Welcome Guest! The IOSH forums are a free resource to both members and non-members. Login or register to use them

Postings made by forum users are personal opinions. IOSH is not responsible for the content or accuracy of any of the information contained in forum postings. Please carefully consider any advice you receive.

Notification

Icon
Error

3 Pages<123
Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
peter gotch  
#81 Posted : 27 February 2021 15:37:53(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
peter gotch

SLord80

My English master at school was a stickler for proper grammar, spelling, sentences, paragraphs and such like.

Usually I am quite relaxed about those who cannot rite proper on these Forums.

But your repeated diatribes are virtually impossible to comprehend. You seem incapable of keeping sentences short and using the return key (or mobile phone equivalent) to put in a paragraph spacing.

I don't think anyone on this thread has suggested that every person who points to there being risks (as well as benefits) in vaccination is an Antivaxxer.

Nor has there been an outpouring of anyone on this thread suggesting that vaccines are 100% effective (quite the opposite - there has been discussion as to how long effectiness might last), or any claim as to how effective vaccination is in stopping the spread from person A (vaccinated) to person B.

So, perhaps you might be polite and stop translating contributors' comments into complete untruths.

The Iron Chicken  
#82 Posted : 28 February 2021 06:22:42(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
The Iron Chicken

Mrs F., my mum's 77yo friend, was vaccinated (both doses) at the very start of the roll-out in early December on the advice of her GP as she suffers with polymyalgia.

Her GP did not give her any information on potential benefits or harms.

Shortly afterward, she noticed government propaganda was warning that even if you have been vaccinated you should still continue uing face coverings, social distancing, handwashing, etc.

This was her particular 'red-pill' moment, when she realised this is about controlling people not a virus.

Welcome to 'Conspiracy Theorist' world, Mrs F - goodness me, we are everywhere now!

The Iron Chicken  
#83 Posted : 28 February 2021 07:44:29(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
The Iron Chicken

Originally Posted by: biker1 Go to Quoted Post

I think this will be an argument that rumbles on. There is an intuitive argument for mandatory vaccination to protect society, but on the other hand there is an obstacle regarding medical ethics, since it is essentially an invasive procedure, which therefore needs patient consent. I see that the lawyers have got involved, so here comes months of legal arguments. My own view is that unless you have a valid medical reason for not getting the vaccination, there is a compelling argument for it to be mandatory. The situation we are in with the pandemic is unprecedented in living memory, so all bets are off.

It's the government psy-op that is unprecedented in living memory...

John Murray  
#84 Posted : 28 February 2021 18:06:27(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
John Murray

Originally Posted by: biker1 Go to Quoted Post
As for mandatory vaccination, it is an extremely thorny issue. I read that employers are starting to develop the mindset of 'no jab, no job'. Sections 7 and 8 of HASAWA could arguably be used to support this. I think it will probably become compulsory by stealth, as has been observed by others, as indeed it became for some foreign travel.

The Vaccination Act 1867 (removed from legislation in 1946) could be resurrected !

SLord80  
#85 Posted : 28 February 2021 19:07:03(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
SLord80

Originally Posted by: peter gotch Go to Quoted Post
SLord80My English master at school was a stickler for proper grammar, spelling, sentences, paragraphs and such like.Usually I am quite relaxed about those who cannot rite proper on these Forums.But your repeated diatribes are virtually impossible to comprehend. You seem incapable of keeping sentences short and using the return key (or mobile phone equivalent) to put in a paragraph spacing.I don't think anyone on this thread has suggested that every personwho points to there being risks (as well as benefits) in vaccination is an Antivaxxer.Nor has there been an outpouring of anyone on this thread suggesting that vaccines are 100% effective (quite the opposite - there has been discussion as to how long effectiness might last), or any claim as to how effective vaccination is in stopping the spread from person A (vaccinated) to person B.So, perhaps you might be polite and stop translating contributors' comments into complete untruths.
Sit down Peter. The tab key doesn’t work in mobile phones, as someone else previously pointed out. You would have seen this, which tells me you forgot it. I guess memory loss is a normal part of aging.
A Kurdziel  
#86 Posted : 01 March 2021 09:27:39(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
A Kurdziel

The following vaccines are approved for use in the UK:

Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine- an RNA vaccine

COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna vaccine- also an RNA vaccine

COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca- based on genetically modified chimp Adeno virus.

The approval comes from the MHRA- Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency who take advice from the JCVI - Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisation

But perhaps you don’ t trust these people as they might be part of the conspiracy : so who do you trust to approve of the new vaccine or run the country or to do anything at all really?

Brian Hagyard  
#87 Posted : 01 March 2021 09:39:53(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
Brian Hagyard

"is it right that 10 people should die to save 100"

So 1 in 10 people that get the vaccine will die from it? And you have the nerve to question anyone elses on this forum. SSLord and Iron Chicken give it a rest, you just look like a pair of idiots!

thanks 1 user thanked Brian Hagyard for this useful post.
chris.packham on 01/03/2021(UTC)
CptBeaky  
#88 Posted : 01 March 2021 10:29:04(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
CptBeaky

Originally Posted by: SLord80 Go to Quoted Post

Please don’t spread misinformation. You’ve said the vaccine reduces death by 85% and referenced Pfizer - this is categorically false. Additionally, how you can claim its ‘irrelevant’ that a vaccine is licensed is astounding. The vaccine literally doesn’t have a license because of a lack of safety data - yet that’s irrelevant? Seriously? The figures for patients in hospital with covid are not so reliable - if I go on a run tonight, fall over and break my arm, and then test positive for covid on my arrival to hospital I’m included in the statistics, although zero symptoms. The actual figure of patients in hospital with covid19 will inevitable be a lower number. Completely agree - the choice should be based on facts. That’s why my mind boggles that if you dare mention that a vaccine may lead to death or serious harm/injury your an anti vaxxer, even though this is undisputed fact.

I don't say that the virus reduces death by 85%, the studies say that. I assume you looked at the study linked?

The virus has passed the safety checks, it just has been through the paperwork for licensing. They are two separate things. (how vaccines are licensed) . The vaccine is constantly being monitored for saftey as part of the rolling review. If we were to wait for licensing it could have delayed the distribution by 200 days or more. The vaccine still had to go through all the reviews and testing, to say otherwise is factually incorrect.

If you have COVID-19, you have COVID 19. It is irrelevant that it may not be why you are in hospital. The numbers are still accurate. I think you mean less people are being treated for COVID-19 than the figures, which is possibly true. I would imagine that this figure does not vary much though, but i have no data to support this, likewise you have no data to support your view.

The number people so far have been confirmed to have had a serious reactions is negligable, (also only 372 per million for non-serious reaction) unless you have evidence to the contrary. You are far more likely to have complications with the disease than the cure. This holds true for all age groups.

As always I link to facts. These are not my opinions.

thanks 6 users thanked CptBeaky for this useful post.
Holliday42333 on 01/03/2021(UTC), Alan Haynes on 01/03/2021(UTC), chris.packham on 01/03/2021(UTC), biker1 on 01/03/2021(UTC), peter gotch on 01/03/2021(UTC), John Murray on 02/03/2021(UTC)
SLord80  
#89 Posted : 01 March 2021 23:56:32(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
SLord80

Originally Posted by: CptBeaky Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: SLord80 Go to Quoted Post
Please don’t spread misinformation. You’ve said the vaccine reduces death by 85% and referenced Pfizer - this is categorically false. Additionally, how you can claim its ‘irrelevant’ that a vaccine is licensed is astounding. The vaccine literally doesn’t have a license because of a lack of safety data - yet that’s irrelevant? Seriously? The figures for patients in hospital with covid are not so reliable - if I go on a run tonight, fall over and break my arm, and then test positive for covid on my arrival to hospital I’m included in the statistics, although zero symptoms. The actual figure of patients in hospital with covid19 will inevitable be a lower number. Completely agree - the choice should be based on facts. That’s why my mind boggles that if you dare mention that a vaccine may lead to death or serious harm/injury your an anti vaxxer, even though this is undisputed fact.
I don't say that the virus reduces death by 85%, the studies say that. I assume you looked at the study linked?The virus has passed the safety checks, it just has been through the paperwork for licensing. They are two separate things. (how vaccines are licensed) . The vaccine is constantly being monitored for saftey as part of the rolling review. If we were to wait for licensing it could have delayed the distribution by 200 days or more. The vaccine still had to go through all the reviews and testing, to say otherwise is factually incorrect.If you have COVID-19, you have COVID 19. It is irrelevant that it may not be why you are in hospital. The numbers are still accurate. I think you mean less people are being treated for COVID-19 than the figures, which is possibly true. I would imagine that this figure does not vary much though, but i have no data to support this, likewise you have no data to support your view.The number people so far have been confirmed to have had a serious reactions is negligable, (also only 372 per million for non-serious reaction)unless you have evidence to the contrary. You are far more likely to have complications with the disease than the cure. This holds true for all age groups.As always I link to facts. These are not my opinions.
Are you claiming someone under 18 year old have a higher likelihood of problems from covid than the vaccine? Surely you can’t be, as that would be utterly ridiculous and proves you haven’t looked at the statistics. Of course the figure of people in hospital with actual covid symptoms matters. How you can disregard this is bordering stupidity. If you believe the vaccine hasn’t been through licensing because they haven’t been through the ‘paperwork’ yet then you are an idiot. It hasn’t been licensed yet because they don’t have sufficient safety data. Paperwork Lol. That made me giggle, thanks. https://assets.publishin...e_Analysis_Print__1_.pdf Do some research and try to think for yourself for once. To reiterate, to claim the vaccine is definitely better for everyone of all age groups is astounding, and is false. If your under 40 with no underlying health conditions then it certain the risks would not outweigh the benefits. Or don’t. Go back to gaping at the tv taking it what ever matt wancock tells you.(ps, he said himself last year masks should be worn by the general population) Oh and one more thing for everyone here who is religiously following our idiotic government as they strip us of our basic human freedoms, most of us would be back in tier 1 now, using the old system. Yet we’re in lockdown for many more months? People like Desmond Dwayne, sir Charles Walker, really do restore my faith in MPs.
Holliday42333  
#90 Posted : 02 March 2021 07:44:38(UTC)
Rank: Forum user
Holliday42333

Originally Posted by: SLord80 Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: CptBeaky Go to Quoted Post
Originally Posted by: SLord80 Go to Quoted Post
Please don’t spread misinformation. You’ve said the vaccine reduces death by 85% and referenced Pfizer - this is categorically false. Additionally, how you can claim its ‘irrelevant’ that a vaccine is licensed is astounding. The vaccine literally doesn’t have a license because of a lack of safety data - yet that’s irrelevant? Seriously? The figures for patients in hospital with covid are not so reliable - if I go on a run tonight, fall over and break my arm, and then test positive for covid on my arrival to hospital I’m included in the statistics, although zero symptoms. The actual figure of patients in hospital with covid19 will inevitable be a lower number. Completely agree - the choice should be based on facts. That’s why my mind boggles that if you dare mention that a vaccine may lead to death or serious harm/injury your an anti vaxxer, even though this is undisputed fact.
I don't say that the virus reduces death by 85%, the studies say that. I assume you looked at the study linked?The virus has passed the safety checks, it just has been through the paperwork for licensing. They are two separate things. (how vaccines are licensed) . The vaccine is constantly being monitored for saftey as part of the rolling review. If we were to wait for licensing it could have delayed the distribution by 200 days or more. The vaccine still had to go through all the reviews and testing, to say otherwise is factually incorrect.If you have COVID-19, you have COVID 19. It is irrelevant that it may not be why you are in hospital. The numbers are still accurate. I think you mean less people are being treated for COVID-19 than the figures, which is possibly true. I would imagine that this figure does not vary much though, but i have no data to support this, likewise you have no data to support your view.The number people so far have been confirmed to have had a serious reactions is negligable, (also only 372 per million for non-serious reaction)unless you have evidence to the contrary. You are far more likely to have complications with the disease than the cure. This holds true for all age groups.As always I link to facts. These are not my opinions.

Are you claiming someone under 18 year old have a higher likelihood of problems from covid than the vaccine? Surely you can’t be, as that would be utterly ridiculous and proves you haven’t looked at the statistics. Of course the figure of people in hospital with actual covid symptoms matters. How you can disregard this is bordering stupidity. If you believe the vaccine hasn’t been through licensing because they haven’t been through the ‘paperwork’ yet then you are an idiot. It hasn’t been licensed yet because they don’t have sufficient safety data. Paperwork Lol. That made me giggle, thanks. https://assets.publishin...e_Analysis_Print__1_.pdf Do some research and try to think for yourself for once. To reiterate, to claim the vaccine is definitely better for everyone of all age groups is astounding, and is false. If your under 40 with no underlying health conditions then it certain the risks would not outweigh the benefits. Or don’t. Go back to gaping at the tv taking it what ever matt wancock tells you.(ps, he said himself last year masks should be worn by the general population) Oh and one more thing for everyone here who is religiously following our idiotic government as they strip us of our basic human freedoms, most of us would be back in tier 1 now, using the old system. Yet we’re in lockdown for many more months? People like Desmond Dwayne, sir Charles Walker, really do restore my faith in MPs.

Reported for breach of Forum Rules 2,3,4&5

CptBeaky  
#91 Posted : 02 March 2021 10:46:10(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
CptBeaky

Quote:

If your under 40 with no underlying health conditions then it certain the risks would not outweigh the benefits

Under 18's aren't being offered the vaccine until more trials are done.

Lets look at age group 18-29. We probably can all agree this is probably the lowest risk group from those being vaccinated. In the US 36m of the populaiton is in this age bracket. Let us be generous and say 50% have had COVID-19, so around 18m. 1,684 have died of COVID, a death rate of 0.009%. (I use the US to get a large enough sample, and I struggled to find the UK numbers by age).

Ok lets now look at the page you linked to. As of the dates of that paper, 17,247,442 people in the UK (since that is what it is measuring) were vaccinated, let's be generous and say only 50% were the Pfizer vaccine (it should be higher), so roughly 8.5m people. Of those 197 died (which may have been unrelated, but let us assume they are not). A death rate overall of 0.002%. This is not even taking into account that the vaccines were all given to high risk people.

So even assuming the deathrate for the vaccine remains constant in ALL age/risk groups, it is still better than COVID-19, by a factor of at least 4.

The data you linked to showed 26,823 reports of reactions. Put those numbers through and you get 0.3% having a reaction (which again may or may not be related to the vaccine), again a lot less than the 83% that get symptoms when infected with COVID-19

I fudged all the numbers in your favour and still you are wrong. You may argue "underlying health issues" etc. but let's be honest, it doesn't look good for you, since the same arguement can be made for the reactions to the vaccine.

peter gotch  
#92 Posted : 02 March 2021 12:13:14(UTC)
Rank: Super forum user
peter gotch

Holliday42333.

Thank you for specifying the reasons for reporting a recent thread. 

P

Users browsing this topic
3 Pages<123
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.