Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by bootyman, Dec 4, 2020.
Good on her for speaking up.
You can't rubber stamp anything they say, Xmas, Freedom Day, jab the first 4 groups then cry freedom etc, etc.
Thats from 10 months ago but she makes a valid point
Why a second ****ty winter?
Why would it not be?
Because the implied message of no more lockdown is a better situation has arrived...
Better however is relative ……
Thanks for posting that up, hard to argue with anything that was said during that interview.
Seems to be a few misconceptions about the dangers of the vaccine and how fast it was developed. The reason they were able to roll it out so quickly was because there are several steps in the development and testing process that are normally carried out in sequence, but for the covid vaccine the regulations around this were relaxed to allow them to preform the steps in parallel. The same amount of testing etc as normal was done, it was just started at an earlier point in the process. Also, this isn't like developing a brand new drug where the side effects are completely unknown. It's the same preservatives, adjuvants etc as previous vaccines, just a different virus culture. So there's actually not all that much to test, comparatively speaking.
One other point to note is that it's not necessarily about the risk to any given individual, it's about building up the collective resistance of the country to the virus and reaching a point of herd immunity. So sure, some people may have adverse effects in rare circumstances to the vaccine, but if enough people refuse the vaccine we won't be able to reach herd immunity until everyone has been infected, and there's a huge death toll associated with that.
Although for some reason she omitted the fact that the U.K. won’t be following the dosing regimen of other countries specifically to further reduce the low risk of myocarditis
That is not an endorsement of the decision but it does seem a rather salient point in the whole affair to gloss over
This interview was from last week before they announced the dosing.
Ah ok fair enough
No doubt when they next have her back and she’ll make the point I’m sure.
Equally one expects she will give a big thumbs up to the JCVI decision to advise booster jabs given her endorsement of them in that clip.
Stop talking sense man, it won’t go down too well
I'd suggest you do some more research (at least before posting something like this) BTW, I'm interested to know where you found out it's the same adjuvants etc?
According to the Govt the vast majority of the adult population have been inoculated, that being on top of naturally acquired immunity. Therefore, we are already above levels previously considered sufficient for herd immunity, in fact this claim was being made months ago. Again, I'm interested in the underlined statement. Sweden was highly criticized for its CV approach, yet they have lower deaths per capita than us. The relevance of this statement is that probably due to their alternative approach, there were higher levels of infection (seemingly confirmed by various antibody studies showing at 40%) which is contraindicative to your claimed association. CV registered deaths in Sweden in the last 8 weeks: 41 the UK: c5000 (thank God we've got plan B in reserve)
6 million adults yet to be vax’d
It’s funny how before the vax, the figures of cases and deaths was incorrect. Falsified figures etc according to many on here
Yet, now after vax rollout, the government released figures are real
Hahahahahahah, so true, that’s golden.
A fair point. I don't have much confidence in any of the figures either now or earlier (as I'm sure you know) but I am addressing people who do so comment under a postulate, if that makes sense?
So around 15% "un-vaxxed" in percentage terms. Estimates of rates required for HI were below 85% and of course a fair proportion of the unvaxxed may have immunity.
I'm no expert so I may not be using the right words, but the point is the chemicals and processes are well understood, this is just a new application of it and not a totally new and unknown drug.
The herd immunity figures have always been fuzzy, people have been coming up with figures from 70%-95% of the total population. If there are 6 million adults (10% of the total population) still to be vaccinated then we are clearly nowhere near the upper bound yet. It's also based on the R number which has been changing as new and more infections variants crop up (which is another reason to get vaccinated, fewer infections means fewer opportunities for the virus to mutate).
I don't know what you're getting at with the Sweden example, it's difficult to compare countries with different policies, population densities and cultures that would affect their compliance with non-mandatory measures.
Anyway, I'm not looking to get into an argument with randos on the internet, that's just my 2c.
No problem! The CV vaccines I.E processes are radically different to traditional vaccines and with one very minor exception, haven't ever been used on humans before. The point about Sweden, is that higher levels of infection didn't lead to higher per capita levels of death (how they arrived at higher levels doesn't matter)