Will you get a Covid vaccine if one becomes available in 2021?

[armaghniac]

I'm hearing, from a usually very reliable source, that some NHS staff in the UK will start getting a vaccine by end of next week.
Can't say I understand it being available so fast, and I'm extremely sceptical, but throwing this up here anyway!

If it is approved then Pfizer has already been making it for a couple of months in anticipation of its being approved, so it will be ready to go.
Hospitals likely already have the storage requirements and the competence to deliver the vaccine. Approval will not be long delayed, Pfizer were already sharing the data with the regulators even before the public. And healthy health care staff who are in daily contact with people with the vaccine is a good place to continue testing it.

[Hound]

I'm hearing, from a usually very reliable source, that some NHS staff in the UK will start getting a vaccine by end of next week.
Can't say I understand it being available so fast, and I'm extremely sceptical, but throwing this up here anyway!

If it is approved then Pfizer has already been making it for a couple of months in anticipation of its being approved, so it will be ready to go.
Hospitals likely already have the storage requirements and the competence to deliver the vaccine. Approval will not be long delayed, Pfizer were already sharing the data with the regulators even before the public. And healthy health care staff who are in daily contact with people with the vaccine is a good place to continue testing it.

And it is the Pfizer one they're telling me. I slightly misunderstood the timing earlier. They're supposedly aiming for a start date of Monday week, 7 December. Carehomes first, then NHS staff.

[Tony Baloney]

I'm hearing, from a usually very reliable source, that some NHS staff in the UK will start getting a vaccine by end of next week.
Can't say I understand it being available so fast, and I'm extremely sceptical, but throwing this up here anyway!

They said weeks ago that NHS would be getting it in December all being well with the trials, so sounds plausible what you are hearing.

[armaghniac]

I think if this process starts and begins to have any effect on the numbers, then people will see an end to the tunnel. This should make restrictions easier and hopefully people will turn on those that would keep us in a pandemic.

[Tony Baloney]

I think if this process starts and begins to have any effect on the numbers, then people will see an end to the tunnel. This should make restrictions easier and hopefully people will turn on those that would keep us in a pandemic.

I'm hoping Seaney's mate gives it the go ahead.

[Rossfan]

 

[Chief]

Yeah I'll get it as soon as it is possible to do so, even if I have to pay. And yes I will be encouraging loved ones to do likewise.

Where you getting it Chief, you can't buy it!

A corrupt CEO from a big pharma company is going to sell it to me in return for not exposing him as a high ranking member of the Illuminati.

I have a chemical engineer mate who is going to tell when it's safe to take it as well.

[Tony Baloney]

Yeah I'll get it as soon as it is possible to do so, even if I have to pay. And yes I will be encouraging loved ones to do likewise.

Where you getting it Chief, you can't buy it!

A corrupt CEO from a big pharma company is going to sell it to me in return for not exposing him as a high ranking member of the Illuminati.

I have a chemical engineer mate who is going to tell when it's safe to take it as well.

I know a few experienced Chemical Engineers if we need a casting vote.

[Seamus]

The Vaccine Safety Project

"Del Bigtree presents the facts about Vaccine Safety and Policy in America- giving you the facts you need to make the right choice for you or your child."

https://www.bitchute.com/video/31L6IlsOoIOc/

It's advisable for everyone to view the entire video but I fully understand with whom I'm dealing with here. For those with a small attention span skip ahead to about the 32.45 min mark and get proof of How Vaccines Are Approved which includes CDC video evidence at their ACIP hearing.

The vaccine looking for approval in this instance is the Dynavax Hepatitis B vaccine. Just to note, in clinical trials 14 healthy people got heart attacks. As Del says regarding the ACIP hearing "some great questions and terrible answers" It then went to vote. The outcome is shocking which was then followed by a couple of more questions.

In 1986 the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) act was introduced.

In 2018 VAERS received 62,803 reports with only 1% reporting including
533 Deaths,
1,438 Permanent Disabilities
5,108 Hospitalizations and
5,588 Emergency Room Visits
 
Image if 100% reported. He explains why there is not proper reporting in the video.

Anyone blindly accepting CDC and FDA recommendations on "COVID -19" vaccines and then having their kids vaccinated after watching this will need their heads examined.

The "experts" are already talking about the next certain pandemic. Easily known where that is going to come from and who is going to get the blame.

If you want to change your vote after watching this video please post here. If you continue blindly may God help you and especially your children.

[Captain Obvious]

"Facts" provided by Del Matthew Bigtree enough said 

[LCohen]

The Vaccine Safety Project

"Del Bigtree presents the facts about Vaccine Safety and Policy in America- giving you the facts you need to make the right choice for you or your child."

https://www.bitchute.com/video/31L6IlsOoIOc/

It's advisable for everyone to view the entire video but I fully understand with whom I'm dealing with here. For those with a small attention span skip ahead to about the 32.45 min mark and get proof of How Vaccines Are Approved which includes CDC video evidence at their ACIP hearing.

The vaccine looking for approval in this instance is the Dynavax Hepatitis B vaccine. Just to note, in clinical trials 14 healthy people got heart attacks. As Del says regarding the ACIP hearing "some great questions and terrible answers" It then went to vote. The outcome is shocking which was then followed by a couple of more questions.

In 1986 the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) act was introduced.

In 2018 VAERS received 62,803 reports with only 1% reporting including
533 Deaths,
1,438 Permanent Disabilities
5,108 Hospitalizations and
5,588 Emergency Room Visits
 
Image if 100% reported. He explains why there is not proper reporting in the video.

Anyone blindly accepting CDC and FDA recommendations on "COVID -19" vaccines and then having their kids vaccinated after watching this will need their heads examined.

The "experts" are already talking about the next certain pandemic. Easily known where that is going to come from and who is going to get the blame.

If you want to change your vote after watching this video please post here. If you continue blindly may God help you and especially your children.

Why would you use Del Bigtree as a source given his record on the issue?

[Seaney]

But if you were 85 years of age, in good health and were sick of living in isolation, you might look at it very differently and see it as a minor risk worth taking. The problem is that it is not just about individual health; it is about public health and as far as I can see, the kind of people that are opposed to vaccinations, do not understand or support public health. Moreover, they just don't care. 

The way I see it, taking the vaccine is a minor risk for the benefit of public health.  There is a big picture: on balance of risk, what is the greater threat to worldwide health systems and the economy - vaccination or uncontrolled spread of Covid 19.  Clearly the latter.

That's some self righteous shite right there, so folk should accept health risks taking a vaccine so you can get to a football match or a concert, the NHS appear to be coping ok, who aren't coping are the cancer patients, those in isolation, the abused, the mental well being of everyone.

And those are the ones you should be taking it for. That is what herd immunity is about, eliminating the transmission paths to those who are vulnerable.
You on the other hand are not prepared to take a small risk for the greater good.

How do you know it is small, what statistical data are you using, the oxford one is under the spotlight, imagine the carnage if it is forced on poor residents in care homes and something goes astray a few months down the line - you prepared to accept that risk or are they collateral damage for the greater good, in which case why have they all been locked up all year.

So we are not to trust the MHRA and other global approval bodies. We keep everything locked down until there is more data? How much do you need, or rather how much more do you need than the MHRA, FDA, etc require?

Do you not understand the concept of long term side effects?

[Seaney]

But if you were 85 years of age, in good health and were sick of living in isolation, you might look at it very differently and see it as a minor risk worth taking. The problem is that it is not just about individual health; it is about public health and as far as I can see, the kind of people that are opposed to vaccinations, do not understand or support public health. Moreover, they just don't care. 

The way I see it, taking the vaccine is a minor risk for the benefit of public health.  There is a big picture: on balance of risk, what is the greater threat to worldwide health systems and the economy - vaccination or uncontrolled spread of Covid 19.  Clearly the latter.

That's some self righteous shite right there, so folk should accept health risks taking a vaccine so you can get to a football match or a concert, the NHS appear to be coping ok, who aren't coping are the cancer patients, those in isolation, the abused, the mental well being of everyone.

We have seen how the general public rank public health in terms of importance against their need to go shopping at Primark or go drinking in Temple Bar.  The public can't or won't take the kind of precautions necessary to protect public health to allow us to live with Covid.

It is not about whether I can go to a football match nor is it about about individual risks versus individual benefits.  Vaccination is about what works at population level for the greater good of public health, the health service and economy also.  It's not self-righteous, it's common sense. 

If it wasn't for the successive lockdowns, social distancing etc the NHS would be overrun.  Despite best efforts, major unseen damage is actually being done to public health systems and the NHS by Covid.  The longer this goes on the greater the risks to other areas of health at a population level, including cancer, mental health services or social care.  The system doesn't have capacity to cope with increased incidence of mental illness, or of large numbers of delayed cancer diagnoses.

The vaccine will be most effective if it is taken on a widespread basis across the population.  The benefits to public health of a vaccine are enormous and the risks are tiny.

The problem is that the success of the vaccine is undermined if large swathes of people choose not to take it due to some perceived risk to their own health.  They might calculate that Covid will do them very little harm if they get it and that they would prefer to take the risk of catching Covid than taking the vaccine.   The problem is however, that if this reservoir of people is big enough (because they believe everything they read online or hear from their esteemed Engineering PHd friend), it will mean that  the disease will continue to thrive and mutate in the human population, ultimately undermining the effectiveness both the vaccine programme and the vaccine itself. 

Covid really has brought out the worst in many people and a lot of what we see is pure selfishness and a large dollop of gullibility.  I think if you surveyed the anti-vaxxers, the anti-maskers, the covid deniers and the covidiots you would find a lot of narcissism, selfishness and a fair few mental health issues also.

Its amazing how society has changed with those hiding behind a keyboard, nowadays if one doesn't agree with the narrative they are berated, dehumanised, accused is self arrogance, selfishness  etc. and that is accepted by the self righteous.  Back in the day if this was being debated in a pub I seriously doubt you would question the mental health of anyone with a cautious approach to a expediently created vaccine, but whatever rocks your boat.

[Tony Baloney]

But if you were 85 years of age, in good health and were sick of living in isolation, you might look at it very differently and see it as a minor risk worth taking. The problem is that it is not just about individual health; it is about public health and as far as I can see, the kind of people that are opposed to vaccinations, do not understand or support public health. Moreover, they just don't care. 

The way I see it, taking the vaccine is a minor risk for the benefit of public health.  There is a big picture: on balance of risk, what is the greater threat to worldwide health systems and the economy - vaccination or uncontrolled spread of Covid 19.  Clearly the latter.

That's some self righteous shite right there, so folk should accept health risks taking a vaccine so you can get to a football match or a concert, the NHS appear to be coping ok, who aren't coping are the cancer patients, those in isolation, the abused, the mental well being of everyone.

And those are the ones you should be taking it for. That is what herd immunity is about, eliminating the transmission paths to those who are vulnerable.
You on the other hand are not prepared to take a small risk for the greater good.

How do you know it is small, what statistical data are you using, the oxford one is under the spotlight, imagine the carnage if it is forced on poor residents in care homes and something goes astray a few months down the line - you prepared to accept that risk or are they collateral damage for the greater good, in which case why have they all been locked up all year.

So we are not to trust the MHRA and other global approval bodies. We keep everything locked down until there is more data? How much do you need, or rather how much more do you need than the MHRA, FDA, etc require?

Do you not understand the concept of long term side effects?

How many vaccines have serious adverse effects? Vaccines have been on the go for >200 years. Do you hanker for the good old days of polio, small pox and rubella?

[Tony Baloney]

But if you were 85 years of age, in good health and were sick of living in isolation, you might look at it very differently and see it as a minor risk worth taking. The problem is that it is not just about individual health; it is about public health and as far as I can see, the kind of people that are opposed to vaccinations, do not understand or support public health. Moreover, they just don't care. 

The way I see it, taking the vaccine is a minor risk for the benefit of public health.  There is a big picture: on balance of risk, what is the greater threat to worldwide health systems and the economy - vaccination or uncontrolled spread of Covid 19.  Clearly the latter.

That's some self righteous shite right there, so folk should accept health risks taking a vaccine so you can get to a football match or a concert, the NHS appear to be coping ok, who aren't coping are the cancer patients, those in isolation, the abused, the mental well being of everyone.

We have seen how the general public rank public health in terms of importance against their need to go shopping at Primark or go drinking in Temple Bar.  The public can't or won't take the kind of precautions necessary to protect public health to allow us to live with Covid.

It is not about whether I can go to a football match nor is it about about individual risks versus individual benefits.  Vaccination is about what works at population level for the greater good of public health, the health service and economy also.  It's not self-righteous, it's common sense. 

If it wasn't for the successive lockdowns, social distancing etc the NHS would be overrun.  Despite best efforts, major unseen damage is actually being done to public health systems and the NHS by Covid.  The longer this goes on the greater the risks to other areas of health at a population level, including cancer, mental health services or social care.  The system doesn't have capacity to cope with increased incidence of mental illness, or of large numbers of delayed cancer diagnoses.

The vaccine will be most effective if it is taken on a widespread basis across the population.  The benefits to public health of a vaccine are enormous and the risks are tiny.

The problem is that the success of the vaccine is undermined if large swathes of people choose not to take it due to some perceived risk to their own health.  They might calculate that Covid will do them very little harm if they get it and that they would prefer to take the risk of catching Covid than taking the vaccine.   The problem is however, that if this reservoir of people is big enough (because they believe everything they read online or hear from their esteemed Engineering PHd friend), it will mean that  the disease will continue to thrive and mutate in the human population, ultimately undermining the effectiveness both the vaccine programme and the vaccine itself. 

Covid really has brought out the worst in many people and a lot of what we see is pure selfishness and a large dollop of gullibility.  I think if you surveyed the anti-vaxxers, the anti-maskers, the covid deniers and the covidiots you would find a lot of narcissism, selfishness and a fair few mental health issues also.

Its amazing how society has changed with those hiding behind a keyboard, nowadays if one doesn't agree with the narrative they are berated, dehumanised, accused is self arrogance, selfishness  etc. and that is accepted by the self righteous.  Back in the day if this was being debated in a pub I seriously doubt you would question the mental health of anyone with a cautious approach to a expediently created vaccine, but whatever rocks your boat.

Back in the day before the Internet, clowns like you would only have the pub to debate in and the rest of the sane world would put their faith in people who have spent their life gaining the qualifications and experience to make decisions on medicine, epidemiology, the economy and a million other subjects you haven't a clue about.