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

[LCohen]

Offering facts??

Ok. You claim that a vaccine is being rushed through. So list the factual things that should have happened by not with this vaccine that have not factually happened?

You're conflating things as usual.

The vaccine has been rushed through - fact
It is unprecedented to have a vaccine in this timeframe - fact
Pfizer CEO did have personal gains in getting the vaccine approved to market - fact
The optics of which are not good - fact

And that's why I've arrived at my position, if you want to ignore that then fire ahead.

Conflating nothing. I am getting you the opportunity to set out any defects in the process. Are you aware of any defects in the process. The answer to that is Yes or No. I would be grateful if you would answer it

You're framing an argument I'm not having and I think your motivation for such is bizarre

I don't know whether there are defects or whether there are not.

I would have genuine worries about the potential of side effects and defects from the virus due to the facts outlined above.

You say you have worries due to it being rushed. My question is - is it being rushed? What has not been done than is giving rise to your worries? The answers lie with you. Please illuminate

I've already answered that.

Of course it's been rushed, it's unprecedented to ever have a vaccine in this length of time, that's a fact. The answer was already there for you is you bothered to look.

Repeating that it is being rushed because you say it is being rushed is not in any meaningful sense answering the questions. Things can be done quickly by throwing more resources at it or you can just lucky with the first batch. Meaningfully being rushed, if were to induce a risk, which seems to be your point, must necessarily something not being done so as to cut a corner. So what it is that is creating the risk that makes you fearful?

Just answer that question

I've already answered the question.

You have just taken the choice to ignore matters of fact so I think that says it all. I let the facts influence my opinions and views and you ignore them to arrive at yours. Can't put it any simpler than that.

You haven't answered the question. Your failure to answer it could be described as complete and absolute. Answer it now. State the part of the vaccine development process that has been left out? Should be easy to answer given you Calum to already have done so.

[LCohen]

What will happen to people who don't take the vaccine or don't have access to it ,Will they be ostracized from the community .
Will people who have taken the vaccine have a card or some sort of certification to say they are vaccinated. The administration of the vaccine and the problems it going to raise should be examined closely before its rolled out , there will be huge problems especially at the start .

Countries may want a certificate to show you've taken it so that you're not bringing it into their country ... Covid passport

A very good point.

[LCohen]

What will happen to people who don't take the vaccine or don't have access to it ,Will they be ostracized from the community .
Will people who have taken the vaccine have a card or some sort of certification to say they are vaccinated. The administration of the vaccine and the problems it going to raise should be examined closely before its rolled out , there will be huge problems especially at the start .

As pointed out elsewhere there may be a role for cards internationally. Also commercially. But I don't think you will need one to walk the streets.

Important that vaccines, even when approved and rolled out, are a long way from a relaxation of social distancing measures.

I'm nearly sure that the roll out of the vaccine will be examined. What makes you think it might not?

Are problems not avoidable with the right planning and buy in?

Buy in is critical. We are all reliant on people not being dicks

[Gmac]

What will happen to people who don't take the vaccine or don't have access to it ,Will they be ostracized from the community .
Will people who have taken the vaccine have a card or some sort of certification to say they are vaccinated. The administration of the vaccine and the problems it going to raise should be examined closely before its rolled out , there will be huge problems especially at the start .

As pointed out elsewhere there may be a role for cards internationally. Also commercially. But I don't think you will need one to walk the streets.

Important that vaccines, even when approved and rolled out, are a long way from a relaxation of social distancing measures.

I'm nearly sure that the roll out of the vaccine will be examined. What makes you think it might not?

Are problems not avoidable with the right planning and buy in?

Buy in is critical. We are all reliant on people not being dicks

unless it goes away there are going to be a lot of situations where regular everyday people are going to be deciding entry for people  like pubs , restaurants , sporting events, shops  in the us for example it would be end of 2022 before everyone is vaccinated at 15 m people a month . Maybe we have to stay masked up and at 25% capacity for a a year or so .

[Franko]

Optics are for Sun readers.

Nobody with a functioning frontal lobe would base a decision on the optics of anything.

Maybe this is the problem.

Not true, optics are for integrity, they are an ethical issue.

So when you compare an ethical an issue with The Sun in one sentence then I think we can assess the lack of intelligence in your point.

Billion dollar pharma has had plenty of disgraces in the past. The very company whose CEO benefits with that bonus from the vaccine making it to market had to settle a lawsuit for $2bn in recent years. Do I trust the ethical values of Pfizer? I do in my hoop.

Lol at that first sentence.

Your behaviour is exactly that of a tabloid.  Big headline but no substance.  Ignore facts, repeat propaganda, throw out selective quotes with no context, run for cover when pressed for evidence.  Someone who behaves in such a manner has no place mentioning the word ethics.

The thing is, I think the tabloids choose to do this.  You on the other hand are constrained by the unfortunate hand you were dealt.

[Angelo]

Optics are for Sun readers.

Nobody with a functioning frontal lobe would base a decision on the optics of anything.

Maybe this is the problem.

Not true, optics are for integrity, they are an ethical issue.

So when you compare an ethical an issue with The Sun in one sentence then I think we can assess the lack of intelligence in your point.

Billion dollar pharma has had plenty of disgraces in the past. The very company whose CEO benefits with that bonus from the vaccine making it to market had to settle a lawsuit for $2bn in recent years. Do I trust the ethical values of Pfizer? I do in my hoop.

Lol at that first sentence.

Your behaviour is exactly that of a tabloid.  Big headline but no substance.  Ignore facts, repeat propaganda, throw out selective quotes with no context, run for cover when pressed for evidence.  Someone who behaves in such a manner has no place mentioning the word ethics.

The thing is, I think the tabloids choose to do this.  You on the other hand are constrained by the unfortunate hand you were dealt.

The only one being tabloidy is you where billion dollar pharma is not to be questioned.

If you can't see how it looks bad for a CEO of a billion dollar pharma company who have had to settle multiple lawsuits in the past to offload a load of shares on the day they announce a vaccine rushed through in under a year then you must be lacking any semblance on intelligence.

Most professional bodies will have codes of conduct and ethical guidelines on the optics of things. The optics of this are absolutely appalling and anyone who has a brain in their head can see this. That must be why you are struggling.

[armaghniac]

What will happen to people who don't take the vaccine or don't have access to it ,Will they be ostracized from the community .
Will people who have taken the vaccine have a card or some sort of certification to say they are vaccinated. The administration of the vaccine and the problems it going to raise should be examined closely before its rolled out , there will be huge problems especially at the start .

It needs to be recorded against your passport, so that people without vaccines are not allowed fly or enter the country. It is perhaps harder to track down people using buses etc, but the effort has to be made.

[LCohen]

What will happen to people who don't take the vaccine or don't have access to it ,Will they be ostracized from the community .
Will people who have taken the vaccine have a card or some sort of certification to say they are vaccinated. The administration of the vaccine and the problems it going to raise should be examined closely before its rolled out , there will be huge problems especially at the start .

As pointed out elsewhere there may be a role for cards internationally. Also commercially. But I don't think you will need one to walk the streets.

Important that vaccines, even when approved and rolled out, are a long way from a relaxation of social distancing measures.

I'm nearly sure that the roll out of the vaccine will be examined. What makes you think it might not?

Are problems not avoidable with the right planning and buy in?

Buy in is critical. We are all reliant on people not being dicks

unless it goes away there are going to be a lot of situations where regular everyday people are going to be deciding entry for people  like pubs , restaurants , sporting events, shops  in the us for example it would be end of 2022 before everyone is vaccinated at 15 m people a month . Maybe we have to stay masked up and at 25% capacity for a a year or so .

Also as it stands the same individual will need multiple vaccinations. 2 injections to get immunity and 2 more each time it wears off.

Also the big issue that not suffering from COVID and not passing it on are 2 different things. The efficacy discussed to date related to the former. But the latter. Masks and social distancing for a long time yet

[LCohen]

Optics are for Sun readers.

Nobody with a functioning frontal lobe would base a decision on the optics of anything.

Maybe this is the problem.

Not true, optics are for integrity, they are an ethical issue.

So when you compare an ethical an issue with The Sun in one sentence then I think we can assess the lack of intelligence in your point.

Billion dollar pharma has had plenty of disgraces in the past. The very company whose CEO benefits with that bonus from the vaccine making it to market had to settle a lawsuit for $2bn in recent years. Do I trust the ethical values of Pfizer? I do in my hoop.

Lol at that first sentence.

Your behaviour is exactly that of a tabloid.  Big headline but no substance.  Ignore facts, repeat propaganda, throw out selective quotes with no context, run for cover when pressed for evidence.  Someone who behaves in such a manner has no place mentioning the word ethics.

The thing is, I think the tabloids choose to do this.  You on the other hand are constrained by the unfortunate hand you were dealt.

The only one being tabloidy is you where billion dollar pharma is not to be questioned.

If you can't see how it looks bad for a CEO of a billion dollar pharma company who have had to settle multiple lawsuits in the past to offload a load of shares on the day they announce a vaccine rushed through in under a year then you must be lacking any semblance on intelligence.

Most professional bodies will have codes of conduct and ethical guidelines on the optics of things. The optics of this are absolutely appalling and anyone who has a brain in their head can see this. That must be why you are struggling.

Which professional body has a code of conduct on how things look rather than how things are?

[Tony Baloney]

Optics are for Sun readers.

Nobody with a functioning frontal lobe would base a decision on the optics of anything.

Maybe this is the problem.

Not true, optics are for integrity, they are an ethical issue.

So when you compare an ethical an issue with The Sun in one sentence then I think we can assess the lack of intelligence in your point.

Billion dollar pharma has had plenty of disgraces in the past. The very company whose CEO benefits with that bonus from the vaccine making it to market had to settle a lawsuit for $2bn in recent years. Do I trust the ethical values of Pfizer? I do in my hoop.

Lol at that first sentence.

Your behaviour is exactly that of a tabloid.  Big headline but no substance.  Ignore facts, repeat propaganda, throw out selective quotes with no context, run for cover when pressed for evidence.  Someone who behaves in such a manner has no place mentioning the word ethics.

The thing is, I think the tabloids choose to do this.  You on the other hand are constrained by the unfortunate hand you were dealt.

The only one being tabloidy is you where billion dollar pharma is not to be questioned.

If you can't see how it looks bad for a CEO of a billion dollar pharma company who have had to settle multiple lawsuits in the past to offload a load of shares on the day they announce a vaccine rushed through in under a year then you must be lacking any semblance on intelligence.

Most professional bodies will have codes of conduct and ethical guidelines on the optics of things. The optics of this are absolutely appalling and anyone who has a brain in their head can see this. That must be why you are struggling.

Which professional body has a code of conduct on how things look rather than how things are?

I must check our Optics Policy tomorrow.

[Angelo]

Optics are for Sun readers.

Nobody with a functioning frontal lobe would base a decision on the optics of anything.

Maybe this is the problem.

Not true, optics are for integrity, they are an ethical issue.

So when you compare an ethical an issue with The Sun in one sentence then I think we can assess the lack of intelligence in your point.

Billion dollar pharma has had plenty of disgraces in the past. The very company whose CEO benefits with that bonus from the vaccine making it to market had to settle a lawsuit for $2bn in recent years. Do I trust the ethical values of Pfizer? I do in my hoop.

Lol at that first sentence.

Your behaviour is exactly that of a tabloid.  Big headline but no substance.  Ignore facts, repeat propaganda, throw out selective quotes with no context, run for cover when pressed for evidence.  Someone who behaves in such a manner has no place mentioning the word ethics.

The thing is, I think the tabloids choose to do this.  You on the other hand are constrained by the unfortunate hand you were dealt.

The only one being tabloidy is you where billion dollar pharma is not to be questioned.

If you can't see how it looks bad for a CEO of a billion dollar pharma company who have had to settle multiple lawsuits in the past to offload a load of shares on the day they announce a vaccine rushed through in under a year then you must be lacking any semblance on intelligence.

Most professional bodies will have codes of conduct and ethical guidelines on the optics of things. The optics of this are absolutely appalling and anyone who has a brain in their head can see this. That must be why you are struggling.

Which professional body has a code of conduct on how things look rather than how things are?

Solicitors and Accountants

[LCohen]

Optics are for Sun readers.

Nobody with a functioning frontal lobe would base a decision on the optics of anything.

Maybe this is the problem.

Not true, optics are for integrity, they are an ethical issue.

So when you compare an ethical an issue with The Sun in one sentence then I think we can assess the lack of intelligence in your point.

Billion dollar pharma has had plenty of disgraces in the past. The very company whose CEO benefits with that bonus from the vaccine making it to market had to settle a lawsuit for $2bn in recent years. Do I trust the ethical values of Pfizer? I do in my hoop.

Lol at that first sentence.

Your behaviour is exactly that of a tabloid.  Big headline but no substance.  Ignore facts, repeat propaganda, throw out selective quotes with no context, run for cover when pressed for evidence.  Someone who behaves in such a manner has no place mentioning the word ethics.

The thing is, I think the tabloids choose to do this.  You on the other hand are constrained by the unfortunate hand you were dealt.

The only one being tabloidy is you where billion dollar pharma is not to be questioned.

If you can't see how it looks bad for a CEO of a billion dollar pharma company who have had to settle multiple lawsuits in the past to offload a load of shares on the day they announce a vaccine rushed through in under a year then you must be lacking any semblance on intelligence.

Most professional bodies will have codes of conduct and ethical guidelines on the optics of things. The optics of this are absolutely appalling and anyone who has a brain in their head can see this. That must be why you are struggling.

Which professional body has a code of conduct on how things look rather than how things are?

Solicitors and Accountants

Post a link

[Milltown Row2]

Must be looking at this after doing the optics in the pub!

[Franko]

Optics are for Sun readers.

Nobody with a functioning frontal lobe would base a decision on the optics of anything.

Maybe this is the problem.

Not true, optics are for integrity, they are an ethical issue.

So when you compare an ethical an issue with The Sun in one sentence then I think we can assess the lack of intelligence in your point.

Billion dollar pharma has had plenty of disgraces in the past. The very company whose CEO benefits with that bonus from the vaccine making it to market had to settle a lawsuit for $2bn in recent years. Do I trust the ethical values of Pfizer? I do in my hoop.

Lol at that first sentence.

Your behaviour is exactly that of a tabloid.  Big headline but no substance.  Ignore facts, repeat propaganda, throw out selective quotes with no context, run for cover when pressed for evidence.  Someone who behaves in such a manner has no place mentioning the word ethics.

The thing is, I think the tabloids choose to do this.  You on the other hand are constrained by the unfortunate hand you were dealt.

The only one being tabloidy is you where billion dollar pharma is not to be questioned.

If you can't see how it looks bad for a CEO of a billion dollar pharma company who have had to settle multiple lawsuits in the past to offload a load of shares on the day they announce a vaccine rushed through in under a year then you must be lacking any semblance on intelligence.

Most professional bodies will have codes of conduct and ethical guidelines on the optics of things. The optics of this are absolutely appalling and anyone who has a brain in their head can see this. That must be why you are struggling.

We can all see how it looked.  And this is exactly my point.  The Sun readers stop there and blow about it on Facebook.  Others may look for more.  You clearly belong in group 1.

And we all know that "billion dollar pharma" (the latest catchphrase, it would seem) is not exactly awash with charitable people.  Hence asking you to provide some evidence, or make some sort of case.  Anything of substance at all.  But, as expected, you've produced nothing but (very earnest)  bluster and repetition of stupid, learned phrases.

I saw Kelvin McKenzie interviewed on some show the other day.  You and he come across as kindred spirits.

[larryin89]

What will happen to people who don't take the vaccine or don't have access to it ,Will they be ostracized from the community .
Will people who have taken the vaccine have a card or some sort of certification to say they are vaccinated. The administration of the vaccine and the problems it going to raise should be examined closely before its rolled out , there will be huge problems especially at the start .

As pointed out elsewhere there may be a role for cards internationally. Also commercially. But I don't think you will need one to walk the streets.

Important that vaccines, even when approved and rolled out, are a long way from a relaxation of social distancing measures.

I'm nearly sure that the roll out of the vaccine will be examined. What makes you think it might not?

Are problems not avoidable with the right planning and buy in?

Buy in is critical. We are all reliant on people not being dicks

So how long do you believe social distancing will be here for ?