Topic

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Coronavirus (LOCKED)

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 784 of 1255 < 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 >

Topic Locked

ASCPFC Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 20 Dec 20 8.31pm
Originally posted by BlueJay There's sense to this of course, but we could just as easily say there's not been a vaccine for any coronavirus previously either, but now we have one. There was never the combined will be perceived need for one. The vaccine has been created to combat a virus that is currently a significant concern to the over 80s, so people in that particular age bracket (and possibly others) would be well advised to take it. It's not far removed from the rationale of having a flu jab, and shouldn't need to be a political or politicised decision one way or the other. With any luck it will eventually mutate in direction that weakens it, but in the meantime, it makes sense for those with good reason to get vaccinated, to do so. Edited by BlueJay (20 Dec 2020 8.19pm) I have no issue with vulnerable or older people, or anyone who wishes to taking the vaccine. I have an issue with people being labelled for not wishing to take the vaccine. As stated, I won't be taking it. It seems basically experimental and not that effective either. But I'm not really trying to convince anyone else. Everyone should do what they think best. Red and Blue Army!
Alert a moderator to this post

ASCPFC

Pro-Cathedral/caravan park 20 Dec 20 8.31pm

Originally posted by BlueJay

There's sense to this of course, but we could just as easily say there's not been a vaccine for any coronavirus previously either, but now we have one. There was never the combined will be perceived need for one. The vaccine has been created to combat a virus that is currently a significant concern to the over 80s, so people in that particular age bracket (and possibly others) would be well advised to take it. It's not far removed from the rationale of having a flu jab, and shouldn't need to be a political or politicised decision one way or the other. With any luck it will eventually mutate in direction that weakens it, but in the meantime, it makes sense for those with good reason to get vaccinated, to do so.

Edited by BlueJay (20 Dec 2020 8.19pm)

I have no issue with vulnerable or older people, or anyone who wishes to taking the vaccine. I have an issue with people being labelled for not wishing to take the vaccine. As stated, I won't be taking it. It seems basically experimental and not that effective either. But I'm not really trying to convince anyone else. Everyone should do what they think best.

Red and Blue Army!

Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree Croydon 20 Dec 20 8.51pm
Originally posted by Eaglecoops It might be unhelpful but it is true. Are you conveniently forgetting the advice that was given that those with allergies should not take this particular vaccine. So trying to scotch such information is poor form. There are numerous vaccines that will be available, staying away from this one could be life saving for some. I’m not an anti-vaxxer but I believe all information should be in the public arena. You imply the vaccine is unsafe due to 'some nasty side effects'. Point 1, they really weren't very nasty. The two people concerned in the UK have had far worse. They didn't use their epipens. Point 2, the likelihood of this not-nasty side effect is so small neither my calculator not Excel can give me the figure without saying 5.71429E-06 That means the chances are 0.00057%. So why even bother mentioning something so de minimis? One could theorise upon why this ever made it into the Press given the complete irrelevance to anything. Edited by Mapletree (20 Dec 2020 8.52pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree

Croydon 20 Dec 20 8.51pm

Originally posted by Eaglecoops

It might be unhelpful but it is true. Are you conveniently forgetting the advice that was given that those with allergies should not take this particular vaccine. So trying to scotch such information is poor form. There are numerous vaccines that will be available, staying away from this one could be life saving for some.

I’m not an anti-vaxxer but I believe all information should be in the public arena.

You imply the vaccine is unsafe due to 'some nasty side effects'.

Point 1, they really weren't very nasty. The two people concerned in the UK have had far worse. They didn't use their epipens.

Point 2, the likelihood of this not-nasty side effect is so small neither my calculator not Excel can give me the figure without saying 5.71429E-06

That means the chances are 0.00057%. So why even bother mentioning something so de minimis? One could theorise upon why this ever made it into the Press given the complete irrelevance to anything.

Edited by Mapletree (20 Dec 2020 8.52pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

Eaglecoops CR3 20 Dec 20 9.25pm
Originally posted by Mapletree You imply the vaccine is unsafe due to 'some nasty side effects'. Point 1, they really weren't very nasty. The two people concerned in the UK have had far worse. They didn't use their epipens. Point 2, the likelihood of this not-nasty side effect is so small neither my calculator not Excel can give me the figure without saying 5.71429E-06 That means the chances are 0.00057%. So why even bother mentioning something so de minimis? One could theorise upon why this ever made it into the Press given the complete irrelevance to anything. Edited by Mapletree (20 Dec 2020 8.52pm) And why put someone at risk when you don’t need to. Are you suggesting that those who suffer allergies should still take this particular vaccine when there are others available because you say they should and you think the risk is small. I’m glad you are not my GP. Do you not think perhaps that the reason there have been so few reactions is because they have already sussed that it can affect those with allergies therefore they have already advised them not to have it and wait for one of the others to be approved? You always think that someone is arguing with you, I’m merely pointing out what has been reported and what the options are.
Alert a moderator to this post

Eaglecoops

CR3 20 Dec 20 9.25pm

Originally posted by Mapletree

You imply the vaccine is unsafe due to 'some nasty side effects'.

Point 1, they really weren't very nasty. The two people concerned in the UK have had far worse. They didn't use their epipens.

Point 2, the likelihood of this not-nasty side effect is so small neither my calculator not Excel can give me the figure without saying 5.71429E-06

That means the chances are 0.00057%. So why even bother mentioning something so de minimis? One could theorise upon why this ever made it into the Press given the complete irrelevance to anything.

Edited by Mapletree (20 Dec 2020 8.52pm)

And why put someone at risk when you don’t need to. Are you suggesting that those who suffer allergies should still take this particular vaccine when there are others available because you say they should and you think the risk is small. I’m glad you are not my GP.

Do you not think perhaps that the reason there have been so few reactions is because they have already sussed that it can affect those with allergies therefore they have already advised them not to have it and wait for one of the others to be approved?

You always think that someone is arguing with you, I’m merely pointing out what has been reported and what the options are.

Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree Croydon 20 Dec 20 9.49pm
Originally posted by Eaglecoops And why put someone at risk when you don’t need to. Are you suggesting that those who suffer allergies should still take this particular vaccine when there are others available because you say they should and you think the risk is small. I’m glad you are not my GP. Do you not think perhaps that the reason there have been so few reactions is because they have already sussed that it can affect those with allergies therefore they have already advised them not to have it and wait for one of the others to be approved? You always think that someone is arguing with you, I’m merely pointing out what has been reported and what the options are. When you have any vaccine you are asked whether you have allergies. This vaccine is nothing special There appears to have been a campaign related to two mild cases. Apparently to scare people about taking a lifesaving vaccine Who would do such a thing? A clue may be in starts with a p, ends in an n and uti is in the middle. That is a guess on my part based on a huge amount of relevant intel And who would be complicit in a scheme to cause thousands of extra deaths by spreading misinformation. Not disinformation or malinformation I will grant you. It is so important not to allow malevolent agencies to undermine confidence in this vaccine. And astonishing that people follow the dangerous drivel like sheep and then say that the mainstream is not to be trusted I run Care Homes. Of course I react when people set out to create mass deaths.
Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree

Croydon 20 Dec 20 9.49pm

Originally posted by Eaglecoops

You always think that someone is arguing with you, I’m merely pointing out what has been reported and what the options are.

When you have any vaccine you are asked whether you have allergies. This vaccine is nothing special

There appears to have been a campaign related to two mild cases. Apparently to scare people about taking a lifesaving vaccine

Who would do such a thing? A clue may be in starts with a p, ends in an n and uti is in the middle. That is a guess on my part based on a huge amount of relevant intel

And who would be complicit in a scheme to cause thousands of extra deaths by spreading misinformation. Not disinformation or malinformation I will grant you. It is so important not to allow malevolent agencies to undermine confidence in this vaccine. And astonishing that people follow the dangerous drivel like sheep and then say that the mainstream is not to be trusted

I run Care Homes. Of course I react when people set out to create mass deaths.

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 20 Dec 20 9.58pm
Originally posted by Mapletree When you have any vaccine you are asked whether you have allergies. This vaccine is nothing special There appears to have been a campaign related to two mild cases. Apparently to scare people about taking a lifesaving vaccine Who would do such a thing? A clue may be in starts with a p, ends in an n and uti is in the middle. That is a guess on my part based on a huge amount of relevant intel And who would be complicit in a scheme to cause thousands of extra deaths by spreading misinformation. Not disinformation or malinformation I will grant you. It is so important not to allow malevolent agencies to undermine confidence in this vaccine. And astonishing that people follow the dangerous drivel like sheep and then say that the mainstream is not to be trusted I run Care Homes. Of course I react when people set out to create mass deaths. On this we agree. A vaccine is the only thing that can end this nightmare. There must be a greater chance of death due to Covid than any potential side effect for the very vulnerable. We all take a tiny risk when taking any vaccine but for the sensible, vaccinating your kids against potentially fatal diseases is a no brainer and this surely fits that category. For those of us who are not at more than tiny risk, perhaps we can afford to sit back and wait a while to see how things work out, since the balance of risk is different.
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

20 Dec 20 9.58pm

Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger

Originally posted by Mapletree

When you have any vaccine you are asked whether you have allergies. This vaccine is nothing special

There appears to have been a campaign related to two mild cases. Apparently to scare people about taking a lifesaving vaccine

Who would do such a thing? A clue may be in starts with a p, ends in an n and uti is in the middle. That is a guess on my part based on a huge amount of relevant intel

I run Care Homes. Of course I react when people set out to create mass deaths.

On this we agree. A vaccine is the only thing that can end this nightmare. There must be a greater chance of death due to Covid than any potential side effect for the very vulnerable. We all take a tiny risk when taking any vaccine but for the sensible, vaccinating your kids against potentially fatal diseases is a no brainer and this surely fits that category. For those of us who are not at more than tiny risk, perhaps we can afford to sit back and wait a while to see how things work out, since the balance of risk is different.

Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree Croydon 20 Dec 20 10.07pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger On this we agree. Stone me.
Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree

Croydon 20 Dec 20 10.07pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

On this we agree.

Stone me.

Alert a moderator to this post

Eaglecoops CR3 20 Dec 20 10.16pm
Originally posted by Mapletree When you have any vaccine you are asked whether you have allergies. This vaccine is nothing special There appears to have been a campaign related to two mild cases. Apparently to scare people about taking a lifesaving vaccine Who would do such a thing? A clue may be in starts with a p, ends in an n and uti is in the middle. That is a guess on my part based on a huge amount of relevant intel And who would be complicit in a scheme to cause thousands of extra deaths by spreading misinformation. Not disinformation or malinformation I will grant you. It is so important not to allow malevolent agencies to undermine confidence in this vaccine. And astonishing that people follow the dangerous drivel like sheep and then say that the mainstream is not to be trusted I run Care Homes. Of course I react when people set out to create mass deaths. Wow, do you really think people on here set out to create mass deaths?
Alert a moderator to this post

Eaglecoops

CR3 20 Dec 20 10.16pm

Originally posted by Mapletree

When you have any vaccine you are asked whether you have allergies. This vaccine is nothing special

There appears to have been a campaign related to two mild cases. Apparently to scare people about taking a lifesaving vaccine

Who would do such a thing? A clue may be in starts with a p, ends in an n and uti is in the middle. That is a guess on my part based on a huge amount of relevant intel

I run Care Homes. Of course I react when people set out to create mass deaths.

Wow, do you really think people on here set out to create mass deaths?

Alert a moderator to this post

cryrst The garden of England 20 Dec 20 10.38pm
Dover port shut for 48hous for traffic out. Due to new strain of virus. Edited by cryrst (20 Dec 2020 11.09pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

cryrst

The garden of England 20 Dec 20 10.38pm

Dover port shut for 48hous for traffic out.
Due to new strain of virus.

Edited by cryrst (20 Dec 2020 11.09pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

BlueJay UK 20 Dec 20 10.42pm
Originally posted by ASCPFC I have no issue with vulnerable or older people, or anyone who wishes to taking the vaccine. I have an issue with people being labelled for not wishing to take the vaccine. As stated, I won't be taking it. It seems basically experimental and not that effective either. But I'm not really trying to convince anyone else. Everyone should do what they think best. I'm certainly with you in that I wouldn't for a moment suggest the whole population should have to have the vaccine. Personal choice. I'd say there are exceptions to that though. Carehome and NHS staff etc. And other countries are of course well within their rights to ask for proof of vaccination in exchange for entry if they so wish. Much in the same way that proof of yellow fever immunisation from certain countries is required to visit India. re: the vaccine, nobody has suffered severe covid or hospitalisation over tens of thousands of participants, so I'm pleased with its effectiveness during trials. We should actively encourage the elderly to have it. Routinely overplaying doubts or underplaying effectiveness encourages at risk individuals to make what are likely to be bad decisions. I certainly acknowledge that the younger a person is the more rationale there is for not bothering with it. From a personal health point of view anyway.
Alert a moderator to this post

BlueJay

UK 20 Dec 20 10.42pm

Originally posted by ASCPFC

I'm certainly with you in that I wouldn't for a moment suggest the whole population should have to have the vaccine. Personal choice. I'd say there are exceptions to that though. Carehome and NHS staff etc. And other countries are of course well within their rights to ask for proof of vaccination in exchange for entry if they so wish. Much in the same way that proof of yellow fever immunisation from certain countries is required to visit India.

re: the vaccine, nobody has suffered severe covid or hospitalisation over tens of thousands of participants, so I'm pleased with its effectiveness during trials. We should actively encourage the elderly to have it. Routinely overplaying doubts or underplaying effectiveness encourages at risk individuals to make what are likely to be bad decisions.

I certainly acknowledge that the younger a person is the more rationale there is for not bothering with it. From a personal health point of view anyway.

Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree Croydon 20 Dec 20 10.45pm
Originally posted by BlueJay I'm certainly with you in that I wouldn't for a moment suggest the whole population should have to have the vaccine. Personal choice. I'd say there are exceptions to that though. Carehome and NHS staff etc. And other countries are of course well within their rights to ask for proof of vaccination in exchange for entry if they so wish. Much in the same way that proof of yellow fever immunisation from certain countries is required to visit India. re: the vaccine, nobody has suffered severe covid or hospitalisation over tens of thousands of participants, so I'm pleased with its effectiveness during trials. We should actively encourage the elderly to have it. Routinely overplaying doubts or underplaying effectiveness encourages at risk individuals to make what are likely to be bad decisions. I certainly acknowledge that the younger a person is the more rationale there is for not bothering with it. From a personal health point of view anyway. As it is probable that the vaccine inhibits transmission by preventing the virus getting a hold and therefore viral load building I would say it is important for everyone to take the vaccine.
Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree

Croydon 20 Dec 20 10.45pm

Originally posted by BlueJay

I certainly acknowledge that the younger a person is the more rationale there is for not bothering with it. From a personal health point of view anyway.

As it is probable that the vaccine inhibits transmission by preventing the virus getting a hold and therefore viral load building I would say it is important for everyone to take the vaccine.

Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree Croydon 20 Dec 20 10.48pm
Originally posted by Eaglecoops Wow, do you really think people on here set out to create mass deaths? No, foreign governments do. It’s just that some people then choose to act as their bots. Like a computer, once control has been taken of people it is simple to manipulate them into creating havoc amongst the unprepared.
Alert a moderator to this post

Mapletree

Croydon 20 Dec 20 10.48pm

Originally posted by Eaglecoops

Wow, do you really think people on here set out to create mass deaths?

No, foreign governments do. It’s just that some people then choose to act as their bots. Like a computer, once control has been taken of people it is simple to manipulate them into creating havoc amongst the unprepared.

Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman Caterham 21 Dec 20 12.43am
Originally posted by cryrst Dover port shut for 48hous for traffic out. Due to new strain of virus. Edited by cryrst (20 Dec 2020 11.09pm) Or due to exaggeration by Boris and the team. Looks like they may not have talked to neighbouring countries about this mutant, or is it France sticking the boot in and playing dirty before Brexit ? What a year. Just when you think with about 10 days left not much more could happen, we could have chaos here caused by any combination of governments. COYP
Alert a moderator to this post

Rudi Hedman

Caterham 21 Dec 20 12.43am

Originally posted by cryrst

Dover port shut for 48hous for traffic out.
Due to new strain of virus.

Edited by cryrst (20 Dec 2020 11.09pm)

Or due to exaggeration by Boris and the team. Looks like they may not have talked to neighbouring countries about this mutant, or is it France sticking the boot in and playing dirty before Brexit ?

What a year. Just when you think with about 10 days left not much more could happen, we could have chaos here caused by any combination of governments.

COYP

Alert a moderator to this post

Topic Locked

Page 784 of 1255 < 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Coronavirus (LOCKED)

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors