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

[LCohen]

So fecking what!!

As long as the flipping thing works and we can all go back to having a normal life again, Gates has made millions off a system that nearly everyone uses, cornered the market on it, Amazon are a monster organization and continue to grow and make one person, and his ex wife billionaires, Facebook and the rest of these platforms make billions too, most people don't care and still use all of the above, as will everyone else if these vaccines work, someone was always going to clean up

You seem to be missing the point of this thread, if there is a safe and properly tested regulated vaccine available will you take it? You've said no because you think its rushed but have no proof of this, just a idea. Well you couldn't have as you've not been working on this vaccine nor have the background in this area other than goggle.

I said no because I would be very sceptical that it isn't safe. What proof have you it is safe? None.

Nobody has any evidence that it is safe. But they are not taking the vaccine yet are they?

[LCohen]

Also Angelo for someone obsessed with optics it doesn't look good that you never answered the question from your very first post on this thread what procedures are being skipped and/or not followed to get a vaccine on the market

How would I know this? How would you know this? You're taking massive leaps of faith here.

I do know it was done in record time. I do know the timeline was unprecedented. I decide to be sceptical with this and you can decide to be naive and dismiss all the alarm bells that should be ringing. The bottom line is while you might disagree with me, you have nothing substantive whatsoever to dissipate my concerns.

You operating in complete blind faith and deciding not to question anything. You told me you work in finance right? I wouldn't like you doing my books.

Or he understands that no vaccine has had the same resources pumped into it as this one. Unless there's steps that were omitted on this process that your aware of? If so which steps? If not, then your making an assumption on no basis.

Also you do realise the Pharma companies don't get to just sign off their own vaccines independently? They are regulated.

Can you be sure that steps weren't missed? Because unless you can, that counterpoint is absolutely preposterous. This kind of turnaround is unprecedented for a vaccine, we are told vaccines takes around 4-5 years to develop. So I would be worried, I would be sceptical.

If you want to go in to a clinic willy nilly and not question anything then that's your prerogative, I have my reasons for not wanting to take the vaccine and they revolve around me not wanting to compromise my health.

You do realise Big Pharma is an extremely seedy business? Maybe you'd like to read a little bit about Pfizer......


https://www.theguardian.com/business/2009/sep/02/pfizer-drugs-us-criminal-fine

When you next buy a car how can you be sure corners have not been cut in its safety controls? Do you not rely on industry standards and audit?

You have raised concerns that the vaccine has been rushed. You have failed to point out a single thing that has been omitted in this "rush". Your reaction to then ask others how they can be sure that something has not been omitted is pure childish Trump/Alex Jones/Qanon nonsense

[LCohen]

Also Angelo for someone obsessed with optics it doesn't look good that you never answered the question from your very first post on this thread what procedures are being skipped and/or not followed to get a vaccine on the market

How would I know this? How would you know this? You're taking massive leaps of faith here.

I do know it was done in record time. I do know the timeline was unprecedented. I decide to be sceptical with this and you can decide to be naive and dismiss all the alarm bells that should be ringing. The bottom line is while you might disagree with me, you have nothing substantive whatsoever to dissipate my concerns.

You operating in complete blind faith and deciding not to question anything. You told me you work in finance right? I wouldn't like you doing my books.

1. Pfizer produce/manufacture the vaccine.  They don't certify the vaccine for use.  So unless you want to call into question the MHRA also, then there will be no vaccine without somebody checking Pfizer's work.
2. Nobody is working on blind faith - everyone is happy to question this if there's even the slightest evidence of wrongdoing.  But if the only thing that you can produce by way of evidence is 'optics', then you belong in the category with Sun readers and the Karens on Facebook - another internet windbag.
3. So what if the guy made money from this?  If I'm the CEO of the company which discovered a vaccine which is worth literally trillions to the worlds economies, I'd be very disappointed if I didn't make some money from doing it.

You are working off blind faith, you seem to be some sort of vaccine fascist that wants everyone to take the vaccine. There are massive question marks over it. Only last week or the week before we have a a Big Pharma company settling over side effects of a Swine Flu vaccine. I'm wary and sceptical of this and would not be willing to take this vaccine on the grounds that it was rushed through in an unprecedented timeline. That should prompt concerns in any rational-minded thinker.

So what if a guy made money from this? Eh, self-interest. He signed a contract DURING the pandemic that would have allowed him to profit heavily from the vaccine hitting the market first and you can't see how it could compromise decision making? Pfizer have a very unscrupulous past. There's an article above from 2009 where they were hit with a record $2bn fine for mispromoting a drug they made and paying kickbacks to doctors so the company in question don't merely have issues in the optics of this, they also have issues in their past transgressions.

Big Pharma is about as seedy an industry as you can find.

Why are people like you, who know absolutley nothing about the vaccine and its potential consequences, so adamant that people risk their health and go and get it.

If and when this vaccine is signed off what will your problems with it be?

[LCohen]

So fecking what!!

As long as the flipping thing works and we can all go back to having a normal life again, Gates has made millions off a system that nearly everyone uses, cornered the market on it, Amazon are a monster organization and continue to grow and make one person, and his ex wife billionaires, Facebook and the rest of these platforms make billions too, most people don't care and still use all of the above, as will everyone else if these vaccines work, someone was always going to clean up

You seem to be missing the point of this thread, if there is a safe and properly tested regulated vaccine available will you take it? You've said no because you think its rushed but have no proof of this, just a idea. Well you couldn't have as you've not been working on this vaccine nor have the background in this area other than goggle.

I said no because I would be very sceptical that it isn't safe. What proof have you it is safe? None.

Medical experts at the minute will monitor the results and from the current tests they have carried out decide if its safe to run out! What proof have you that it's not safe?

You seem to confusing what I'm saying.

I'm very sceptical and wary and therefore would be very cautious about the vaccine, go ahead and find out what those words mean if you're confused.

What proof have you that the vaccine is ok?

None of us have any proof that the vaccine is ok. That is why we are not taking it yet

[LCohen]

Also Angelo for someone obsessed with optics it doesn't look good that you never answered the question from your very first post on this thread what procedures are being skipped and/or not followed to get a vaccine on the market

How would I know this? How would you know this? You're taking massive leaps of faith here.

I do know it was done in record time. I do know the timeline was unprecedented. I decide to be sceptical with this and you can decide to be naive and dismiss all the alarm bells that should be ringing. The bottom line is while you might disagree with me, you have nothing substantive whatsoever to dissipate my concerns.

You operating in complete blind faith and deciding not to question anything. You told me you work in finance right? I wouldn't like you doing my books.

Or he understands that no vaccine has had the same resources pumped into it as this one. Unless there's steps that were omitted on this process that your aware of? If so which steps? If not, then your making an assumption on no basis.

Also you do realise the Pharma companies don't get to just sign off their own vaccines independently? They are regulated.

Can you be sure that steps weren't missed? Because unless you can, that counterpoint is absolutely preposterous. This kind of turnaround is unprecedented for a vaccine, we are told vaccines takes around 4-5 years to develop. So I would be worried, I would be sceptical.

If you want to go in to a clinic willy nilly and not question anything then that's your prerogative, I have my reasons for not wanting to take the vaccine and they revolve around me not wanting to compromise my health.

You do realise Big Pharma is an extremely seedy business? Maybe you'd like to read a little bit about Pfizer......


https://www.theguardian.com/business/2009/sep/02/pfizer-drugs-us-criminal-fine

No one can be 100% sure on anything. However people tend to make judgement calls on what is the most likely scenario.
It's been explained that no other vaccine processed has had the resources thrown at it that Covid has. Also it's a Coronavirus which meant stage 2 trials were much quicker. 6 months instead of 2 years due to previous research. Previous work on SARS allowed them to avoid stumbling blocks. The virus itself creates a natural immune reaction in most people who get the virus, therefore was easier to recreate unlike the likes of HIV.  This information is all out there.
You can be skeptical absolutely, but it needs to be based on something more than it's happened too quickly.

The timeline is a massive worry
Previous vaccines and their side effects
The fact that big pharma is a dirty industry
The self-interest of those trying to get to market first

Listen you can choose to believe everything reported willy nilly. I think when it comes to my health and wellbeing, it's very important to not be naive.

Do you accept that pharmaceuticals get a lot right?
Do you understand that it might be possible to accelerate prorgress in an issue if more resources are applied to it and they are better coordinated?

[Hound]

So fecking what!!

As long as the flipping thing works and we can all go back to having a normal life again, Gates has made millions off a system that nearly everyone uses, cornered the market on it, Amazon are a monster organization and continue to grow and make one person, and his ex wife billionaires, Facebook and the rest of these platforms make billions too, most people don't care and still use all of the above, as will everyone else if these vaccines work, someone was always going to clean up

You seem to be missing the point of this thread, if there is a safe and properly tested regulated vaccine available will you take it? You've said no because you think its rushed but have no proof of this, just a idea. Well you couldn't have as you've not been working on this vaccine nor have the background in this area other than goggle.

I said no because I would be very sceptical that it isn't safe. What proof have you it is safe? None.

Medical experts at the minute will monitor the results and from the current tests they have carried out decide if its safe to run out! What proof have you that it's not safe?

You seem to confusing what I'm saying.

I'm very sceptical and wary and therefore would be very cautious about the vaccine, go ahead and find out what those words mean if you're confused.

What proof have you that the vaccine is ok?

None of us have any proof that the vaccine is ok. That is why we are not taking it yet

Exactly. As Pfizer have said, these results are preliminary. Promising, but preliminary.

They have also full details of everything there are doing on their website
https://www.pfizer.com/science/coronavirus

They have stated "We have made the protocol for our COVID-19 vaccine study available to reinforce our longstanding commitment to scientific and regulatory rigor that benefits patients." They will be subject to full peer review like all the other companies trying to come up with a vaccine. Then they will be subject to regulatory review and approval.

"Blind faith" will not be required.

[Angelo]

The timeline is a massive worry
Previous vaccines and their side effects
The fact that big pharma is a dirty industry
The self-interest of those trying to get to market first

Listen you can choose to believe everything reported willy nilly. I think when it comes to my health and wellbeing, it's very important to not be naive.

There's explanations for the timeline. I've mentioned a few of the bigger ones above.

With regards to the rest, are you saying you would never take another new vaccine again because Pharma is a dirty industry? Therefore any vaccine could be as a result of a self serving pharma company?

You can choose to believe those explanations without question, I will choose to be sceptical.

And that's what it comes down to, I would be very suspicious of Big Pharma, their motivations to rush through a vaccine and precedent of side effects with vaccines. Given the public will for a vaccine and financial gains of producing one, there is more motivation than ever to rush one through.

And that's what shapes my outlook.

As regard to your second question, the fact is none of us know anything about this vaccine. It hasn't even hit the market yet so for me I question things, I'm going to queue up will my shoulder sleeve rolled without weighing everything up, it you want to embark down that route then that's your choice. I'm not telling you what to do, maybe you should stop trying to dictate to me.

[Angelo]

Also Angelo for someone obsessed with optics it doesn't look good that you never answered the question from your very first post on this thread what procedures are being skipped and/or not followed to get a vaccine on the market

How would I know this? How would you know this? You're taking massive leaps of faith here.

I do know it was done in record time. I do know the timeline was unprecedented. I decide to be sceptical with this and you can decide to be naive and dismiss all the alarm bells that should be ringing. The bottom line is while you might disagree with me, you have nothing substantive whatsoever to dissipate my concerns.

You operating in complete blind faith and deciding not to question anything. You told me you work in finance right? I wouldn't like you doing my books.

Or he understands that no vaccine has had the same resources pumped into it as this one. Unless there's steps that were omitted on this process that your aware of? If so which steps? If not, then your making an assumption on no basis.

Also you do realise the Pharma companies don't get to just sign off their own vaccines independently? They are regulated.

Can you be sure that steps weren't missed? Because unless you can, that counterpoint is absolutely preposterous. This kind of turnaround is unprecedented for a vaccine, we are told vaccines takes around 4-5 years to develop. So I would be worried, I would be sceptical.

If you want to go in to a clinic willy nilly and not question anything then that's your prerogative, I have my reasons for not wanting to take the vaccine and they revolve around me not wanting to compromise my health.

You do realise Big Pharma is an extremely seedy business? Maybe you'd like to read a little bit about Pfizer......


https://www.theguardian.com/business/2009/sep/02/pfizer-drugs-us-criminal-fine

No one can be 100% sure on anything. However people tend to make judgement calls on what is the most likely scenario.
It's been explained that no other vaccine processed has had the resources thrown at it that Covid has. Also it's a Coronavirus which meant stage 2 trials were much quicker. 6 months instead of 2 years due to previous research. Previous work on SARS allowed them to avoid stumbling blocks. The virus itself creates a natural immune reaction in most people who get the virus, therefore was easier to recreate unlike the likes of HIV.  This information is all out there.
You can be skeptical absolutely, but it needs to be based on something more than it's happened too quickly.

The timeline is a massive worry
Previous vaccines and their side effects
The fact that big pharma is a dirty industry
The self-interest of those trying to get to market first

Listen you can choose to believe everything reported willy nilly. I think when it comes to my health and wellbeing, it's very important to not be naive.

Do you accept that pharmaceuticals get a lot right?
Do you understand that it might be possible to accelerate prorgress in an issue if more resources are applied to it and they are better coordinated?

Getting a lot right doesn't mean you can't be wrong a lot or a lesser amount either.

There are genuine health concerns for people here and that's why one around 1 in 3 people who voted on this poll have said no. Maybe rather than trying to dictate to people to go against what they have valid grounds as concerns to their health, that you should accept their views are valid and they are entitled to put their own health concerns first?


Or maybe we should blindly trust everything Big Pharma tells us without question.

[trueblue1234]

The timeline is a massive worry
Previous vaccines and their side effects
The fact that big pharma is a dirty industry
The self-interest of those trying to get to market first

Listen you can choose to believe everything reported willy nilly. I think when it comes to my health and wellbeing, it's very important to not be naive.

There's explanations for the timeline. I've mentioned a few of the bigger ones above.

With regards to the rest, are you saying you would never take another new vaccine again because Pharma is a dirty industry? Therefore any vaccine could be as a result of a self serving pharma company?

You can choose to believe those explanations without question, I will choose to be sceptical.

And that's what it comes down to, I would be very suspicious of Big Pharma, their motivations to rush through a vaccine and precedent of side effects with vaccines. Given the public will for a vaccine and financial gains of producing one, there is more motivation than ever to rush one through.

And that's what shapes my outlook.

As regard to your second question, the fact is none of us know anything about this vaccine. It hasn't even hit the market yet so for me I question things, I'm going to queue up will my shoulder sleeve rolled without weighing everything up, it you want to embark down that route then that's your choice. I'm not telling you what to do, maybe you should stop trying to dictate to me.

Where did I dictate that you had to take it? Don't take it. I've no issue with that. (I do have a slight one with regards to how it impacts the rest of us but not enough to force you to take a vaccine that you seem to be so passionately against).
But I will continue to challenge your view that people are naive for taking the vaccine. That's just nonsense. 

[thebigfella]

Also Angelo for someone obsessed with optics it doesn't look good that you never answered the question from your very first post on this thread what procedures are being skipped and/or not followed to get a vaccine on the market

How would I know this? How would you know this? You're taking massive leaps of faith here.

I do know it was done in record time. I do know the timeline was unprecedented. I decide to be sceptical with this and you can decide to be naive and dismiss all the alarm bells that should be ringing. The bottom line is while you might disagree with me, you have nothing substantive whatsoever to dissipate my concerns.

You operating in complete blind faith and deciding not to question anything. You told me you work in finance right? I wouldn't like you doing my books.

Or he understands that no vaccine has had the same resources pumped into it as this one. Unless there's steps that were omitted on this process that your aware of? If so which steps? If not, then your making an assumption on no basis.

Also you do realise the Pharma companies don't get to just sign off their own vaccines independently? They are regulated.

Can you be sure that steps weren't missed? Because unless you can, that counterpoint is absolutely preposterous. This kind of turnaround is unprecedented for a vaccine, we are told vaccines takes around 4-5 years to develop. So I would be worried, I would be sceptical.

If you want to go in to a clinic willy nilly and not question anything then that's your prerogative, I have my reasons for not wanting to take the vaccine and they revolve around me not wanting to compromise my health.

You do realise Big Pharma is an extremely seedy business? Maybe you'd like to read a little bit about Pfizer......


https://www.theguardian.com/business/2009/sep/02/pfizer-drugs-us-criminal-fine

No one can be 100% sure on anything. However people tend to make judgement calls on what is the most likely scenario.
It's been explained that no other vaccine processed has had the resources thrown at it that Covid has. Also it's a Coronavirus which meant stage 2 trials were much quicker. 6 months instead of 2 years due to previous research. Previous work on SARS allowed them to avoid stumbling blocks. The virus itself creates a natural immune reaction in most people who get the virus, therefore was easier to recreate unlike the likes of HIV.  This information is all out there.
You can be skeptical absolutely, but it needs to be based on something more than it's happened too quickly.

The timeline is a massive worry
Previous vaccines and their side effects
The fact that big pharma is a dirty industry
The self-interest of those trying to get to market first

Listen you can choose to believe everything reported willy nilly. I think when it comes to my health and wellbeing, it's very important to not be naive.

Do you accept that pharmaceuticals get a lot right?
Do you understand that it might be possible to accelerate prorgress in an issue if more resources are applied to it and they are better coordinated?

Getting a lot right doesn't mean you can't be wrong a lot or a lesser amount either.

There are genuine health concerns for people here and that's why one around 1 in 3 people who voted on this poll have said no. Maybe rather than trying to dictate to people to go against what they have valid grounds as concerns to their health, that you should accept their views are valid and they are entitled to put their own health concerns first?


Or maybe we should blindly trust everything Big Pharma tells us without question.

You again have missed the point, no one is blindly trusting the "Big Pharma"    They are trusting the "independent" scientific peer reviews and regulatory bodies.

[Ed Ricketts]

It's actually getting to be quite impressive how Angelo can be bothered with all these rows on different threads on an internet forum. He is going to need to give a man a start or employ a secretary to keep up with it all. Serious effort.

It looks that way at first.

Then you realise that every post on a topic is just a clone of the previous one - Big Pharma! Big Pharma! Big Pharma!

Sometimes it seems like a standard trolling exercise, other times you'd worry about him.

[Captain Obvious]

Well done Dolly.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/amphtml/saint-dolly-parton-part-funded-102423789.html?

[Angelo]

The timeline is a massive worry
Previous vaccines and their side effects
The fact that big pharma is a dirty industry
The self-interest of those trying to get to market first

Listen you can choose to believe everything reported willy nilly. I think when it comes to my health and wellbeing, it's very important to not be naive.

There's explanations for the timeline. I've mentioned a few of the bigger ones above.

With regards to the rest, are you saying you would never take another new vaccine again because Pharma is a dirty industry? Therefore any vaccine could be as a result of a self serving pharma company?

You can choose to believe those explanations without question, I will choose to be sceptical.

And that's what it comes down to, I would be very suspicious of Big Pharma, their motivations to rush through a vaccine and precedent of side effects with vaccines. Given the public will for a vaccine and financial gains of producing one, there is more motivation than ever to rush one through.

And that's what shapes my outlook.

As regard to your second question, the fact is none of us know anything about this vaccine. It hasn't even hit the market yet so for me I question things, I'm going to queue up will my shoulder sleeve rolled without weighing everything up, it you want to embark down that route then that's your choice. I'm not telling you what to do, maybe you should stop trying to dictate to me.

Where did I dictate that you had to take it? Don't take it. I've no issue with that. (I do have a slight one with regards to how it impacts the rest of us but not enough to force you to take a vaccine that you seem to be so passionately against).
But I will continue to challenge your view that people are naive for taking the vaccine. That's just nonsense.

That's my viewpoint, my viewpoint is the on that is being attacked here in case you didn't notice. I have valid reasons for not wanting to take it but of course some people can't accept that.

[Seaney]

It's actually getting to be quite impressive how Angelo can be bothered with all these rows on different threads on an internet forum. He is going to need to give a man a start or employ a secretary to keep up with it all. Serious effort.

It looks that way at first.

Then you realise that every post on a topic is just a clone of the previous one - Big Pharma! Big Pharma! Big Pharma!

Sometimes it seems like a standard trolling exercise, other times you'd worry about him.

He has a point though - some serious profiteering going on here.  Prof Ugur Sahin, BioNTech co-founder on the Andrew Marr show had no answer to how long immunity would last, or if it would stop transmission yet we have lads on here queuing up to get it.  One question no one is answering (maybe they did but I can't be arsed reading back through the pages I have missed)  is surely it is against the human rights of Care Home residents to have this forced upon them especially as the usual 10 year vaccine has been rushed through in 10 months, and if there is side effects and these poor souls die would anyone care, they seem to be collateral damage.

[Angelo]

Also Angelo for someone obsessed with optics it doesn't look good that you never answered the question from your very first post on this thread what procedures are being skipped and/or not followed to get a vaccine on the market

How would I know this? How would you know this? You're taking massive leaps of faith here.

I do know it was done in record time. I do know the timeline was unprecedented. I decide to be sceptical with this and you can decide to be naive and dismiss all the alarm bells that should be ringing. The bottom line is while you might disagree with me, you have nothing substantive whatsoever to dissipate my concerns.

You operating in complete blind faith and deciding not to question anything. You told me you work in finance right? I wouldn't like you doing my books.

Or he understands that no vaccine has had the same resources pumped into it as this one. Unless there's steps that were omitted on this process that your aware of? If so which steps? If not, then your making an assumption on no basis.

Also you do realise the Pharma companies don't get to just sign off their own vaccines independently? They are regulated.

Can you be sure that steps weren't missed? Because unless you can, that counterpoint is absolutely preposterous. This kind of turnaround is unprecedented for a vaccine, we are told vaccines takes around 4-5 years to develop. So I would be worried, I would be sceptical.

If you want to go in to a clinic willy nilly and not question anything then that's your prerogative, I have my reasons for not wanting to take the vaccine and they revolve around me not wanting to compromise my health.

You do realise Big Pharma is an extremely seedy business? Maybe you'd like to read a little bit about Pfizer......


https://www.theguardian.com/business/2009/sep/02/pfizer-drugs-us-criminal-fine

No one can be 100% sure on anything. However people tend to make judgement calls on what is the most likely scenario.
It's been explained that no other vaccine processed has had the resources thrown at it that Covid has. Also it's a Coronavirus which meant stage 2 trials were much quicker. 6 months instead of 2 years due to previous research. Previous work on SARS allowed them to avoid stumbling blocks. The virus itself creates a natural immune reaction in most people who get the virus, therefore was easier to recreate unlike the likes of HIV.  This information is all out there.
You can be skeptical absolutely, but it needs to be based on something more than it's happened too quickly.

The timeline is a massive worry
Previous vaccines and their side effects
The fact that big pharma is a dirty industry
The self-interest of those trying to get to market first

Listen you can choose to believe everything reported willy nilly. I think when it comes to my health and wellbeing, it's very important to not be naive.

Do you accept that pharmaceuticals get a lot right?
Do you understand that it might be possible to accelerate prorgress in an issue if more resources are applied to it and they are better coordinated?

Getting a lot right doesn't mean you can't be wrong a lot or a lesser amount either.

There are genuine health concerns for people here and that's why one around 1 in 3 people who voted on this poll have said no. Maybe rather than trying to dictate to people to go against what they have valid grounds as concerns to their health, that you should accept their views are valid and they are entitled to put their own health concerns first?


Or maybe we should blindly trust everything Big Pharma tells us without question.

You again have missed the point, no one is blindly trusting the "Big Pharma"    They are trusting the "independent" scientific peer reviews and regulatory bodies.

The regulatory bodies in big pharma also have huge questions to answer. If Big Pharma is dirty, a lot of it has to do with their regulation.

And we know Pfizer have a history of kickbacks.

So I think it's probably you who is missing the point.

Have a read of this:

https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/07/hidden-conflicts-pharma-payments-fda-advisers-after-drug-approvals-spark-ethical