Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak

[Happy Blue]

1 minute ago, Gunnersauraus said:

Where does it say that? It just says the chances of dying of covid in different age groups. The chances of dying of a vaccine are much lower than that?

Read point 9 again, this might be the problem, you don't look at things properly

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Happy Blue said:

Read point 9 again, this might be the problem, you don't look at things properly

I just reposted it

[Happy Blue]

2 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

I just reposted it

It clearly says under 30's may be more likely to die from the covid 19 vaccine than covid 19  ...you see only what you want to see

Edited October 10, 2021 by Happy Blue

[Guest]

@Happy Blue where did you get that  consent form from? There is a fake consent form being sent and I'm pretty certain it is that.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Happy Blue said:

It clearly says under 30's may be more likely to die from the covid 19 vaccine than covid 19  ...you see only what you want to see

I read it quickly then looked again and noticed it

[Happy Blue]

1 minute ago, Gunnersauraus said:

@Happy Blue where did you get that  consent form from? There is a fake consent form being sent and I'm pretty certain it is that.

From my kids school, i told them if they try to jab my kids i will kill them

[Guest]

Just now, Happy Blue said:

From my kids school, i told them if they try to jab my kids i will kill them

It's a fake consent form. I just googled it right then. It's been targeted to schools

[Happy Blue]

2 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

It's a fake consent form. I just googled it right then. It's been targeted to schools

Schools are sending these home, i went to see the headmaster about it, he never said anything about it being fake

[Guest]

6 minutes ago, Happy Blue said:

Schools are sending these home, i went to see the headmaster about it, he never said anything about it being fake

I just googled it and there are fake consent forms going around. If they were real anti vaxers would have been on it like a rash. It was fairly obvious there was something dodgy about it. A lot of schools weren't aware they were fake 

Edited October 10, 2021 by Guest

[Happy Blue]

5 minutes ago, Gunnersauraus said:

I just googled it and there are fake consent forms going around. If they were real anti vaxers would have been on it like a rash. It was fairly obvious there was something dodgy about it

I'm just trying to find the fake one to compare the two   ...this is an experimental vaccine so who knows what the long term effects of it will be and the fact 99% of people will be fine without it to start with

Edited October 10, 2021 by Happy Blue

[Stan]

29 minutes ago, Happy Blue said:

Under 30's are more likely to die from the vaccine than covid, any comments?

 

It literally says 'may' be more likely to die.

And that's taken from a survey to see if people understand the statement or not. Where's the 'fact'?

[Guest]

Just now, Stan said:

It literally says 'may' be more likely to die.

And that's taken from a survey to see if people understand the statement or not. Where's the 'fact'?

What you mean it was a test to see if people can tell what it means?  From what I have read it is likely a fake consent form. The fact is happy blue has an understandable reason not to want to vaccinate. Is it logical? 100% no. Is it something that would cause most of us not to vaccinate? Probably 

[Guest]

@nudge there was this newspaper or website or something. It went around and exposed certain things. I think it proved that the Russians shot down that plane or something. Somebody told me about it and I looked them up. I think they were actually nominated for a peace prize. Anyway I like things like that.  The reason is is that that is looking for evidence and then proving something with evidence. I'm always very sceptical of anti vaxers because they already have a result and its about twisting facts to suit. 

[nudge]

1 hour ago, Gunnersauraus said:

I don't think any scientist would say just because scientists agree in something it is fact. However I think it makes sense when  you have little knowledge of science to trust the experts. Whatever research I do into something  it will never be as much as what scientists have done. It makes sense to believe they know more than me. To be honest even if you very good scientific knowledge it still makes sense to trust that the experts know more. So in general I go with the scientific consensus. If that consensus changes I go with that. 

However it does also depend how many scientists would have to be dishonest for something to be wrong. If it would take hundreds or thousands of scientists to be lying for something to be faked I'm not particularly inclined to believe it. The reason is that it seems quite unlikely to be true. Or at least less unlikely than what they are saying.  I dont know how many experts would have to be being dishonest for the vaccines to not be safe perhaps you do? 

Yeah, I'd say it's generally a good idea to go along with the position which is supported by a large body of clear and convincing data. 

As for your second paragraph, I think you're missing the point there a bit. Nobody is accusing scientists of being dishonest or lying, that's not the point. Let's not look for any conspiracies here. As for safety, any drug or vaccine always has certain risks and side effects; no drug or vaccine is 100% safe, and Covid vaccines are no exception. Clinical trials and current real-world data suggests that current vaccines are generally safe and effective in preventing severe course of disease. At the same time, there's also evidence of serious (albeit rare) side effects associated with some vaccines. In general, the benefits of a vaccine should always outweigh its risks - when new data from continuous monitoring and reviews suggests that in some cases it might no longer be true, the recommendations for vaccination should change - hence why in some countries certain vaccines are being restricted for certain age groups (AstraZeneca a while ago due to the risk of TTS, Moderna now due to the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis, etc.). As long as it all stays transparent and the data is easily accessible to everyone in order to make informed decisions, that's perfectly fine. Forcing people into decisions through political power is not fine though, at least not in my books.

[Guest]

43 minutes ago, nudge said:

Yeah, I'd say it's generally a good idea to go along with the position which is supported by a large body of clear and convincing data. 

As for your second paragraph, I think you're missing the point there a bit. Nobody is accusing scientists of being dishonest or lying, that's not the point. Let's not look for any conspiracies here. As for safety, any drug or vaccine always has certain risks and side effects; no drug or vaccine is 100% safe, and Covid vaccines are no exception. Clinical trials and current real-world data suggests that current vaccines are generally safe and effective in preventing severe course of disease. At the same time, there's also evidence of serious (albeit rare) side effects associated with some vaccines. In general, the benefits of a vaccine should always outweigh its risks - when new data from continuous monitoring and reviews suggests that in some cases it might no longer be true, the recommendations for vaccination should change - hence why in some countries certain vaccines are being restricted for certain age groups (AstraZeneca a while ago due to the risk of TTS, Moderna now due to the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis, etc.). As long as it all stays transparent and the data is easily accessible to everyone in order to make informed decisions, that's perfectly fine. Forcing people into decisions through political power is not fine though, at least not in my books.

I'll respond better later because a bit busy. One bit I noticed is where you said the advice on vaccines should be updated. 100 percent agree. But to be honest with AstraZeneca in Britain they did stop it for under 40s. Which if anything is an argument for vaccines because as soon as date suggested it may not be as safe as they wanted they stopped it.  I was actually willing to take AstraZeneca because I had more chance of dying on the journey home but was told I couldn't.

  I think we would both agree that people need to know the limits of their own knowledge. People need to know how much research goes into these things and that some great minds study these things. You cant disprove all this research with a quick google search 

[MUFC]

Anyone had this cold?

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/double-jabbed-brits-suffering-worst-25179317#comments-wrapper

[Happy Blue]

4 hours ago, MUFC said:

Anyone had this cold?

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/double-jabbed-brits-suffering-worst-25179317#comments-wrapper

People are still dying of covid after being double jabbed, conspiracy theorist like Tommy will love this

Edited October 11, 2021 by Happy Blue

[Honey Honey]

17 hours ago, Happy Blue said:

Schools are sending these home, i went to see the headmaster about it, he never said anything about it being fake

Yeah it was a scam which some schools fell for and distributed. 

[Guest]

I couldn't remember what it was called but I stumbled across it. The dunning Krueger affect is a bias where people with little knowledge of something overestimate their knowledge. I do wonder whether a lot of anti vaxers have this as they seem to think they know a lot more than they do ? Or do pro vaxers have it ??

[RandoEFC+]

[nudge]

45 minutes ago, RandoEFC said:

The joke's on you, I personally refuse to fly Boeing  

[Stan]

Nothing we probably didn't know already, but this government has blood on their hands. 

 

 

I wonder what excuse they'll hide behind. 

[Guest]

10 hours ago, Stan said:

Nothing we probably didn't know already, but this government has blood on their hands. 

 

 

I wonder what excuse they'll hide behind. 

I think anyone who wasnt completely biased knew the government had made a lot of mistakes 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Looking likely that boosters are now going to be available to everyone here pretty soon. I think there's a bit of an ethical dilemma here in that: I would be totally fine with getting a booster and having a bit more protection from the virus - but I don't really think it's right that a country that's got so much vaccine skepticism is getting its booster jabs ahead of so many countries where demand for the vaccine is sky high and so many people haven't had their first or second jabs.

Strikes me as wrong when it's a global pandemic and people should be getting the vaccine worldwide to really limit the spread of the disease and bring us back to normal ASAP.

[nudge]

12 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Looking likely that boosters are now going to be available to everyone here pretty soon. I think there's a bit of an ethical dilemma here in that: I would be totally fine with getting a booster and having a bit more protection from the virus - but I don't really think it's right that a country that's got so much vaccine skepticism is getting its booster jabs ahead of so many countries where demand for the vaccine is sky high and so many people haven't had their first or second jabs.

Strikes me as wrong when it's a global pandemic and people should be getting the vaccine worldwide to really limit the spread of the disease and bring us back to normal ASAP.

This is also exactly what the biggest (so far) international panel of scientists said after reviewing currently available evidence from randomised controlled trials and observational studies published in peer-reviewed journals and pre-print servers a month ago - namely, their reccomendation was that booster doses for the general population are not appropriate at this stage of the pandemic, as current vaccine supplies could save more lives if used in previously unvaccinated populations than if used as boosters in vaccinated populations. They also suggested that if boosters are widely introduced too soon or too frequently, there's a risk that it could cause significant adverse reactions, and that could have huge implications for vaccine acceptance in the future.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)02046-8/fulltext