take up is now lower than in many comparable countries.
I think there’s an adverse reactions thread. I suppose (like UK politics/pollution/Tories/Johnson/Brexit) there will always be problems keeping COVID-19/propaganda/antivaxx/anti-mask/side-effects threads/multiple threads on track,
*edit
https://singletrackmag.com/forum/topic/covid-vaccination-side-effects-what-were-yours/
My wrath is reserved for the xxxxs who spread the miss-information and whose nonsense actually costs lives. I have a fair degree of sympathy for those that have been suckered into believing it
Agreed, (and also not to say anyone should be bullied) but for point of reference at what point do they become one and the same?
Talking of bullying, the irony of those signs ‘let our kids smile’:
As far as fighting the war social services commufascists* it’s all in hand. Alpha Men assemble**:
*satire
**not satire
Difficult to spot folk using different IP addresses and/or email accounts.
Yeah it’s impossible. 😗
I kept out of this thread for the last day or two as any contribution I had would be tiresomely repetitive. Well what fun I missed!
Couple of high quality takedowns !
So to dismiss everything out of hand is incorrect and not helpful.
It is helpful to me as I don't have to waste any time.
Covid is a big change for people and as we know people struggle with change. One way to deal with it is to focus on the majority that want to understand and spending your time on them rather than the 1% who will always be against it (change is bad) as that 1% become insignificant.
Perhaps it’s time for some sort of control on the Chat forum – no posting until a certain number of days/weeks after registration
There already is. There's a delay of several hours, though that's largely to stop spammers spamming when all the moderators are in bed.
erratum:
As far as fighting the war against
social servicescommufascists*, it’s all in hand. Alpha Men assemble… **
Yeah it’s impossible.
There was a thing a bit back, with Steam(gaming) Valve anti cheat. And as far as i know it recorded things like the GPU id thingy.
Of course with valve you sign up to let them read your system for them gauging who has what gup/processor etc for game minimum requirements to see what the majority of their users are running.
Anyway, if you were caught cheating and to prevent cheaters just opening a new account it took its id from your GPU signature and its unlikely people would go to the extreme of changing a GPU in order to get a new account.
I think though for that you need the users permission, and i dont think thats possibly here. Shame, as it would mean they couldnt sign up unless they changed their computer.
That Alpha Men Assemble guff - is that some sort of Brass Eye style spoof?
Unfortunately not....
Gammon goons assemble
Do you dismiss anything that is not directly from your bum-chum TiRed?
Well modesty forbids, but we've never met in person.
If you would like to review the vaccine data, the EMA have published their assessment (EPAR) together with their approval and further assessment of safety signals here https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/comirnaty . The CDC don't license medicines and vaccines, so you will be waiting for a while to see the data from them. By contrast, the FDA held two advisory committees and the materials have been published (including review data). The Children's Ad Com is here. You are welcome to search for the adult materials.
Thanks chum.
You are welcome to search for the adult materials.
I think he was searching for some different adult material in the end.....
That Alpha Men Assemble guff – is that some sort of Brass Eye style spoof?
You’d think they were but they are genuine in their beliefs. Some of their stuff is more comical than Brass Eye.
World beating surely? 🤣
I was working off the gov dashboard which shows 90% first dose for eligible population. Damn me and my rose tints!
Good comparison that ^ ta!
[url= https://i.postimg.cc/NMHp42TQ/Screenshot-20220126-152517.pn g" target="_blank">https://i.postimg.cc/NMHp42TQ/Screenshot-20220126-152517.pn g"/> [/img][/url]
Depends on your definition of "eligible population".
[url= https://i.postimg.cc/kX012ctf/Screenshot-20220126-152852.pn g" target="_blank">https://i.postimg.cc/kX012ctf/Screenshot-20220126-152852.pn g"/> [/img][/url]
That data is actually pretty close if you take it as total coverage (rather than just over 12’s) and assume that 2 jabs is fully vaccinated..
Blimey, I missed some goings on.
You leave the thread for a couple of days and find out that Drac and TiRed are in a committed and loving relationship.
Covid gone all Tinder.
It was only a matter of time before our secret came out.
I'll buy a hat.👍
petemoore's vitriol was only jealousy - he would have settled for either drac or TiRed but missed out.. twice; poor little love.
Just goes to show persistence doesn't always pay off I guess. 😬
Hey! I’m game for a threesome if TiRed is.
I'd just like to say that i have concerns about losing otherwise committed and skilled NHS staff because of this. I still don't know why they aren't getting the jab - why aren't they just getting the jab? - but they evidently aren't, and in considerable numbers.
I appreciate there is a difference between the anti-vax and the anti-this-vax, but i don't really understand it.
I remain amazed that the numbers being talked about are still unvaccinated, but is there any evidence that this 'coercion' is actually bringing people into the fold?
I do not want to come across as being supportive of those choosing not to vaccinate, but there is a practical element to this that suggests a tactical retreat might be in order.
@monkeyboyjc: sorry to hear about your wife.
It was interesting observing the different messaging in the press around the safety of the AZ jab, in the UK vs Australia.
The Australian press was continuously reporting on the the safety of the AZ vaccine in the early days of the roll-out here - to the point that I think it was over-reporting. This had the effect of stalling the whole vaccine roll-out in Australia, the over 60s decided that they would "wait for Pfizer" instead of having AZ now. One has some sympathy for that position - deaths and hospitalizations in Australia were very low, so the benefits were questionable. Australia's vaccine rollout basically stopped at 3%, because the PM hadn't secured any Pfizer jabs.
Conversely, it seemed very strange that there was so little in the UK press about deaths/Serious Adverse Reactions due to the AZ vaccine. The covid situation in the UK was so dire just prior to the roll-out starting that I suspect that they press (in particular the BBC) were put on some sort of "war footing", where any stories that could threaten the willingness of the public to have the AZ jab were suppressed. I am aware that this sounds dangerously close to a conspiracy theory - but it was really noticeable sitting over here. Not saying that the data was suppressed - only that there didn't seem to be any kind of discussion about it in the media.
FYI: Policy in Australia became that anyone over 40 should have the Pfizer jab...... as the risk posed buy the virus in lower age groups than that, was lower than the risk of the AZ jab.
Not saying that's right/wrong/good/bad - but it was really weird that this same discussion wasn't playing-out in the UK media
YI: Policy in Australia became that anyone over 40 should have the Pfizer jab…… as the risk posed buy the virus in lower age groups than that, was lower than the risk of the AZ jab.
Sorry - I meant: "anyone under 60 should have the Pfizer Jab"
Loving that the South West are showing Scotland how it’s done :-).
Yours truly, a Scot living in the South West 😉
@batfink I agree, it took along time for the UK to adopt a possition of safety around the az. Which cirtainly hasn't helped the pro vaccine propaganda.
I remain amazed that the numbers being talked about are still unvaccinated, but is there any evidence that this ‘coercion’ is actually bringing people into the fold?
It is unlikely to. Some will no doubt fold if/when it comes to actually losing their jobs, others will be sacked. Does seem surprising how many people in a loosely medical area seem so ignorant but they are just people and there are a lot of idiots/ignorant/selfish people around.
Drac
Full Member
Hey! I’m game for a threesome if TiRed is.
Of all the disturbing posts on am antivaxx thread I thought I'd need to report, this wasn't it 😱
As set out earlier, that 80,000 figure isn't all front line staff and hasn't been updated to reflect any progress. The BBC has an article on it today.
I'm afraid I'd sooner do without the services of a medical professional who doesn't understand the data behind the vaccination and risks, or how a public health programme needs to work. It's a question of professional competence although I understand the ethical concerns.
I still don’t know why they aren’t getting the jab – why aren’t they just getting the jab? – but they evidently aren’t, and in considerable numbers.
I believe it is to do with the word and concept of 'Mandate' They dont wish to be forced and are standing up for their own rights- not to be forced against their will, and also for those who do not wish it, because of a number of personal reasons, which may include fear of having an adverse reaction.
They also feel the use of ppe safeguards the patient. And I suppose one could even argue now that if infection from the omicron variant is leading to less deaths from say for example seasonal flu, where there is no need for the carers to be vaccinated against, then they shouldn't need to be vaccinated against covid.
I dont think anyone is suggesting that the latest mutation isnt dangerous to some, I think it might be that its not as dangerous to the previous mutations or the original virus, but i suppose this relies upon a fact that you cannot catch previous variants, although that said im not sure this is correct and the previous mutations are still about.
As set out earlier, that 80,000 figure isn’t all front line staff and hasn’t been updated to reflect any progress.
The actual terms of it are here*, but i would suspect when they use the term 'Healthcare workers', they're referring to the staff who actually provide the healthcare and not people like the backroom staff who work in admin.
* " This will include front line workers, as well clinical workers not directly involved in patient care but who nevertheless may have direct, face to face contact with patients, such as receptionists, ward clerks, porters and cleaners."
Conversely, it seemed very strange that there was so little in the UK press about deaths/Serious Adverse Reactions due to the AZ vaccine.
There was they talked about Pulmonary Embolisms well out of proportion to the risk compared to other risks. The government reacted pretty quickly and switched to Pfizer for those with increased risk.
As set out earlier, that 80,000 figure isn’t all front line staff and hasn’t been updated to reflect any progress. The BBC has an article on it today.
Not too bad of an article as it has the voices of those not having it and then a response from a virologist. The dentist of 50 years not renewing their contract made me smile, yeah as that’s the reason there leaving.
The actual terms of it are here*, but i would suspect when they use the term ‘Healthcare workers’, they’re referring to the staff who actually provide the healthcare and not people like the backroom staff who work in admin.
The term is clear, what isn’t is which ones out of those that haven’t had the vaccine are patient contact. Clinicians can work in call centres, they’re healthcare but never see patient.
The government reacted pretty quickly and switched to Pfizer for those with increased risk.
Yes, I'm not saying that nothing was said/done..... my point was more that there hasn't been the same level of scrutiny by the press of the AZ vaccine side effects/risk-benefit, as there has been over here.
It was obvious that the BBC switched to more of a "PSA" role during the pandemic - which is fair enough..... I just wonder whether that extended to not running articles that might cause people to doubt whether they should go and have the AZ jab.
Conversely, it seemed very strange that there was so little in the UK press about deaths/Serious Adverse Reactions due to the AZ vaccine.
Wasn't it just proportionate to the actual risks?
I just wonder whether that extended to not running articles that might cause people to doubt whether they should go and have the AZ jab.
Like I say they did as they blew it out of proportion, the risk was minimal but the press made it look like it was high. You had no real choice of what vaccine you got, it depended what the vaccination centre had.
Like I say they did as they blew it out of proportion
I think that was my point..... I didn't see that in the UK press (admittedly from over here, but I follow the UK press) at anything like the same level as the Australian press.
my point was more that there hasn’t been the same level of scrutiny by the press of the AZ vaccine side effects/risk-benefit, as there has been over here.
Where is here? There was clearly some 'vaccine nationalism' going on in the UK, not sure why you'd think foreign press and governments would be immune to it - especially given British governments behaviour and resentment around Brexit etc. Just as likely foreign media were playing up the risks as the BBC were playing it down.
Edit: Australia? Not generally seen as a bastion of accuracy in the press is it?
They dont wish to be forced
I think I'd be cautious about lumping 60,000-80,000 individuals into a group like that. I think there's every variation of reason why folks chose not to be vaccinated.
the risk posed buy the virus in lower age groups than that, was lower than the risk of the AZ jab.
Citation needed. I found this, which isn't quite the same thing:
She added: "The balance of benefits and risks is very favourable for older people, but is more finely balanced for younger people."
From someone from the MHRA, on the BBC website of all places.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-57021738
It's obviously terrible for anyone who does get it/their families etc but the risks are still incredibly tiny, and people are just not good at understanding/calculating risk.
There was they talked about Pulmonary Embolisms well out of proportion to the risk compared to other risks. The government reacted pretty quickly and switched to Pfizer for those with increased risk.
There was, but generally only talked about in the under 40's being switched away from az. My wife and I knew the az vaccine would be risky for her months before it's introduction/clearing by gov and use in the general population.
The government was extremely slow to react as many with the NHS had already raised concerns the prior year.
The government was extremely slow to react
Given they are still showing the CV symptoms as the ones from the original variant that aren't even very common any more, I'm sure this part is true.
Define 'risky' though.
From someone from the MHRA, on the BBC website of all places.
It was originally on the gov.uk website
It’s obviously terrible for anyone who does get it/their families etc but the risks are still incredibly tiny, and people are just not good at understanding/calculating risk.
Risk = Likelihood x Severity
So I guess a lot of the anti vaxers logic goes, particularly if they are young and fit:
Catching Covid = possible x mild
Vaccine = very unlikely x severe
There was, but generally only talked about in the under 40’s being switched away from az. My wife and I knew the az vaccine would be risky for her months before it’s introduction/clearing by gov and use in the general population.
The government was extremely slow to react as many with the NHS had already raised concerns the prior year.
Yes it was because they were the higher risk. You see I’d say they weren’t it wasn’t out that long before they changed to Pfizer for certain categories.
Sorry to hear about your wife.
Catching Covid = possible x mild
Vaccine = very unlikely x severe
Which would make sense if the risk of thrombosis wasn’t higher from covid.
Very simplistic as doesn’t show ages and other factors but here you go.
https://twitter.com/drailyntan/status/1381872393027784710?s=21
So I guess a lot of the anti vaxers logic goes, particularly if they are young and fit:
Catching Covid = possible x mild
Vaccine = very unlikely x severe
It's understandable to a degree but it seems a pretty self-centred way of looking at the world.
Risk = Likelihood x Severity
So I guess a lot of the anti vaxers logic goes, particularly if they are young and fit:
Catching Covid = possible x mild
Vaccine = very unlikely x severe
Seems to me thats exactly how the government are now treating it. I suppose at some point youre going to have to look at this in a pragmatic viewpoint, and not just throw it under the 'Anti-vaxx' bus.
Very simplistic as doesn’t show ages and other factors but here you go.
Way too simplistic. Particularly when age is put into the mix.
As I said, the heath advice in Australia is that the tipping point at which the risk of thrombosis/thrombocytopenia from the AZ vaccine is greater than the risk posed by covid, is 60. Anyone under 60 gets pfizer here, anyone older gets AZ.
As I said, the reason that the Australian vaccine roll-out was so slow was that the press were widely reporting this risk, and basically everyone refused to have it (Pfizer wasn't available at the time). I completely agree that it was over-reported.
What's interesting is that it wasn't (I don't think, correct me if I'm wrong) over-reported in the UK...... even with its bloodthirsty tabloid press, none of them went after this story with any of their usual disregard of the actual facts