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

[imtommygunn]

Not to go all seaney but the brits look like they're doing a political stunt out of this. I am sure it is fine but this shouting from the rafters makes me uncomfortable.

On the mogg eu statement apparently he is half right. So you couldn't approve that quick with being completely in eu , apparently, however there are distribution things you couldn't do if you were out of the eu so couldn't have happened without eu. Basically if a Tory said that you know it is either a blatant lie or some kind of obfuscation of the full truth

[RedHand88]

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.

That of course, is not her call. It also would have been politically disastrous as the majority of the population are delighted its been approved.

[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.

That of course, is not her call. It also would have been politically disastrous as the majority of the population are delighted its been approved.

That's the whole point, isn't it. Nationalist, unless it doesn't suit.

[Seaney]

Well done on avoiding the question.

So now it is 'if any have complications' rather than your initial statement that folk in care homes are collateral damage.

It is one in the same, as mentioned who will be looking after their interests, no one is allowed into a care home.

It isnt - you said folk in care homes are collateral damage.

You have not provided any evidence of the sort.

Fair enough if you are anti vaccine - but pointless throwing out comments with absolutely no factual basis.

I am going with what the Health Secretary, Medical Regulator & numerous prominent epidemiologists & immunologists are saying.

Who are you going with?

I'll tell you who he's following.

Jim Corr, Gemma "Gemtrails" O'Doherty and some Ohio soccer mom on Facebook who shared a debunked pseudoscientific "research paper."

Lol, don't forget David icke. He's made a big comeback with the science deniers.

Yeah the discussion board pack - bet you were all lovely at school as well. 

[Seaney]

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.

In our discussions we've established:

1) The vaccine is effective
2) The vast scientific majority think it is safe;
3) These experts were not the same experts who modelled infection rates or developed lockdown measures
4) That it won't be mandatory;
5) People like me that would have been happy to have paid for it will not be allowed to do so;
6)  Anybody that wants it should have it within a couple of months - again nobody will be forced.
7) That you know little to nothing about the laws surrounding Director Dealing(s) and when CEO's can and cannot sell shares.

Your last stand here seems to be though inventing hypothetical scenarios about vulnerable old people being head locked and hood winked into getting it.

You are clutching at straws big time.

Wtf are you talking about!  Good that the vast majority think it's safe. I am sold.

[Seaney]

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 ?

Anyone without family consent with dementia say in a care home will be directed to have this by the relevant authorities, fact!

[Seaney]

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.

Of course it wasn't!

[Seaney]

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"

Point to the evidence that make you so sure to the contrary.

[Seaney]

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!

I haven't been in a pub this year, maybe you get all your information when half canned, looking at your posts I would believe it.

[Seaney]

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.

As opposed to the absurd situation to give them a vaccine with no evidence how it will affect them in the long term, it really is win win, if they have some reaction who is there to care!

[GetOverTheBar]

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!

He's the pied piper in this thread no doubt.

There are some other decent WUMs on the GAA Board though.

[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.

As opposed to the absurd situation to give them a vaccine with no evidence how it will affect them in the long term, it really is win win, if they have some reaction who is there to care!

That's not absurd. Medical professionals following medical practices. Standard. As I said, it would be absurd if medical professionals decided with no logical reason to not follow medical policy.

[RedHand88]

Its on its way through the channel tunnel this evening boys. Get her out quick go go go.

[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 ?

Anyone without family consent with dementia say in a care home will be directed to have this by the relevant authorities, fact!

If that's the fact then you will have no difficulty posting a link to something official then. Please post it at your earliest convenience

[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.

Of course it wasn't!

Well we are in agreement on that. An independent regulator approved it. If they government could have influenced the timing of the approval for political reasons then the political motivation would have been to do it the previous day.

The government interference is a complete red herring. Only crackpots are pushing that line