You have to be careful using phrases like "everything possible" because clearly you don't believe that. If you wanted to do everything possible you would lock everyone up in their homes from birth till death. I am assuming you would like some freedom?
One-jab efficacy questions
- Thread starter Chris152
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
- Status
You have to be careful using phrases like "everything possible" because clearly you don't believe that. If you wanted to do everything possible you would lock everyone up in their homes from birth till death. I am assuming you would like some freedom?
Yes and no, would total loss of freedom for say three months in the begining have been that bad if we now had total freedom now within the UK and fewer deaths. It all comes down to the guy with no balls at the top who wanted his cake and to eat it, before he realised you can't it was to late.
Jacob
Pint of bass, porkpie, and packet of crisps please
From United Kingdom Coronavirus: 4,357,091 Cases and 126,826 Deaths - Worldometer
If you can see an error you should drop them a line, I'm sure they would be very grateful to be corrected!
Jonm
Established Member
You are assuming that vaccines make a substantial reduction in spread of the virus and I have not seen much evidence about that occurring. The only figures I can recall seeing is that vaccines reduce the spread by 30%. Given that the uk strain is said to transmit 70% faster than the original strain, a 30% reduction in transmission would mean that even with extensive vaccination the current uk strain would circulate faster than the original strain. Of course Vaccines may make a very substantial reduction in transmissions.
With regard to mutations the real dangers to us are from the slums and refugee camps of the world.
Jacob
Pint of bass, porkpie, and packet of crisps please
Not really. They are the ones who find it hardest to get here and are least likely to be visited by freewheeling travellers.
It's the well off world travellers, whether for business or pleasure, who will spread it fastest.
Last edited:
Jacob
Pint of bass, porkpie, and packet of crisps please
Which is it? Do they or don't they reduce the spread/transmissions?
RobinBHM
Established Member
No supposedly about it, NPIs do lower rate of infection spread.
Less people getting Covid mean less hospital and less deaths.....that's a clear effect on mortality rate.
You have no data on mortality rates with no NPIs.....although your arguments all assume that basis.
You were talking about the chances of dying though, so more accurately we should say infection fatality rate rather than mortality rate which is what I was referring to and assumed you were too. Are you claiming NPI lower the IFR of Covid?
Jacob
Pint of bass, porkpie, and packet of crisps please
If NPI reduces infections there will be fewer infected people to infect other people. Would a little diagram help?
Did we not have the lid on covid back in July last, Then this government opened the flood gates and let everyone go traveling round the world, and gave us lockdown 2 It'll happen again this summer and we'll be dubbed up by September, if not before then.
John Brown
Freeloading Social media influenza
Well, what do you know! I'm 68, but I always assumed you were older, based on your political viewpoints and opinions.
Do I sound old? lol
I think the threat of a vaccine passport will weight on the young, otherwise they will have to get frequent tests to be able to go to clubs etc. As you say, more coercion.
Taking the vaccine is a personal choice in this country, small pox vaccines were compulsory in the mid 19th century and there were protesters, most famously in Leicester, the government moved on, it realised the best course is persuasion and being open with the data. Its a very personal choice as individuals are receiving a foreign body into themselves. Compulsion is self defeating as it builds mistrust. Most people are choosing to take the vaccine as they perceive the risks of not taking it to out-way those of taking it. with over 80% uptake, herd immunity is likely. But importantly its a free choice for the individual.
I would re-assure your partner about the AZ vaccine through, if she wants a vaccine, she may not get a choice of manufactuer for some time. The data on AZ safety is very good worldwide, its got a unjustifiable bad press by overseas politicians shooting their mouths-off. The blood clot issue is of v. low incidence - about 1 in 1million in the UK, and seems to effect younger women (20 to 40 age group) who are taking certain contraceptive pills. If she or any young person falls in that category then the risk seems a higher, its still very small even for that age group. There is still little data to really be sure its a problem at all.
One thing with the AZ vaccine is it tends to be associated with a couple of days feeling like having a dose of flue, raised temperature, exhaustion. It is milder in older people and more severe in the younger age group. My wife felt rotten for 3 days whilst I hardly noticed it. The second dose has less reported side effects, whilst the Pfizer version has more the second time round. None of the side effects are due to an illness, just the way the body naturally responds to foreign proteins in the blood.
Lowering deaths in the older population was the original strategy, but recent studies are showing how much more dangerous the decease is for the young. Long covid and damage to organs is becoming apparent in younger people who had quite mild symptoms at the time. The Kent variant seems to be more serous in the young. There maybe 1 million with serous side effects out of the roughly 5million cases, so it could be effecting the lives of 20% of those infected. Early data, but going in the wrong direction.
Luckily for us, the side effects of vaccines are manifested very early on ie in weeks. In 200 years of vaccination, contra indications have shown up quickly.
You are absolutely right that extreme caution is required with vaccines as they are given to otherwise healthy people, especially for the very young. That is why it usually take 5 to 10 years to develop a completely new vaccine (flue variants excepted). A vaccine is not a drug as such, so does not interfere with the body's metabolism or with DNA as a small molecule drug could, as Thalidomide did. A vaccine produces piece of virus protein, our bodies receive these all the time from natural infections. The side effects of vaccines are seen very quickly.
If there was a high incidence ie 1 in 10,000 of a side effect, it would show up in the early clinical trials, the ones granted a licence passed all these tests very well. The Covid vaccine is being rolled out globally to billions of people, we should start to see rare side effects (blood clots could be one such side effect) that affect say 1 in 250,000 or 1 in a million emerging. This data would help when rolling the vaccine out to the young, but so far trial are showing very little effect.
Jonm
Established Member
The government with all their resources do not know or are not telling us so how do you expect me to know.
The point I am making is that statements are being made about how we should behave assuming that vaccination substantially reduces transmission, but we do not know that.
Provided you are careful, waiting is a fine strategy, its what the Leicester folk did when fighting epidemics in the 19th century, good contact tracing and isolation. Vaccination is really a strategy for getting the population socialising again.
I must stress that vaccines today are a safe medication - at least by comparison with any other medication. Gulf war syndrome is still not really understood, but the most likely suspect is Sarin poisoning, it fits the symptoms and the soldier were exposed. There have been no known vaccine side effects that give gulf war syndrome, and nothing on that scale.
RobinBHM
Established Member
We won't know for a while because vaccines haven't been around long enough.
Jacob
Pint of bass, porkpie, and packet of crisps please
You seemed to be contradicting yourself. OK so you don't know but it's reasonable to assume that reducing infection will reduce transmission - unless/until it is shown to be otherwise.
- Status
