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

[LCohen]

My own view people should be free to refuse the vaccine, but they should be prepared to be refused entry to pubs, restaurants, sporting events, schools, universities, creches, airports, basically anywhere that you freely mix with other people. If you're not willing to protect society then society should keep you in a semi permanent lockdown.

You really mean that people shouldn't be free to refuse the vaccine.

No, they shouldn't be free to go around infecting other people. The vaccine is one way of not doing that.

No it isn't, there is no evidence it stops the spread.

There isn't yet. I expect there soon will be. It seems extremely likely that it reduces transmission even if it does not stop it.

FFS, so you getting the first jab, oh no, you will be in a queue behind millions of vulnerable folk as will all those promoting it!

The posters don't have a choice in that. It's outside their control. However they do have a choice on taking the vaccine when it's offered to them. That is inside their control.

But the folk in care homes have no choice, they have to be the collateral damage!

Who said by taking the vaccine it will cause damage?

Who knows it won't, what is the long term scientific evidence on people with complicated health issues, the old, the very young etc?

So you dont know if anyone has to be collateral damage?

And you don't if anyone will not be.

You are the one saying folk in care homes are collateral damage.

No evidence whatsoever - you do know what collateral damage means right?

No I am a bit thick - but you are obviously a highly educated individual with a moral superiority above all.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-55155953

Elderly people in care homes and care home staff have been placed top of the priority list, followed by the over-80s and health and care staff

So is it being forced upon folk with complex health issues, no doubt it has been fully tested to take these illnesses into account!

You have chosen to use the word "forced" and it is key to the point you are trying to make. What is your evidence for anyone being forced ?

[LCohen]

My own view people should be free to refuse the vaccine, but they should be prepared to be refused entry to pubs, restaurants, sporting events, schools, universities, creches, airports, basically anywhere that you freely mix with other people. If you're not willing to protect society then society should keep you in a semi permanent lockdown.

You really mean that people shouldn't be free to refuse the vaccine.

No, they shouldn't be free to go around infecting other people. The vaccine is one way of not doing that.

No it isn't, there is no evidence it stops the spread.

There isn't yet. I expect there soon will be. It seems extremely likely that it reduces transmission even if it does not stop it.

FFS, so you getting the first jab, oh no, you will be in a queue behind millions of vulnerable folk as will all those promoting it!

The posters don't have a choice in that. It's outside their control. However they do have a choice on taking the vaccine when it's offered to them. That is inside their control.

But the folk in care homes have no choice, they have to be the collateral damage!

Do they not have to get family consent?

No idea yet to see the policy except patients in care homes are priority, what of ones who have no family, I can't see it being anything other than mandatory in care homes, but hey out of sight out of mind eh!

So you are outraged at people being forced to take a vaccine but you evidence that people will be forced to take is your own assumption that in the future people will be forced to take it.

Looks you have decided to be outraged and then filled in the blanks with shite to justify the outrage

[LCohen]

So in short....

COVID-19 - well established potentially serious side effects.

Vaccine - no established side effects, safety certified in widespread clinical trials involving 10ks of volunteers.

Why would anyone say they don't want the vaccine?

Covid-19 98% not an issue for the majority of the population

Vaccine, untested over long period of time or with people with serious health conditions, but let it rip - isn't that your phrase!

What is your alternative to vaccination. Feel free to consult with Angelo, Hereiam and Seamus. A lot of like minds there

[LCohen]

I actually think it's as simple as the UK needing a 'win' in being the first to do something (or be seen to do something), some positive publicity.  The Oxford Vaccine coming in 3rd was a bit of a blow for a mental case Government that wants to be seen as a world leader post Brexit.

While I have pretty much no doubt the vaccine/s will be entirely safe, the UK Government is so discredited and so untrustworthy in general that it's unfortunate they were the first ones to ratify this Pfizer one

Their association with anything is toxic and could lead to at least a degree of what is almostly certainly unwarranted scepticism among otherwise sensible people

Hopefully the EU ratifies it soon

But it wasn't the government who approved it.

[LCohen]

Boris just said it's not mandatory Seaney.

You can sleep easy now.

You can stay in lockdown or maintain social distancing or whatever.

The rest of who are taking the vaccine will just get on with our normal lives as best we can and be able to go to football matches, pubs airplanes etc as before.

Boris says a lot of things, not surprised you would believe them, I am sure vulnerable folk in a care home will have no say whatsoever, and as no one is allowed in to see them, who's going look after their interests.

Point to the evidence that makes you "sure"

[Milltown Row2]

Seaney must be laughing his head off at the bites he's getting !!

The biggest WUM on board.

Doesn't give a shit about the elderly, it's just the last straw in a daft wind up. He'll be front and centre at the clinic when it's handed out.

He's arguing against the leading virologists in the world and quoting his mate in the pub!

[Eire90]

Boris just said it's not mandatory Seaney.

You can sleep easy now.

You can stay in lockdown or maintain social distancing or whatever.

The rest of who are taking the vaccine will just get on with our normal lives as best we can and be able to go to football matches, pubs airplanes etc as before.

Boris says a lot of things, not surprised you would believe them, I am sure vulnerable folk in a care home will have no say whatsoever, and as no one is allowed in to see them, who's going look after their interests.

Point to the evidence that makes you "sure"

the non vaccinated will  be able to go to pubs aswell

[trueblue1234]

It's not. Family consent is required. If in the case of no family, if a care home patient has sound mind they make the decision themselves. If not, as per the Mental capacity act the decision will be made for them in their best interests.

Hope that puts your mind at ease.

It does if correct, didn't see this guidance, so in the case of no consent will they be allowed to remain in the care home, the bit in bold means mandatory vaccines in reality.

The alternative is to not give them a vaccine that has been agreed as the best possible course of action by medical bodies and to leave them at risk of Covid just because there was no one to give consent. I'm sure you'll agree that would be fairly absurd path to take. 

[thebigfella]

Where do I sign up? Could get skiing yet this season 

[tyssam5]

Boris goes a few weeks ahead of 'the Europeans' - he's probably reading this thread and thinking this would be his best path to have even more shite talked.

[bennydorano]

I actually think it's as simple as the UK needing a 'win' in being the first to do something (or be seen to do something), some positive publicity.  The Oxford Vaccine coming in 3rd was a bit of a blow for a mental case Government that wants to be seen as a world leader post Brexit.

While I have pretty much no doubt the vaccine/s will be entirely safe, the UK Government is so discredited and so untrustworthy in general that it's unfortunate they were the first ones to ratify this Pfizer one

Their association with anything is toxic and could lead to at least a degree of what is almostly certainly unwarranted scepticism among otherwise sensible people

Hopefully the EU ratifies it soon

But it wasn't the government who approved it.

Makes it even Lamer,  a 'British' 1st. But the MHRA is funded by the Department for Health i see.

Did anyone see Bojo's Downing Street briefing today, the last 'questions was from the Sun. Can't remember the Journo's name but his Question/Statement was - "did being free from Brussels red tape make it easier to speed through the approval process" (said with a Brexit, back slapping guffaw). I could have vomited.

[armaghniac]

Boris goes a few weeks ahead of 'the Europeans' - he's probably reading this thread and thinking this would be his best path to have even more shite talked.

Rees-Mogg tweeted about how good it was to be free from EU bureaucracy and be able to approve this. But sure the Russians approved their jab in August.

And of course Michelle O'Neill welcomed it, when she should have said that it not be used in any part of Ireland until the EMA approved it.

[LCohen]

Boris goes a few weeks ahead of 'the Europeans' - he's probably reading this thread and thinking this would be his best path to have even more shite talked.

Rees-Mogg tweeted about how good it was to be free from EU bureaucracy and be able to approve this. But sure the Russians approved their jab in August.

Rees-Mogg probably does have the intellect to recognise that nothing that happened today could not have happened whilst inside the EU. In fact Britain is technically still within the EU regulatory framework.

[LCohen]

I actually think it's as simple as the UK needing a 'win' in being the first to do something (or be seen to do something), some positive publicity.  The Oxford Vaccine coming in 3rd was a bit of a blow for a mental case Government that wants to be seen as a world leader post Brexit.

While I have pretty much no doubt the vaccine/s will be entirely safe, the UK Government is so discredited and so untrustworthy in general that it's unfortunate they were the first ones to ratify this Pfizer one

Their association with anything is toxic and could lead to at least a degree of what is almostly certainly unwarranted scepticism among otherwise sensible people

Hopefully the EU ratifies it soon

But it wasn't the government who approved it.

Makes it even Lamer,  a 'British' 1st. But the MHRA is funded by the Department for Health i see.

Did anyone see Bojo's Downing Street briefing today, the last 'questions was from the Sun. Can't remember the Journo's name but his Question/Statement was - "did being free from Brussels red tape make it easier to speed through the approval process" (said with a Brexit, back slapping guffaw). I could have vomited.

Looks like Britain did do something right in its approach to interim and parallel approvals (a bit like the scientist's approach to clinical trials). So fair play. But it wasn't the government and it wasn't because of Brexit.

[bennydorano]

Alok Sharma tweet

The UK was the first country to sign a deal with Pfizer/BioNTech - now we will be the first to deploy their vaccine

To everyone involved in this breakthrough: thank you

In years to come, we will remember this moment as the day the UK led humanity's charge against this disease