Vaccine opinion around here seems heavily biased against

Treatments and their effectiveness, herd immunity, masks, testing, etc.
thinksaboutit
Posts: 662
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2021 11:38 am

Vaccine opinion around here seems heavily biased against

Post by thinksaboutit »

Looking at recent posts, it seems most here are anti-vax to some extent. Typical views are.

Ranging from enthusiastic anti-vaxxers seeking to put other people off, through the "vaccine-shy" and the "shouldn't be coerced" to the "don't want vaccine passports"

There seems to be 2 or 3 posters only that seem strongly in favour of vaccines.

Am I wrong?

Illimitible
Posts: 187
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2020 3:06 am

Re: Vaccine opinion around here seems heavily biased against

Post by Illimitible »

Why does it matter to you what other people think

Hollow Horse
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2020 2:30 am

Re: Vaccine opinion around here seems heavily biased against

Post by Hollow Horse »

Being generous in response to your posed question, I would say yes and no. Yes in that there is a wide range of opinion on these forums regarding vaccinations and no in that there is a majority of "anti-vaxxers". Reading through the posts I get the impression that the majority feel it is a matter of informed decision making regarding being vaccinated, and yes there is a significant number who state they would not make a choice to be vaccinated, but most give a solid rationale and in my opinion that is their prerogative. Most opposition seems to be against the vaccine being forced upon people so they can live as they choose, something that I support passionately and I am certainly not an "anti-vaxxer" I prefer to choose which risks I am prepared to take not have the state decide them for me, so I will not take up the offer and will vehemently oppose any mandatory passport, certification or whatever , whilst supporting anyone who makes the choice to be vaccinated. Does that make me, in your reasoning, "anti-vaxx to some extent" ? If so then if we are painting a broad church I must be a "denier" to some extent because I am sceptical about the proportionality of many responses to this pandemic (soon to be endemic) infection? Sorry but as the terms are generally understood, you cannot be anti-vaxx or a Covid denier to "some extent" , so even though I have , as usual used too many words in response I think your original question is irrelevant to the discussion as there appears no understanding that people can agree or disagree with all or parts of an argument.

Speedstick
Posts: 555
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2020 8:27 pm

Re: Vaccine opinion around here seems heavily biased against

Post by Speedstick »

It is surely just a matter of personal choice Thinksaboutit, and respect of that decided either way.
If you wish to have it, l respect that and have no intention to sway or amend your decision.
All l would appreciate from others is the right to formulate my own opinion on the issue, without coercion.
'No jab, no job' is surely a violation of an individual's human rights as laid down in the Nuremberg code.
Why is this very important code now being ignored???.

Rudolph Rigger
Posts: 175
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2020 11:04 am

Re: Vaccine opinion around here seems heavily biased against

Post by Rudolph Rigger »

thinksaboutit wrote: Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:51 pm Am I wrong?
Yes - often :D

Joking aside, I come away with a different impression.

First off, let's dispense with the label "anti-vax". I don't recall any posts that are anti-vax in general. To be ignorantly opposed to all vaccines is just as dumb as being ignorantly in favour of all vaccines.

Doctor : don't worry, it's a vaccine
Patient : A vaccine you say? Oh, it must be good then

Like any medication there are going to be pluses and minuses, risks and benefits to weigh up.

Overall, vaccines have been a modern medical miracle - wonderful things when they're (a) safe and (b) work well

Most of the concerns (note : concerns - not some rabid frothy-mouthed anti-vax loony diatribe) centre around the safety and efficacy of these new vaccines which have been produced very quickly. The speed of production is not, in itself, a bad thing - but it does leave an entirely rational concern about whether proper safety testing has been undertaken. The concern may be misplaced - but it is entirely rational, especially if one is concerned about long-term effects.

The second main concern is that of enforcement - either direct or indirect through societal pressure. I would say that most of the posts are decidedly against any kind of coercion - be that direct governmental coercion or more indirect societal coercion ("no jab, no job" or "get jabbed to protect others. If you don't you're a bit of a selfish scumbag").

For my part, I see no good scientific reason for mass vaccination. On the assumption we have an effective vaccine - effective at reducing symptoms and deaths - then once the majority of those who would otherwise have succumbed to the virus are vaccinated we have reached a suitable end goal.

At this point the virus impact will be less than that of a typical flu

No further action required.

User avatar
klondike
Posts: 33
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2020 9:51 am

Re: Vaccine opinion around here seems heavily biased against

Post by klondike »

I'm not enthused with the short testing period but clearly there was little choice as people are certainly dying from the effects of covid be that actually catching it or from reduced healthcare while the GPs are away we know not where and hospitals are producing more infections than any other known source. At 71 despite no medium or long term testing having been done plus possible obstacles to a normal life for those refusing I had my first jab 8 Feb. I had zero reaction to it. No soreness not even any redness. Is it possible I had some prior immunity and my body just got on with the job of disposing of this pathogen with no fuss? I do have a shaky reason for thinking I may have caught it way back in late 2019 before I'd even heard of it but won't elaborate here.

Anyhow what I have been doing for some time triggered by disbelief in the wild projections of the epidemiological modelers is automatically downloading some NHS England and ONS stats adding age groupings, percentages and graphs from the data all served up on my own Raspberry Pi based web server. I think I can see the first green shoots of evidence that the vaccines really work. With no publicly available stats on covid admissions by age group I can't see what the group hailing success in Scotland saw. All I see are deaths by age group and vaccination stats. The key stats I see an inkling in are from the NHS England weekly file tab3 (covid deaths by age and morbidity) and the ONS weekly covid deaths by age. The ONS numbers in particular run well behind current.

These are some bits which I posted elsewhere. I'll leave out the image as anybody interested enough can just take a look at the pages concerned which are produced by a Raspberry Pi on my home internet connection.....

First sign of green shoots it the death stats w/e 12 Feb.

As I said in a different post on the Scotland hospitalisation studies there was nothing showing in the death stats at that time. Amongst the stats I have set up doing automatic downloads and minor analysis on (mostly graphing, grouping and computing percentages) there is now an inkling of a relative decline in death numbers amongst the older groups.

What I am looking at is the percentage of weekly deaths in a series of age groupings. Those percentages have remained pretty much static throughout the epidemic. Because of the delays between vaccination and build up of immunity and the maybe 3 or 4 weeks between infection and a death being recorded in the weekly ONS stats I expected it to be maybe a little later before anything showed.

First vaccinated were care home and NHS staff. By 11 Jan when the first NHS England vaccination stats started appearing regularly there were enough given that those groups were done. So next up would be the over 80s the first of who should be gaining some immunity by late January. Roll forward to mid February and if the vaccines were working the numbers should start showing in the death stats. Well it's small but they do show something. Probably not yet statistically significant or there would be an announcement.

(was an image here)

The change is small but bigger than anything I've seen by way of change across the period of our epidemic. Differences in the age grouping provided by NHS England and ONS make direct comparison across the whole pandemic tricky when you get the rather small changes seen here. Number wise the change is small but the graph shows a decline in percentage deaths over the last week for both the 90+ and 80-89 groupings with that drop being made up for mostly by the increase in the 60-69 group. Of course as we are in a period where the virus is in retreat overall all deaths have declined.

A link to the actual graphs which link back to all the others. The percentage one I've posted about is the bottom one.
https://covid.digitalham.co.uk/ONSdeaths_by_age.php You'll need a laptop or computer for this to show much as tablets don't seem able to handle the javascript produced by the graphing software I chose to use and show no "hover" data. Phones are way too small anyway.

Thursday is the NHS England weekly file day. That tells the same story.

The 80+ age group over the course of the epidemic made up 52.52% but over the last week since 17th February show as 49.23%. Looking at all the weekly spreadsheets the only other time I spot it sinking below 50% was way back when the overall death toll was comparatively small at less than 100 deaths a week in total.

This is actually the second week in a row with a fall but it was smaller the previous week and I wasn't confident that it wasn't just natural variation in the numbers. It still could be of course but that is looking less likely to me now.

https://covid.digitalham.co.uk/age_morbidity.php

jotheboat
Posts: 7
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2021 5:34 am

Re: Vaccine opinion around here seems heavily biased against

Post by jotheboat »

I'm strongly in favour of people making their own minds up having made an informed choice.

That choice is based on what we read, see and hear. Worryingly the debate has been skewed because many people, with views that differ from the establishment, have been shut down.

Age and underlying conditions may come into an individuals choice.
In my case I'm over 60 with a couple of conditions. I chose to have the vaccine because it appears that there is a good chance that my symptoms will be lessened should I become infected. I want to see my grandkids grow up.
Secondly (though not proven I gather) I think there is a chance that I am less likely to pass anything on to my elderly friends. If I knowingly did that I would be mortified.

If I were under 40 and in peak health my decision may well have been different.

jmc
Posts: 432
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:01 am

Re: Vaccine opinion around here seems heavily biased against

Post by jmc »

thinksaboutit wrote: Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:51 pm Looking at recent posts, it seems most here are anti-vax to some extent. Typical views are.

Ranging from enthusiastic anti-vaxxers seeking to put other people off, through the "vaccine-shy" and the "shouldn't be coerced" to the "don't want vaccine passports"

There seems to be 2 or 3 posters only that seem strongly in favour of vaccines.

Am I wrong?
The term "anti-vax" for the last thirty plus years has meant something very specific. It is a small group of mostly affluent middle class people who dont want their kids vaccinated for various reasons. Almost all reasons to a greater or lesser degrees completely spurious. Either the "big pharma" conspiracy people. People who believe everything "man-made" is automatically "poison". Or people grasping at straws for why their kids are autistic or have other serious birth defects.. It must be the vaccines, not the fact that once women go over the age of 25 the probability of having a kid with serious birth defects etc starts going up exponentially. So a lot of career women starting having kids in the 30's and 40's will have a lot of kids with serious problems. The wont accept this fact of basic biology so they must rationalize the cause as vaccines or something similar.

So almost all cranks, no matter how sincere in their beliefs.

Not one single poster I have read here over the months is an Anti-Vaxer as traditionally understood. Although some have been suitable suspicious of Big Pharma for often very legitimate reasons. They have form, as an industry.

All I read here are people who are trying to inform themselves on the subject and when presented with the information that is currently available and the literature on modern vaccines and vaccine development over the last 100 plus years have decided that this purely experimental vaccine is not something they would willingly take. At this moment in time.

This is called informed consent. We have informed ourselves with the best information available at the moment and we do not consent.

So what I see in the MSM legacy media at the moment is people being smeared with term "Anti-Vaxer" who have very legitimate concerts about the safety and actual health risk benefits of an untested experimental vaccine.

All other vaccines I have taken willing or given to my kids had gone through a very rigorous testing and approval process like 501(b)(1). A process that takes at least 4 to 6 years minimum for vaccines candidates.

All previous human corona-virus vaccine candidates in the last three decades failed early in the FDA approval process and were never released for general use.

The current SARs CoV 2 vaccines have a documented averse reaction death rate already at least 70 times higher than the only other general population mass vaccine, the annual flu shot. At the current rate more people in the US will have died from averse reaction to the SARs CoV 2 vaccine in 3 month than in the previous 30 years of flu shots.

For the general population under 60 the actual probable risk of death or serious illness from SARs CoV 2 pneumonia at the moment is little different from Influenza (H1N1/H3N2). For those in the high risk groups there is absolutely no evidence given the manner in which SARs 2 vaccines works that they will have any impact on final mortality rates. Which is the situation with the Influenza vaccines. Any actual potential YLL gain in the high risk group is going to be so small as to be quite possible canceled out by the adverse reaction numbers.

By any traditional standards of health risk / benefits used for all other vaccines not only should this vaccine be purely voluntary but the actual groups where any real positive public health care benefit can be shown are actually very small. And even then the evidence from studies with mandatory Influenza vaccination of health care workers in contact with old people is not exactly overwhelming. Best outcomes was a reduction of mortality rates of 2%. Basically a margin of error result.

So to answer your question, there are no Anti Vaxers here. Just a lot of very rational people who have looked at the evidence, looked at the science, and looked at the data, and said this is not for us. We'll pass on being what are little more than guinea-pigs for the early trials of an experimental vaccine.

All the evidence indicates that when the SARs CoV 2 vaccine story is written it will not be some great public health triumph like the story of the polio vaccine but a public health debacle like the story of Thalidomide. For those not old enough to remember the story of Thalidomide it was a prescription drug that caused many thousand of serious birth defects in the UK and Europe but not in the US. Because a senior FDA official asked a lots of awkward questions and did not get answers she was happy with. Thalidomide babies were pretty common when I was growing up. Kids without arms and legs.

That's why I am a SARs CoV 2 vaccine skeptic. The evidence I have seen so far.

jmc
Posts: 432
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2020 9:01 am

Re: Vaccine opinion around here seems heavily biased against

Post by jmc »

jotheboat wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 8:42 am I'm strongly in favour of people making their own minds up having made an informed choice.

That choice is based on what we read, see and hear. Worryingly the debate has been skewed because many people, with views that differ from the establishment, have been shut down.

Age and underlying conditions may come into an individuals choice.
In my case I'm over 60 with a couple of conditions. I chose to have the vaccine because it appears that there is a good chance that my symptoms will be lessened should I become infected. I want to see my grandkids grow up.
Secondly (though not proven I gather) I think there is a chance that I am less likely to pass anything on to my elderly friends. If I knowingly did that I would be mortified.

If I were under 40 and in peak health my decision may well have been different.
Thank you for posting a perfect example of informed choice and informed consent.

You informed yourself as to the pros and cons. Weighed it up for your personal situation. And then decided to go ahead because that is what you thought was best for you and you were most happy with.

You made the right decision for you. For the right reasons.

I think I would be correct in saying that is what all the contributors here want. The right to decided for themselves. In this particular situation. Nothing more. The right to informed consent. And the right to informed dissent.

Nobody
Posts: 280
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2020 12:05 pm

Re: Vaccine opinion around here seems heavily biased against

Post by Nobody »

jmc reading your posts makes me wish I had been clever enough to get an education. I see no reason to take the vaccine since I have no human contact via which I might possibly contract the virus. If there were a vaccine for the Aids virus (if it is or was ever a virus) then why would I take it since I am not sexually active, not homosexual, not a drug user, do not frequent the types of spaces nor involve myself in the types of activities that might make be vulnerable to the contraction of that disorder. If they make work conditional on taking the vaccine well, I belong to a social category who never satisfied those discriminatory conditions at any point in my adult life so it will not affect me. If I was offered a job on condition of taking the vaccine, then I would probably take it, but that is as unlikely as me contracting the virus probably for the same reasons: my lack of public value condemns me to a social condition that reproduces my isolation and reproduces my negation in the labour market. Many lower class people are in this position and there will be more joining me. About the only good thing that can come of this, for us, is that the government will have to give up their war on those on benefits since they are going to take us back to the eighties where we had massive unemployment that has been a structurally continuous feature of our economy and hidden condition of its functioning ever since that will now be harder for them to hide as they pursue their absurd policies that make economic activity ever more difficult to participate in.

Post Reply