FabSwingers.com > Forums > Virus > Waning Pfizer effectiveness
Waning Pfizer effectiveness
Jump to: Newest in thread
Quote from BBC... Prof Eran Segal, who advises the Israeli government on Covid matters, said by month five or six after vaccination, people are probably only 30-40% protected, compared with more than 90% when protection first kicks in.
The situation in Israel apparently being driven by the effectiveness hailing off.
Full story.. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58432776
They go on to say...
Despite this fall, vaccination still prevents a substantial amount of sickness, with the unvaccinated becoming severely ill with Covid about nine times as often in over-60s, and twice as often in younger people.
Be interesting to understand what exactly Is meant by 40% effective. And how it is determined. I'd assume there is a standard process to establish a vaccines efficacy? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
 |
By *ovebjsMan
over a year ago
Bristol |
"Quote from BBC... Prof Eran Segal, who advises the Israeli government on Covid matters, said by month five or six after vaccination, people are probably only 30-40% protected, compared with more than 90% when protection first kicks in.
The situation in Israel apparently being driven by the effectiveness hailing off.
Full story.. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58432776
They go on to say...
Despite this fall, vaccination still prevents a substantial amount of sickness, with the unvaccinated becoming severely ill with Covid about nine times as often in over-60s, and twice as often in younger people.
Be interesting to understand what exactly Is meant by 40% effective. And how it is determined. I'd assume there is a standard process to establish a vaccines efficacy? "
now go and look at the longevity of the Flu vaccines  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Quote from BBC... Prof Eran Segal, who advises the Israeli government on Covid matters, said by month five or six after vaccination, people are probably only 30-40% protected, compared with more than 90% when protection first kicks in.
The situation in Israel apparently being driven by the effectiveness hailing off.
Full story.. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58432776
They go on to say...
Despite this fall, vaccination still prevents a substantial amount of sickness, with the unvaccinated becoming severely ill with Covid about nine times as often in over-60s, and twice as often in younger people.
Be interesting to understand what exactly Is meant by 40% effective. And how it is determined. I'd assume there is a standard process to establish a vaccines efficacy? "
Yes. It's levels of protection against symptomatic infection.
Even if the vaccine losses some efficacy, the immune system is still in a better position to fight the infection and therefore reduces hospitalisation and death. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Quote from BBC... Prof Eran Segal, who advises the Israeli government on Covid matters, said by month five or six after vaccination, people are probably only 30-40% protected, compared with more than 90% when protection first kicks in.
The situation in Israel apparently being driven by the effectiveness hailing off.
Full story.. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58432776
They go on to say...
Despite this fall, vaccination still prevents a substantial amount of sickness, with the unvaccinated becoming severely ill with Covid about nine times as often in over-60s, and twice as often in younger people.
Be interesting to understand what exactly Is meant by 40% effective. And how it is determined. I'd assume there is a standard process to establish a vaccines efficacy?
now go and look at the longevity of the Flu vaccines "
Does the flu vaccine help with covid then? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
For me this is the problem. I simply don't understand what 40% effectiveness means. Am I 40% less likely to catch covid or will I experience only 40% severity of illness? It's like the percentage of population vaccinated. The criteria keeps changing re adult age groups so I have no clear idea of exactly what the accurate percentage is
It's almost as if it's deliberate  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"For me this is the problem. I simply don't understand what 40% effectiveness means. Am I 40% less likely to catch covid or will I experience only 40% severity of illness? It's like the percentage of population vaccinated. The criteria keeps changing re adult age groups so I have no clear idea of exactly what the accurate percentage is
It's almost as if it's deliberate "
But if we keep wrapping positivity around it... Its like magic... It all feels better. 42k infections is a good thing. 800 deaths last week is really low.... Everything is going really well... 100 stray dogs are going to be left in Afghanistan... That's bloody outrageous I'm going to call my minister and rip him a new one hold the front page. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"For me this is the problem. I simply don't understand what 40% effectiveness means. Am I 40% less likely to catch covid or will I experience only 40% severity of illness? It's like the percentage of population vaccinated. The criteria keeps changing re adult age groups so I have no clear idea of exactly what the accurate percentage is
It's almost as if it's deliberate
But if we keep wrapping positivity around it... Its like magic... It all feels better. 42k infections is a good thing. 800 deaths last week is really low.... Everything is going really well... 100 stray dogs are going to be left in Afghanistan... That's bloody outrageous I'm going to call my minister and rip him a new one hold the front page. "
 .
That's the conversation that goes on in our house every time the news comes on.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovebjsMan
over a year ago
Bristol |
"Quote from BBC... Prof Eran Segal, who advises the Israeli government on Covid matters, said by month five or six after vaccination, people are probably only 30-40% protected, compared with more than 90% when protection first kicks in.
The situation in Israel apparently being driven by the effectiveness hailing off.
Full story.. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58432776
They go on to say...
Despite this fall, vaccination still prevents a substantial amount of sickness, with the unvaccinated becoming severely ill with Covid about nine times as often in over-60s, and twice as often in younger people.
Be interesting to understand what exactly Is meant by 40% effective. And how it is determined. I'd assume there is a standard process to establish a vaccines efficacy?
now go and look at the longevity of the Flu vaccines
Does the flu vaccine help with covid then? "
 It's the same thing! every vaccine Losses some efficasy over time
And just to answer a pedantic question, No it deos not |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don’t understand why people are so insistent on taking the jab when stories like these indicate the jabs are pretty ineffective? I just don’t get it "
I'm not sure the story is saying that. Simply that it starts off being effective at doing something (clarity needed about what) and after 5 to 6 months it's less than half as effective (at doing something).
Even the most ardent pro vaxxer or anti vaxxer and all the majority in between the two extremes can see that finding accurate unbiased helpful facts that help individuals make an informed decision that is right for them is extremely challenging....and there's an awful lot that is deliberately vague but emotive to apply pressure. I'm double jabbed... But what happens next? In 3 months? In 9 months? In 2 years? We can't keep having this battle of ideologies 7 days a week it's unhealthy.
At some point we've got to "learn to live with" (to borrow an expression) people who have different opinions to ourselves. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Effectiveness can be divided into several categories. Prevention of: infection (asymptomatic), symptomatic infection, hospitalisation, ventilation, and death. (The categories aren't always used or consistently)
Waning immunity tends to refer to asymptomatic and mild disease.
The vaccines were developed to prevent hospitalisation and death - and they still do that quite well.
It's amazing that the vaccines can block infection at all, but we tend not to expect this of other vaccines and it's not what the Covid vaccines were tested for.
The media is horrendously unclear on all of this. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions..."
We seem to have got into a state now where unless we get told it officially we don't believe it or its not true. Our inability to see what's in front of us and process it and make a sensible decision for ourselves is a bigger concern.
As for the vaccines I tend to agree in as much as I think we will find out they are not the miracle we were happy clapping in April / may / june, and that winter is going to be very challenging. I hope to be proved wrong of course. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don’t understand why people are so insistent on taking the jab when stories like these indicate the jabs are pretty ineffective? I just don’t get it "
That's your interpretation of it but it's not reflective of the clinical trials or real world experience. The vaccines have very, very high efficacy - phenomenally high for vaccines - we're very fortunate.
Efficacy is better thought of as the risk reduction against having severe illness. With a 95%, reduction in the risk of becoming seriously ill, most people would jump at the opportunity to skip that suffering. The illness can leave your organs damaged or destroyed, including heart, lungs, kidneys and brain. Not to mention long Covid, which has no certain end point of your not still going to be suffering life changing symptoms. The efficacy can reflect the immediate continuation of good health and the bonus can be that you can continue to live life as you always have done  .
Who and how many of us take risk reduction measures every day? Most of us, when crossing the road, washing our hands etc. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovebjsMan
over a year ago
Bristol |
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions..."
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I'm double pfizer jabbed since April and currently have covid (day 5). Managed to catch it from somebody else who is double jabbed since April.
On the plus side, it feels like a cold that I can manage with rest and paracetamol. Could have been much worse without the vaccine. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I'm double pfizer jabbed since April and currently have covid (day 5). Managed to catch it from somebody else who is double jabbed since April.
On the plus side, it feels like a cold that I can manage with rest and paracetamol. Could have been much worse without the vaccine. "
Feel better. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don’t understand why people are so insistent on taking the jab when stories like these indicate the jabs are pretty ineffective? I just don’t get it "
Pretty simple some protection is better than none!
Why do people get the flu jab same reason!
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"I don’t understand why people are so insistent on taking the jab when stories like these indicate the jabs are pretty ineffective? I just don’t get it "
It isn’t ineffective at all - that’s total incorrect. If it was ineffective, our hospitals would be full of covid patients right now.
The vaccine is doing exactly what it is meant to do, just that it currently has a limited shelf life, so boosters would be needed at some point. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don’t understand why people are so insistent on taking the jab when stories like these indicate the jabs are pretty ineffective? I just don’t get it "
from the article:
Despite this fall, vaccination still prevents a substantial amount of sickness, with the unvaccinated becoming severely ill with Covid about nine times as often in over-60s, and twice as often in younger people. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"For me this is the problem. I simply don't understand what 40% effectiveness means. Am I 40% less likely to catch covid or will I experience only 40% severity of illness? It's like the percentage of population vaccinated. The criteria keeps changing re adult age groups so I have no clear idea of exactly what the accurate percentage is
It's almost as if it's deliberate "
To me it means that opposed to 90% where 10 from 100 people might get ill after having the jab, 60 people would get ill after the specified timeframe.
It doesn't mean that these 60 people would be severely ill and go to hospital. I've know a fair few people recently who had covid and had hardly any symptoms. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore "
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable. "
what's the alternative ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable. "
So a vaccine designed to prevent hospitalisation and death, which is preventing hospitalisations and deaths, is unacceptable?
Do you expect everything to do more than it claims to be able to do? Do you think that Viagra should reverse hair loss as well as give people boners? Do you think apples should make penises grow as well as being a good part of a healthy diet? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable. what's the alternative ? "
Isn't it their choice.? Why the incessant pressure on people who are not yet convinced?or who are questioning some of the perceived wisdom? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable. what's the alternative ?
Isn't it their choice.? Why the incessant pressure on people who are not yet convinced?or who are questioning some of the perceived wisdom? "
Yep, it’s their choice , I have no problem with people not having the vaccine , I also have no problem with private businesses requiring people to be vaccinated or tested either . |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable. what's the alternative ?
Isn't it their choice.? Why the incessant pressure on people who are not yet convinced?or who are questioning some of the perceived wisdom? "
you are reading too much into what I've said.
If the current vaccine is unacceptable then what do we do instead? Of this is an individual based risk decision rather than a general statement then I'm not going to get in your way. I would like to understand your thinking because maybe you have seen something I haven't. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ovebjsMan
over a year ago
Bristol |
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable. "
No point in discussing it with you as you just don’t seem to get it
Probably never will |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It just sounds like one big con to me now to make money from the jabs "
The AZ vaccine is available to low and middle income countries at cost.
So they're not doing a very good job at this 'con'. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable. what's the alternative ? "
Fuck knows, but it just seems like the wrong parts of society are advancing. Social media and material technology are advancing on an almost daily basis but medicines are still very risky and poor? Then again, you can't make money from a healthy society can you? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable.
So a vaccine designed to prevent hospitalisation and death, which is preventing hospitalisations and deaths, is unacceptable?
Do you expect everything to do more than it claims to be able to do? Do you think that Viagra should reverse hair loss as well as give people boners? Do you think apples should make penises grow as well as being a good part of a healthy diet?"
I rate your sarcasm! Well done. However if you're happy that the only viable way out of this pandemic is something that only has temporary effect, then I don't knkw what to say to you? See, the problem is that we are expecting covid to become like the flu, yes? A constant? But, there is a vast difference between the flu and covid, covid is capable of overwhelming medical facilities within days, so, without a vaccine that lasts longer, this virus will continue to come in varying forms of waves, killing people and destroying nations financially. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable.
So a vaccine designed to prevent hospitalisation and death, which is preventing hospitalisations and deaths, is unacceptable?
Do you expect everything to do more than it claims to be able to do? Do you think that Viagra should reverse hair loss as well as give people boners? Do you think apples should make penises grow as well as being a good part of a healthy diet?
I rate your sarcasm! Well done. However if you're happy that the only viable way out of this pandemic is something that only has temporary effect, then I don't knkw what to say to you? See, the problem is that we are expecting covid to become like the flu, yes? A constant? But, there is a vast difference between the flu and covid, covid is capable of overwhelming medical facilities within days, so, without a vaccine that lasts longer, this virus will continue to come in varying forms of waves, killing people and destroying nations financially. "
Fortunately vaccines continue to be developed and studied.
And given that the vaccines prevent hospitalisation and death in almost all cases (in real life effectiveness exceeding most vaccines we had before Covid - which is why thousands of British children die of measles encephalitis in the 21st century, I'm sure) - the overwhelming is unlikely to happen in the vaccinated.
The fact that you want the vaccines to do more than what they were designed to do doesn't mean they don't work. It means that you're expecting that Viagra to cure baldness and complaining that it only gives a long lasting boner. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don’t understand why people are so insistent on taking the jab when stories like these indicate the jabs are pretty ineffective? I just don’t get it "
Nope, you really don't get it. That's not what the story is Saying.
The levels of scientific illiteracy in this country are frankly borderline depressing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *andKBCouple
over a year ago
Plymouth |
"I don’t understand why people are so insistent on taking the jab when stories like these indicate the jabs are pretty ineffective? I just don’t get it
Nope, you really don't get it. That's not what the story is Saying.
The levels of scientific illiteracy in this country are frankly borderline depressing."
Sadly yes. Amazes me how poor people are at reading and using statistics too. Including the media. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don’t understand why people are so insistent on taking the jab when stories like these indicate the jabs are pretty ineffective? I just don’t get it
Nope, you really don't get it. That's not what the story is Saying.
The levels of scientific illiteracy in this country are frankly borderline depressing."
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable. what's the alternative ?
Fuck knows, but it just seems like the wrong parts of society are advancing. Social media and material technology are advancing on an almost daily basis but medicines are still very risky and poor? Then again, you can't make money from a healthy society can you? "
“……. Social media and material technology are advancing….”
——————————
Social media and technology did not advance over night; they advanced with time over many years.
The covid vaccine has been around for just under a year. As social media and technology have advanced over time, so will the vaccine advance as more research is done into it.
The vaccine may give temporary protection initially, but booster shots could extend the length of the protection it gives, so the vaccine is not a waste of time.
Without the vaccine, hospitalisations & deaths would be much higher than they are now.
Any protection is better than no protection at all. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Indeed, Astrazeneca was developed and supplied at cost. In the long run why wouldn't they make money from it anyway. That's the way the world works, and if you invest in the skills, knowledge, technology and research, then you deserve a return so long as it's not obscene. In answer to OP, protection was always expected to wane, just as it does with flu. Once this settles down in 5-10 years, we'll get a combined flu and Covid vaccination in the autumn for the winter every year and think nothing of it. But let's not think it's going to suddenly be fine after one vaccination. Immunity needs to build over years and we will all catch Covid many times, but each time it will be less worse than the time before unless new strains appear. I've had proper flu 3 times, nasty each time lasting 4 weeks. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well."
This is the thing that gets me... It's not even failure. It's doing everything it said it would, really well.
But because it doesn't do other stuff it "failed".
Good grief |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"It just sounds like one big con to me now to make money from the jabs
Making money from the jabs we can get for FREE. Make it make sense!"
They are not free. They are (currently) paid for by the Govt. Guess where the Govt gets the money? Our taxes. So we are paying. The profit motive will be long term as any discounted price now will be discontinued and boosters become the norm.
The pharma companies are and will make a LOT of money and we are paying them (indirectly through tax). |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
This is the thing that gets me... It's not even failure. It's doing everything it said it would, really well.
But because it doesn't do other stuff it "failed".
Good grief "
It’s almost as if some people are using this to advance the antivaxx agenda… |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
This is the thing that gets me... It's not even failure. It's doing everything it said it would, really well.
But because it doesn't do other stuff it "failed".
Good grief
It’s almost as if some people are using this to advance the antivaxx agenda…"
Indeed. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
This is the thing that gets me... It's not even failure. It's doing everything it said it would, really well.
But because it doesn't do other stuff it "failed".
Good grief "
@inaswing as always most of what you post is sensible and often spot on but some of your points above in this thread (not bothering long quoting) are a tad disingenuous.
The vaccines were trumpted by EVERYONE that they reduced the chance of serious illness by c.90-95%.
It now appears that falls over time to much lower levels. It doesn’t make the vaccines bad but it does substantially reduce what was previously being celebrated.
So they may still be doing what they said they would do but it now appears they will do it for significantly less people and reduce over time.
Obviously this is a far better way to persuade people to have a booster compared to reliance on a possible variant of concern. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I bought a coffee maker that makes great coffee, threw it out though because it completely failed to make bread."
My thyroid medication doesn't give me a six pack. weight loss can be associated with this medication so I demand to be a size 8 right now |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
This is the thing that gets me... It's not even failure. It's doing everything it said it would, really well.
But because it doesn't do other stuff it "failed".
Good grief
It’s almost as if some people are using this to advance the antivaxx agenda…"
“…… It’s almost as if some people are using this to advance the antivaxx agenda…”
—————————-
Indeed, that seems to be their motive and intention - which is sad  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"I bought a coffee maker that makes great coffee, threw it out though because it completely failed to make bread."
I wish I was there to catch the coffee maker when you were throwing it out. All I need is coffee; I’ve got enough bread. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable.
So a vaccine designed to prevent hospitalisation and death, which is preventing hospitalisations and deaths, is unacceptable?
Do you expect everything to do more than it claims to be able to do? Do you think that Viagra should reverse hair loss as well as give people boners? Do you think apples should make penises grow as well as being a good part of a healthy diet?
I rate your sarcasm! Well done. However if you're happy that the only viable way out of this pandemic is something that only has temporary effect, then I don't knkw what to say to you? See, the problem is that we are expecting covid to become like the flu, yes? A constant? But, there is a vast difference between the flu and covid, covid is capable of overwhelming medical facilities within days, so, without a vaccine that lasts longer, this virus will continue to come in varying forms of waves, killing people and destroying nations financially.
Fortunately vaccines continue to be developed and studied.
And given that the vaccines prevent hospitalisation and death in almost all cases (in real life effectiveness exceeding most vaccines we had before Covid - which is why thousands of British children die of measles encephalitis in the 21st century, I'm sure) - the overwhelming is unlikely to happen in the vaccinated.
The fact that you want the vaccines to do more than what they were designed to do doesn't mean they don't work. It means that you're expecting that Viagra to cure baldness and complaining that it only gives a long lasting boner."
Me? I'm just happy these anti-vaxxers ain't going to get a free heard immunity ride from us sensible ones who have been double jabbed.  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
The vaccines were trumpted by EVERYONE that they reduced the chance of serious illness by c.90-95%.
"
... And at one point, the narrative was that they would also reduce the risk of transmission. But having seen a number of family, friends and colleagues who were recently double vaccinated end up contracting the bug and experiencing fairly serious side effects, it really does seem to not be doing quite what it is meant to do. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
This is the thing that gets me... It's not even failure. It's doing everything it said it would, really well.
But because it doesn't do other stuff it "failed".
Good grief
It’s almost as if some people are using this to advance the antivaxx agenda…"
Which really ought to be stamped on by mods here........ |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable.
So a vaccine designed to prevent hospitalisation and death, which is preventing hospitalisations and deaths, is unacceptable?
Do you expect everything to do more than it claims to be able to do? Do you think that Viagra should reverse hair loss as well as give people boners? Do you think apples should make penises grow as well as being a good part of a healthy diet?
I rate your sarcasm! Well done. However if you're happy that the only viable way out of this pandemic is something that only has temporary effect, then I don't knkw what to say to you? See, the problem is that we are expecting covid to become like the flu, yes? A constant? But, there is a vast difference between the flu and covid, covid is capable of overwhelming medical facilities within days, so, without a vaccine that lasts longer, this virus will continue to come in varying forms of waves, killing people and destroying nations financially.
Fortunately vaccines continue to be developed and studied.
And given that the vaccines prevent hospitalisation and death in almost all cases (in real life effectiveness exceeding most vaccines we had before Covid - which is why thousands of British children die of measles encephalitis in the 21st century, I'm sure) - the overwhelming is unlikely to happen in the vaccinated.
The fact that you want the vaccines to do more than what they were designed to do doesn't mean they don't work. It means that you're expecting that Viagra to cure baldness and complaining that it only gives a long lasting boner.
Me? I'm just happy these anti-vaxxers ain't going to get a free heard immunity ride from us sensible ones who have been double jabbed. "
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
The vaccines were trumpted by EVERYONE that they reduced the chance of serious illness by c.90-95%.
... And at one point, the narrative was that they would also reduce the risk of transmission. But having seen a number of family, friends and colleagues who were recently double vaccinated end up contracting the bug and experiencing fairly serious side effects, it really does seem to not be doing quite what it is meant to do. "
They're still reducing severe illness.
They might have done those other things, but that would be a bonus, not a failure if it doesn't. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It just sounds like one big con to me now to make money from the jabs
Making money from the jabs we can get for FREE. Make it make sense!"
We get them free, but the people who make them get funded to do so. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable. what's the alternative ?
Fuck knows, but it just seems like the wrong parts of society are advancing. Social media and material technology are advancing on an almost daily basis but medicines are still very risky and poor? Then again, you can't make money from a healthy society can you?
“……. Social media and material technology are advancing….”
——————————
Social media and technology did not advance over night; they advanced with time over many years.
The covid vaccine has been around for just under a year. As social media and technology have advanced over time, so will the vaccine advance as more research is done into it.
The vaccine may give temporary protection initially, but booster shots could extend the length of the protection it gives, so the vaccine is not a waste of time.
Without the vaccine, hospitalisations & deaths would be much higher than they are now.
Any protection is better than no protection at all. "
Protection that fails what the people pushing it claimed it would achieve is not a victory or a good thing. In fact, it pushed people to believe that it was more than likely lies. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"
The vaccines were trumpted by EVERYONE that they reduced the chance of serious illness by c.90-95%.
... And at one point, the narrative was that they would also reduce the risk of transmission. But having seen a number of family, friends and colleagues who were recently double vaccinated end up contracting the bug and experiencing fairly serious side effects, it really does seem to not be doing quite what it is meant to do. "
I think the vaccines are a good thing. They are one of the weapons we have in our arsenal to fight this horrible virus. The more weapons we have the better. I am sure the vaccines will be refined, updated and improved over time, however...
The rhetoric is slowly changing as evident in this thread. Sadly (very sadly) the vaccines appear to be not as good as we were being told (repeatedly and vocally by the great and good AND folks on here).
Go back just a matter of weeks and some people on here were trying to claim some form or moral high ground by implying they took the vaccine for the good of society (rather than being honest and admitting their PRIMARY driver was protecting themselves) and many were trying to socially shame anyone (both anti vaxxers and hesitants) by shouting about how the vaccines reduce transmission. Again, very sadly, this is now in doubt.
And yet we now have people trying to rewrite history saying “oh we never said that”! Well sorry to say you and many others most certainly did.
For avoidance of doubt - the vaccines are good, just not as good as we were led to believe. Very sad. Hope they fix it! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"It just sounds like one big con to me now to make money from the jabs
Making money from the jabs we can get for FREE. Make it make sense!
We get them free, but the people who make them get funded to do so. "
Even we don’t get them free - they are paid for through our tax! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well."
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable.
So a vaccine designed to prevent hospitalisation and death, which is preventing hospitalisations and deaths, is unacceptable?
Do you expect everything to do more than it claims to be able to do? Do you think that Viagra should reverse hair loss as well as give people boners? Do you think apples should make penises grow as well as being a good part of a healthy diet?
I rate your sarcasm! Well done. However if you're happy that the only viable way out of this pandemic is something that only has temporary effect, then I don't knkw what to say to you? See, the problem is that we are expecting covid to become like the flu, yes? A constant? But, there is a vast difference between the flu and covid, covid is capable of overwhelming medical facilities within days, so, without a vaccine that lasts longer, this virus will continue to come in varying forms of waves, killing people and destroying nations financially.
Fortunately vaccines continue to be developed and studied.
And given that the vaccines prevent hospitalisation and death in almost all cases (in real life effectiveness exceeding most vaccines we had before Covid - which is why thousands of British children die of measles encephalitis in the 21st century, I'm sure) - the overwhelming is unlikely to happen in the vaccinated.
The fact that you want the vaccines to do more than what they were designed to do doesn't mean they don't work. It means that you're expecting that Viagra to cure baldness and complaining that it only gives a long lasting boner.
Me? I'm just happy these anti-vaxxers ain't going to get a free heard immunity ride from us sensible ones who have been double jabbed.
"
Oh dear well I hope you make it through the winter with your compromised immune system ... best of luck ...  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I bought a coffee maker that makes great coffee, threw it out though because it completely failed to make bread."
And you accuse others of strawman arguments. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"
The vaccines were trumpted by EVERYONE that they reduced the chance of serious illness by c.90-95%.
... And at one point, the narrative was that they would also reduce the risk of transmission. But having seen a number of family, friends and colleagues who were recently double vaccinated end up contracting the bug and experiencing fairly serious side effects, it really does seem to not be doing quite what it is meant to do.
They're still reducing severe illness.
They might have done those other things, but that would be a bonus, not a failure if it doesn't."
They are still reducing severe illness which is fantastic, but it now appears that they do not continue to do so at the levels that were being claimed. That is really disappointing and sad. Doesn’t mean the vaccines aren’t good, they are, but not as good as we thought. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool. "
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout "
Are you denying that this vaccine has fallen far short of the standards that it was pushed on to the public with? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout "
This vaccine isn't general medicine, this is something that was waved in people's faces and hyped up as a ticket to freedom, the path to utopia. It isn't that is it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout
Are you denying that this vaccine has fallen far short of the standards that it was pushed on to the public with? "
I'm using your logic. Anything less than perfect is failure.
Quite clearly medicine is genocide. The greatest genocide in all humanity. Billions of innocent people murdered. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
I suspect there's been townoarts at play here:
The first is parties jumped on the immediate success at promoted it to the high heavens. I suspect part of that was political as the vaccine policy was the bright spot of our covid policies and also allowed us to justify releasing lockdown measures. If vaccines generally reduce in effectiveness I wonder if scientists ever thought we had the silver bullet
Secondly, delta has been a bit of a curve ball that has broken the rules other variants obeyed.
I wonder if delta would have happened (or how much the likelihood would have reduced) in a world where the vaccines were available before the mutation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *oi_LucyCouple
over a year ago
Barbados |
"I don’t understand why people are so insistent on taking the jab when stories like these indicate the jabs are pretty ineffective? I just don’t get it "
Because “stories like this” literally describe how the vaccine is still pretty effective. Just not as effective as when first administered.
-Matt |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout
Are you denying that this vaccine has fallen far short of the standards that it was pushed on to the public with?
I'm using your logic. Anything less than perfect is failure.
Quite clearly medicine is genocide. The greatest genocide in all humanity. Billions of innocent people murdered."
Swerved the question. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout
Are you denying that this vaccine has fallen far short of the standards that it was pushed on to the public with?
I'm using your logic. Anything less than perfect is failure.
Quite clearly medicine is genocide. The greatest genocide in all humanity. Billions of innocent people murdered.
Swerved the question. "
My great grandmother was on thyroid medication. Before Victorian times her (my) diagnosis was a death sentence. Since then a totally normal life could be achieved.
She died nearly 30 years ago.
Forgive me, I'm overcome to discover that the medication I take played a role in Nan's death. That she was a victim of the greatest genocide the world has ever known.
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable. what's the alternative ?
Fuck knows, but it just seems like the wrong parts of society are advancing. Social media and material technology are advancing on an almost daily basis but medicines are still very risky and poor? Then again, you can't make money from a healthy society can you?
“……. Social media and material technology are advancing….”
——————————
Social media and technology did not advance over night; they advanced with time over many years.
The covid vaccine has been around for just under a year. As social media and technology have advanced over time, so will the vaccine advance as more research is done into it.
The vaccine may give temporary protection initially, but booster shots could extend the length of the protection it gives, so the vaccine is not a waste of time.
Without the vaccine, hospitalisations & deaths would be much higher than they are now.
Any protection is better than no protection at all.
Protection that fails what the people pushing it claimed it would achieve is not a victory or a good thing. In fact, it pushed people to believe that it was more than likely lies. "
“….. Protection that fails what the people pushing it claimed….”
————————-
How has it failed if it is giving people protection for up to 6 months at the least ??
Hospitalisations & and deaths have been reduced as a result of the vaccine - so that’s success!
I don’t remember any of the scientists claiming the immunity from the vaccine would last forever, so no lies have been told. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout
This vaccine isn't general medicine, this is something that was waved in people's faces and hyped up as a ticket to freedom, the path to utopia. It isn't that is it? "
while i disagree with your hyperbole, I agree that we were not given the nuances position that we did not know, possibly could not know, how long it would be at full effectiveness for.
I do wonder, if we had been given the position of boosters being needed, what would have changed ?
It's vaccines or lockdown as far as I can see. Given case numbers it is hard to see we could have had an open summer if the cases: hospitalisations would have been at pre vaccine levels.
I suspect most people have made their vaccine views before any data was published. We are (on all sides) probably now just looking for stories to support our views. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout
Are you denying that this vaccine has fallen far short of the standards that it was pushed on to the public with?
I'm using your logic. Anything less than perfect is failure.
Quite clearly medicine is genocide. The greatest genocide in all humanity. Billions of innocent people murdered.
Swerved the question.
My great grandmother was on thyroid medication. Before Victorian times her (my) diagnosis was a death sentence. Since then a totally normal life could be achieved.
She died nearly 30 years ago.
Forgive me, I'm overcome to discover that the medication I take played a role in Nan's death. That she was a victim of the greatest genocide the world has ever known.
"
You ever considered a career as a drift racer? Maybe a slalom skiier? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout
This vaccine isn't general medicine, this is something that was waved in people's faces and hyped up as a ticket to freedom, the path to utopia. It isn't that is it? while i disagree with your hyperbole, I agree that we were not given the nuances position that we did not know, possibly could not know, how long it would be at full effectiveness for.
I do wonder, if we had been given the position of boosters being needed, what would have changed ?
It's vaccines or lockdown as far as I can see. Given case numbers it is hard to see we could have had an open summer if the cases: hospitalisations would have been at pre vaccine levels.
I suspect most people have made their vaccine views before any data was published. We are (on all sides) probably now just looking for stories to support our views. "
We aren't. We are both vaccinated. So forgive us if now we feel like we have been sold short on the substance injected into us. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout
This vaccine isn't general medicine, this is something that was waved in people's faces and hyped up as a ticket to freedom, the path to utopia. It isn't that is it? while i disagree with your hyperbole, I agree that we were not given the nuances position that we did not know, possibly could not know, how long it would be at full effectiveness for.
I do wonder, if we had been given the position of boosters being needed, what would have changed ?
It's vaccines or lockdown as far as I can see. Given case numbers it is hard to see we could have had an open summer if the cases: hospitalisations would have been at pre vaccine levels.
I suspect most people have made their vaccine views before any data was published. We are (on all sides) probably now just looking for stories to support our views.
We aren't. We are both vaccinated. So forgive us if now we feel like we have been sold short on the substance injected into us. "
I wasn't meaning to imply you were anti vaccines. More that views don't change much for most people (I'm guessing, possibly wrongly, you were slightly conflicted to start with).
Im intrigued. If you had known then what you knew today, what would you have done ?
And are you annoyed at scientists or politicians? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout
This vaccine isn't general medicine, this is something that was waved in people's faces and hyped up as a ticket to freedom, the path to utopia. It isn't that is it? while i disagree with your hyperbole, I agree that we were not given the nuances position that we did not know, possibly could not know, how long it would be at full effectiveness for.
I do wonder, if we had been given the position of boosters being needed, what would have changed ?
It's vaccines or lockdown as far as I can see. Given case numbers it is hard to see we could have had an open summer if the cases: hospitalisations would have been at pre vaccine levels.
I suspect most people have made their vaccine views before any data was published. We are (on all sides) probably now just looking for stories to support our views.
We aren't. We are both vaccinated. So forgive us if now we feel like we have been sold short on the substance injected into us. I wasn't meaning to imply you were anti vaccines. More that views don't change much for most people (I'm guessing, possibly wrongly, you were slightly conflicted to start with).
Im intrigued. If you had known then what you knew today, what would you have done ?
And are you annoyed at scientists or politicians? "
I probably would have waited to see if any advances were made for vaccine longevity. There is always trial and error with science, having said that I believe that medical science should be far more effective than it is, especially surrounding pandemic possibilities. But, Politicians are who I place blame with, I believe they would have been informed that the vaccines would have quite a severe efficacy drop off and they still pushed it as the golden ticket to get out of lockdowns. Now, it feels like this is going to cycle over and over with lockdowns as variants emerge and put people down and then a wave of vaccines or boosters being the route out |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The way I see the situation is this.
The vaccines were tested to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines were shown to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines are still preventing hospitalisations and deaths.
Some people hoped they might confer sterilising immunity. They don't seem to, or if they do it's temporary.
This was communicated badly.
People seem to expect much more than was claimed.
Therefore... the vaccines which are doing exactly what they claim to do have failed? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout
This vaccine isn't general medicine, this is something that was waved in people's faces and hyped up as a ticket to freedom, the path to utopia. It isn't that is it? while i disagree with your hyperbole, I agree that we were not given the nuances position that we did not know, possibly could not know, how long it would be at full effectiveness for.
I do wonder, if we had been given the position of boosters being needed, what would have changed ?
It's vaccines or lockdown as far as I can see. Given case numbers it is hard to see we could have had an open summer if the cases: hospitalisations would have been at pre vaccine levels.
I suspect most people have made their vaccine views before any data was published. We are (on all sides) probably now just looking for stories to support our views.
We aren't. We are both vaccinated. So forgive us if now we feel like we have been sold short on the substance injected into us. I wasn't meaning to imply you were anti vaccines. More that views don't change much for most people (I'm guessing, possibly wrongly, you were slightly conflicted to start with).
Im intrigued. If you had known then what you knew today, what would you have done ?
And are you annoyed at scientists or politicians?
I probably would have waited to see if any advances were made for vaccine longevity. There is always trial and error with science, having said that I believe that medical science should be far more effective than it is, especially surrounding pandemic possibilities. But, Politicians are who I place blame with, I believe they would have been informed that the vaccines would have quite a severe efficacy drop off and they still pushed it as the golden ticket to get out of lockdowns. Now, it feels like this is going to cycle over and over with lockdowns as variants emerge and put people down and then a wave of vaccines or boosters being the route out"
I'm annoyed at how politicised this all is and I suspect it may have led to poorer health decisions along the way. That said ... Unless having an old vaccine precludes from having a better one in the future, I don't think there has been any health loss. And for me, if ten trade off is vaccine (albeit not a silver bullet) versus further lockdowns, I'm happy with my choice. While still be pissed at how this has been dealt with outside the science. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"The way I see the situation is this.
The vaccines were tested to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines were shown to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines are still preventing hospitalisations and deaths.
Some people hoped they might confer sterilising immunity. They don't seem to, or if they do it's temporary.
This was communicated badly.
People seem to expect much more than was claimed.
Therefore... the vaccines which are doing exactly what they claim to do have failed?"
You missed off the %
It is the drop in % that people are disappointed with.
Not sure anyone is saying they don’t work re reducing hospitalisation and death. Just not doing it as well (after a period of time) that we had all been told. It is disappointing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The way I see the situation is this.
The vaccines were tested to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines were shown to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines are still preventing hospitalisations and deaths.
Some people hoped they might confer sterilising immunity. They don't seem to, or if they do it's temporary.
This was communicated badly.
People seem to expect much more than was claimed.
Therefore... the vaccines which are doing exactly what they claim to do have failed?"
It does make you wonder what, and who, people are really angry at. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Quote from BBC... Prof Eran Segal, who advises the Israeli government on Covid matters, said by month five or six after vaccination, people are probably only 30-40% protected, compared with more than 90% when protection first kicks in.
The situation in Israel apparently being driven by the effectiveness hailing off.
Full story.. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58432776
They go on to say...
Despite this fall, vaccination still prevents a substantial amount of sickness, with the unvaccinated becoming severely ill with Covid about nine times as often in over-60s, and twice as often in younger people.
Be interesting to understand what exactly Is meant by 40% effective. And how it is determined. I'd assume there is a standard process to establish a vaccines efficacy? "
Until you catch the viris there us no way of knowing the efficacy of a vaccine, and the increasing cases of covid among the vaccinated shows the efficacy is extremely low in the vacancies on offer. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see the situation is this.
The vaccines were tested to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines were shown to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines are still preventing hospitalisations and deaths.
Some people hoped they might confer sterilising immunity. They don't seem to, or if they do it's temporary.
This was communicated badly.
People seem to expect much more than was claimed.
Therefore... the vaccines which are doing exactly what they claim to do have failed?
You missed off the %
It is the drop in % that people are disappointed with.
Not sure anyone is saying they don’t work re reducing hospitalisation and death. Just not doing it as well (after a period of time) that we had all been told. It is disappointing."
The reduction in efficacy stuff I've seen has been about transmission and mild disease. Which was never part of the bargain.
My thyroid medication promises me a normal metabolism (if I keep taking my pills) and a normal life, up from (pre Victorian times) a long drawn out death. It doesn't promise to make me a size 8, but weight loss can be associated with a normal metabolism.
The vaccine stuff is like me getting pissed off that I'm not a size 8 - even though the medication I take is the reason I'm alive, and indeed has seen relatives of mine live into their 90s to die of old age/unrelated stuff. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"The way I see the situation is this.
The vaccines were tested to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines were shown to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines are still preventing hospitalisations and deaths.
Some people hoped they might confer sterilising immunity. They don't seem to, or if they do it's temporary.
This was communicated badly.
People seem to expect much more than was claimed.
Therefore... the vaccines which are doing exactly what they claim to do have failed?
It does make you wonder what, and who, people are really angry at."
answering for me only: like many I struggled thru lockdown. IF policians have gone all guns blazing into freedom Day on the basis of the vaccines being a silver bullet, and because of that we need to go into a hard lock down again (that's all IFS I admit) then I'm gonna be pissed at them when moderation was also on the table. I'm holding fire ATM, but reports like these do put me on edge slightly. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"The way I see the situation is this.
The vaccines were tested to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines were shown to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines are still preventing hospitalisations and deaths.
Some people hoped they might confer sterilising immunity. They don't seem to, or if they do it's temporary.
This was communicated badly.
People seem to expect much more than was claimed.
Therefore... the vaccines which are doing exactly what they claim to do have failed?
You missed off the %
It is the drop in % that people are disappointed with.
Not sure anyone is saying they don’t work re reducing hospitalisation and death. Just not doing it as well (after a period of time) that we had all been told. It is disappointing."
“…… It is the drop in % that people are disappointed with.…”
—————————-
When the vaccines were being developed, none of the scientists claimed that the immunity from the vaccine would last forever.
Quite frankly, they didn’t know how long immunity would last for, so no claims or promises were made to that effect.
So, people like me are not disappointed at all because I never expected the protection to last indefinitely.
From the onset I anticipated that we would need booster jabs just like we do with the flu, so none of this has come to me as a surprise at all.
If anything what’s happening now is what I expected.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable. "
It's a good job then that these vaccines are effective and working so well, isn't it? . Tens of thousands of deaths have been and continue to be prevented by them. The freedoms that we've got back are also due to the vaccines. I assume you're not saying that we should return to lockdown etc. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Quote from BBC... Prof Eran Segal, who advises the Israeli government on Covid matters, said by month five or six after vaccination, people are probably only 30-40% protected, compared with more than 90% when protection first kicks in.
The situation in Israel apparently being driven by the effectiveness hailing off.
Full story.. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-58432776
They go on to say...
Despite this fall, vaccination still prevents a substantial amount of sickness, with the unvaccinated becoming severely ill with Covid about nine times as often in over-60s, and twice as often in younger people.
Be interesting to understand what exactly Is meant by 40% effective. And how it is determined. I'd assume there is a standard process to establish a vaccines efficacy?
Until you catch the viris there us no way of knowing the efficacy of a vaccine, and the increasing cases of covid among the vaccinated shows the efficacy is extremely low in the vacancies on offer."
That's incorrect. Their efficacy is very, very high. Their effectiveness in the real world is very high too. You probably didn't read the appropriate scientific literature. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I wouldn't be surprised if the length of effectiveness keeps slowly getting whittled down until someone says, you know what, we rushed the vaccines, they are not that good, so we are going to keep working on it and you will all have to be revaccinated when we get it right. Until then, live with it and the restrictions...
Have you ever seen how the vaccines are developed and tested over and over again ?
We are not in the 1960's anymore
Exactly, it's not, so a vaccine that provides pretty short lived protection against a global pandemic, to me, is unacceptable.
It's a good job then that these vaccines are effective and working so well, isn't it? . Tens of thousands of deaths have been and continue to be prevented by them. The freedoms that we've got back are also due to the vaccines. I assume you're not saying that we should return to lockdown etc. "
No, I'm not, but I believe that this lockdown on and off again will continue and that the length of protection the vaccines actually give will be the cause of them. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see the situation is this.
The vaccines were tested to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines were shown to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines are still preventing hospitalisations and deaths.
Some people hoped they might confer sterilising immunity. They don't seem to, or if they do it's temporary.
This was communicated badly.
People seem to expect much more than was claimed.
Therefore... the vaccines which are doing exactly what they claim to do have failed?
You missed off the %
It is the drop in % that people are disappointed with.
Not sure anyone is saying they don’t work re reducing hospitalisation and death. Just not doing it as well (after a period of time) that we had all been told. It is disappointing.
“…… It is the drop in % that people are disappointed with.…”
—————————-
When the vaccines were being developed, none of the scientists claimed that the immunity from the vaccine would last forever.
Quite frankly, they didn’t know how long immunity would last for, so no claims or promises were made to that effect.
So, people like me are not disappointed at all because I never expected the protection to last indefinitely.
From the onset I anticipated that we would need booster jabs just like we do with the flu, so none of this has come to me as a surprise at all.
If anything what’s happening now is what I expected.
"
I remember the Trump warp speed thing saying they'd help fund anything over 50% effectiveness. Which would have been a reduction in the burden we face, but much less of a reduction than what we have.
The fact we've got things that are this good is bloody incredible, to be honest, and I'm really grateful. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"The way I see the situation is this.
The vaccines were tested to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines were shown to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines are still preventing hospitalisations and deaths.
Some people hoped they might confer sterilising immunity. They don't seem to, or if they do it's temporary.
This was communicated badly.
People seem to expect much more than was claimed.
Therefore... the vaccines which are doing exactly what they claim to do have failed?
You missed off the %
It is the drop in % that people are disappointed with.
Not sure anyone is saying they don’t work re reducing hospitalisation and death. Just not doing it as well (after a period of time) that we had all been told. It is disappointing.
The reduction in efficacy stuff I've seen has been about transmission and mild disease. Which was never part of the bargain.
My thyroid medication promises me a normal metabolism (if I keep taking my pills) and a normal life, up from (pre Victorian times) a long drawn out death. It doesn't promise to make me a size 8, but weight loss can be associated with a normal metabolism.
The vaccine stuff is like me getting pissed off that I'm not a size 8 - even though the medication I take is the reason I'm alive, and indeed has seen relatives of mine live into their 90s to die of old age/unrelated stuff."
But that isn’t what the article linked to in the OP says...
“Prof Eran Segal, who advises the Israeli government on Covid matters, said by month five or six after vaccination, people are probably only 30-40% protected, compared with more than 90% when protection first kicks in.”
So that is 90% protected from serious illness and death reducing to 30-40%. So not transmission or mild disease! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see the situation is this.
The vaccines were tested to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines were shown to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines are still preventing hospitalisations and deaths.
Some people hoped they might confer sterilising immunity. They don't seem to, or if they do it's temporary.
This was communicated badly.
People seem to expect much more than was claimed.
Therefore... the vaccines which are doing exactly what they claim to do have failed?
You missed off the %
It is the drop in % that people are disappointed with.
Not sure anyone is saying they don’t work re reducing hospitalisation and death. Just not doing it as well (after a period of time) that we had all been told. It is disappointing.
The reduction in efficacy stuff I've seen has been about transmission and mild disease. Which was never part of the bargain.
My thyroid medication promises me a normal metabolism (if I keep taking my pills) and a normal life, up from (pre Victorian times) a long drawn out death. It doesn't promise to make me a size 8, but weight loss can be associated with a normal metabolism.
The vaccine stuff is like me getting pissed off that I'm not a size 8 - even though the medication I take is the reason I'm alive, and indeed has seen relatives of mine live into their 90s to die of old age/unrelated stuff.
But that isn’t what the article linked to in the OP says...
“Prof Eran Segal, who advises the Israeli government on Covid matters, said by month five or six after vaccination, people are probably only 30-40% protected, compared with more than 90% when protection first kicks in.”
So that is 90% protected from serious illness and death reducing to 30-40%. So not transmission or mild disease!"
Frankly, the sentence is entirely unclear and could be read in several ways. To know if you're correct, we'd have to see words like "against severe disease".
It is also consistent with (see my addition in stars):
"Prof Eran Segal, who advises the Israeli government on Covid matters, said by month five or six after vaccination, people are probably only 30-40% protected *against asymptomatic infection*, compared with more than 90% when protection first kicks in.”
Protection drops in something. That something isn't defined. I'm not convinced it's severe disease, to be honest, because I don't think the data I've seen bears that out. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"The way I see the situation is this.
The vaccines were tested to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines were shown to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines are still preventing hospitalisations and deaths.
Some people hoped they might confer sterilising immunity. They don't seem to, or if they do it's temporary.
This was communicated badly.
People seem to expect much more than was claimed.
Therefore... the vaccines which are doing exactly what they claim to do have failed?
You missed off the %
It is the drop in % that people are disappointed with.
Not sure anyone is saying they don’t work re reducing hospitalisation and death. Just not doing it as well (after a period of time) that we had all been told. It is disappointing.
The reduction in efficacy stuff I've seen has been about transmission and mild disease. Which was never part of the bargain.
My thyroid medication promises me a normal metabolism (if I keep taking my pills) and a normal life, up from (pre Victorian times) a long drawn out death. It doesn't promise to make me a size 8, but weight loss can be associated with a normal metabolism.
The vaccine stuff is like me getting pissed off that I'm not a size 8 - even though the medication I take is the reason I'm alive, and indeed has seen relatives of mine live into their 90s to die of old age/unrelated stuff.
But that isn’t what the article linked to in the OP says...
“Prof Eran Segal, who advises the Israeli government on Covid matters, said by month five or six after vaccination, people are probably only 30-40% protected, compared with more than 90% when protection first kicks in.”
So that is 90% protected from serious illness and death reducing to 30-40%. So not transmission or mild disease!
Frankly, the sentence is entirely unclear and could be read in several ways. To know if you're correct, we'd have to see words like "against severe disease".
It is also consistent with (see my addition in stars):
"Prof Eran Segal, who advises the Israeli government on Covid matters, said by month five or six after vaccination, people are probably only 30-40% protected *against asymptomatic infection*, compared with more than 90% when protection first kicks in.”
Protection drops in something. That something isn't defined. I'm not convinced it's severe disease, to be honest, because I don't think the data I've seen bears that out."
Hmmm except the 90% figure has been roundly and widely touted to mean protection from serious illness.
And you know that.
As I said initially, I agree and respect with the vast majority of what you say but here it feels like you are twisting the narrative.
To be honest I hope you are correct, but few people reading that quote would have that take away. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The way I see the situation is this.
The vaccines were tested to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines were shown to prevent hospitalisation and death.
The vaccines are still preventing hospitalisations and deaths.
Some people hoped they might confer sterilising immunity. They don't seem to, or if they do it's temporary.
This was communicated badly.
People seem to expect much more than was claimed.
Therefore... the vaccines which are doing exactly what they claim to do have failed?
You missed off the %
It is the drop in % that people are disappointed with.
Not sure anyone is saying they don’t work re reducing hospitalisation and death. Just not doing it as well (after a period of time) that we had all been told. It is disappointing.
The reduction in efficacy stuff I've seen has been about transmission and mild disease. Which was never part of the bargain.
My thyroid medication promises me a normal metabolism (if I keep taking my pills) and a normal life, up from (pre Victorian times) a long drawn out death. It doesn't promise to make me a size 8, but weight loss can be associated with a normal metabolism.
The vaccine stuff is like me getting pissed off that I'm not a size 8 - even though the medication I take is the reason I'm alive, and indeed has seen relatives of mine live into their 90s to die of old age/unrelated stuff.
But that isn’t what the article linked to in the OP says...
“Prof Eran Segal, who advises the Israeli government on Covid matters, said by month five or six after vaccination, people are probably only 30-40% protected, compared with more than 90% when protection first kicks in.”
So that is 90% protected from serious illness and death reducing to 30-40%. So not transmission or mild disease!
Frankly, the sentence is entirely unclear and could be read in several ways. To know if you're correct, we'd have to see words like "against severe disease".
It is also consistent with (see my addition in stars):
"Prof Eran Segal, who advises the Israeli government on Covid matters, said by month five or six after vaccination, people are probably only 30-40% protected *against asymptomatic infection*, compared with more than 90% when protection first kicks in.”
Protection drops in something. That something isn't defined. I'm not convinced it's severe disease, to be honest, because I don't think the data I've seen bears that out.
Hmmm except the 90% figure has been roundly and widely touted to mean protection from serious illness.
And you know that.
As I said initially, I agree and respect with the vast majority of what you say but here it feels like you are twisting the narrative.
To be honest I hope you are correct, but few people reading that quote would have that take away."
I'm not saying I know for sure. I'm saying - read the sentence. It's consistent both with "drop in protection against infection" and "drop in protection against hospitalisation".
You're reading the latter in. It doesn't say that.
You may be correct that that's what meant. I don't know.
I think we'd be seeing such a drop in the UK in the form of hospitalisation and death in the over 60s here, if it were definitely true that protection against severe disease drops that rapidly. If memory serves (Indie Sage broadcast before last), half of hospitalisations at that time were in the under 50s, suggesting that the over 50s (the most fragile of which were fully vaccinated over six months ago) are still protected.
I'm not trying to twist, I'm trying to reconcile my understanding. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don’t understand why people are so insistent on taking the jab when stories like these indicate the jabs are pretty ineffective? I just don’t get it "
Read all the other factual reports which show vaccines cut death & illness dramatically. They cause less side effects than you get from catching Covid and they help your body become ‘aware’ of Covid allowing your body to build up its own ability to fight the virus & its variants.
It is highly likely we will need to have annual shots along the lines of the Flu jabs to boost defences.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I don’t understand why people are so insistent on taking the jab when stories like these indicate the jabs are pretty ineffective? I just don’t get it
Read all the other factual reports which show vaccines cut death & illness dramatically. They cause less side effects than you get from catching Covid and they help your body become ‘aware’ of Covid allowing your body to build up its own ability to fight the virus & its variants.
It is highly likely we will need to have annual shots along the lines of the Flu jabs to boost defences.
"
I caught COVID when I was unvaccinated yet my symptoms were trivial compared to my colleagues who had had 2xAZ jabs. My symptoms were also trivial compared to several of my friend's reactions to their first injections which took them out of work for seven to ten days. I think more research needs to be done into finding out why certain people are either asymptomatic or don't get severe symptoms, it seems to me like identifying what promotes natural immunity is just as valid as blanket-vaccinating everyone, especially now that we are seeing limited effectiveness vs what was originally predicted. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"I don’t understand why people are so insistent on taking the jab when stories like these indicate the jabs are pretty ineffective? I just don’t get it
Read all the other factual reports which show vaccines cut death & illness dramatically. They cause less side effects than you get from catching Covid and they help your body become ‘aware’ of Covid allowing your body to build up its own ability to fight the virus & its variants.
It is highly likely we will need to have annual shots along the lines of the Flu jabs to boost defences.
I caught COVID when I was unvaccinated yet my symptoms were trivial compared to my colleagues who had had 2xAZ jabs. My symptoms were also trivial compared to several of my friend's reactions to their first injections which took them out of work for seven to ten days. I think more research needs to be done into finding out why certain people are either asymptomatic or don't get severe symptoms, it seems to me like identifying what promotes natural immunity is just as valid as blanket-vaccinating everyone, especially now that we are seeing limited effectiveness vs what was originally predicted. "
You realise that sounds a lot like “how can there be global warming when it’s cold today?” Yeah? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
I seriously just can't figure out people's logic, are yous really just spitting out studies done by these pharma companies them selves.
This time last year "without a vaccine, let me remind you" there was less cases and deaths in most place around the world then there is now. Please do explain how it is working so well. And before you all try throw in the old delta "India" variant, the country has 1.4 billion people in it and if you were to look at the deaths per million cases was never as bad as was made out. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
This is the thing that gets me... It's not even failure. It's doing everything it said it would, really well.
But because it doesn't do other stuff it "failed".
Good grief "
So. Here is my point. Not saying it's not working. Not saying dont have it. I'm saying. Publish accurate up to date information for all relevant covid vaccines with risks and benefits for age groups and sexes and this will allow people to make an informed decision on what they wish to do for their health. Stop quoting misinformation and deliberately vague statements of how much it helps stop infections. The risks of covid and the vaccine are not the same for all age groups and for all sexes and for all variants. One minute it's the old that are vulnerable the next it's 16 year olds are now vulnerable and must be jabbed. If that's the case let's see the risk benefit analysis and crack on. The benefits are not the same. People have died as a result of the vaccines, many more have died of the virus. Stop quoting efficacy rates that are meaningless out of date or inaccurate. Stop saying the virus is harmless, it clearly isn't for some people, Stop saying that efficacy tailing off in 5 months is actually OK when it very clearly isn't a good thing.... And so on. Just let's have the accurate facts, published for everyone and let's make our own decision and then let's move on. The bull that both sides of the debate keep spouting and spreading is not helping anyone but their own ego.
And stop saying whatever the question is. That the answer is have two jabs and take no other precautions. There was a narrative spread far and wide 3 months ago that the vaxes were little miracles in a needle. And now we are seeing that they aren't. We also see that they reduce serious symptoms and perhaps deaths too. So they are generally, for a lot of people doing good things. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *D835Man
over a year ago
London |
"I don’t understand why people are so insistent on taking the jab when stories like these indicate the jabs are pretty ineffective? I just don’t get it
Read all the other factual reports which show vaccines cut death & illness dramatically. They cause less side effects than you get from catching Covid and they help your body become ‘aware’ of Covid allowing your body to build up its own ability to fight the virus & its variants.
It is highly likely we will need to have annual shots along the lines of the Flu jabs to boost defences.
I caught COVID when I was unvaccinated yet my symptoms were trivial compared to my colleagues who had had 2xAZ jabs. My symptoms were also trivial compared to several of my friend's reactions to their first injections which took them out of work for seven to ten days. I think more research needs to be done into finding out why certain people are either asymptomatic or don't get severe symptoms, it seems to me like identifying what promotes natural immunity is just as valid as blanket-vaccinating everyone, especially now that we are seeing limited effectiveness vs what was originally predicted. "
All of that research you mentioned above is going on right now. We don’t know the answer to those questions yet. It will take some time before any firm conclusions are drawn - probably years.
In the meantime, we know that the vaccine has been effective in reducing hospitalisations & deaths. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
The vaccines were trumpted by EVERYONE that they reduced the chance of serious illness by c.90-95%.
... And at one point, the narrative was that they would also reduce the risk of transmission. But having seen a number of family, friends and colleagues who were recently double vaccinated end up contracting the bug and experiencing fairly serious side effects, it really does seem to not be doing quite what it is meant to do.
I think the vaccines are a good thing. They are one of the weapons we have in our arsenal to fight this horrible virus. The more weapons we have the better. I am sure the vaccines will be refined, updated and improved over time, however...
The rhetoric is slowly changing as evident in this thread. Sadly (very sadly) the vaccines appear to be not as good as we were being told (repeatedly and vocally by the great and good AND folks on here).
Go back just a matter of weeks and some people on here were trying to claim some form or moral high ground by implying they took the vaccine for the good of society (rather than being honest and admitting their PRIMARY driver was protecting themselves) and many were trying to socially shame anyone (both anti vaxxers and hesitants) by shouting about how the vaccines reduce transmission. Again, very sadly, this is now in doubt.
And yet we now have people trying to rewrite history saying “oh we never said that”! Well sorry to say you and many others most certainly did.
For avoidance of doubt - the vaccines are good, just not as good as we were led to believe. Very sad. Hope they fix it! "
Very well said. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout
Are you denying that this vaccine has fallen far short of the standards that it was pushed on to the public with?
I'm using your logic. Anything less than perfect is failure.
Quite clearly medicine is genocide. The greatest genocide in all humanity. Billions of innocent people murdered."
Nobody on here has said anything less than perfect is failure. A few more people are now questioning the claims that were being made only a few months ago and crowed about to bully and belittle those who were not as comfortable believing the stories. It seems 3 months on the numbers and the narrative have changed. Nobody is saying they are a failure. Just that they are not the miracle that we were being sold a few months ago. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I seriously just can't figure out people's logic, are yous really just spitting out studies done by these pharma companies them selves.
This time last year "without a vaccine, let me remind you" there was less cases and deaths in most place around the world then there is now. Please do explain how it is working so well. And before you all try throw in the old delta "India" variant, the country has 1.4 billion people in it and if you were to look at the deaths per million cases was never as bad as was made out. "
a good point well made. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I seriously just can't figure out people's logic, are yous really just spitting out studies done by these pharma companies them selves.
This time last year "without a vaccine, let me remind you" there was less cases and deaths in most place around the world then there is now. Please do explain how it is working so well. And before you all try throw in the old delta "India" variant, the country has 1.4 billion people in it and if you were to look at the deaths per million cases was never as bad as was made out. "
India’s reported deaths per million figures is pure fiction, it is without doubt many many times higher than the official number. Secondly average age in India is only 28, with a virus with mortality very much driven by age they are naturally going to have low deaths/100,000 compared to an elderly nation like ours! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I seriously just can't figure out people's logic, are yous really just spitting out studies done by these pharma companies them selves.
This time last year "without a vaccine, let me remind you" there was less cases and deaths in most place around the world then there is now. Please do explain how it is working so well. And before you all try throw in the old delta "India" variant, the country has 1.4 billion people in it and if you were to look at the deaths per million cases was never as bad as was made out.
India’s reported deaths per million figures is pure fiction, it is without doubt many many times higher than the official number. Secondly average age in India is only 28, with a virus with mortality very much driven by age they are naturally going to have low deaths/100,000 compared to an elderly nation like ours!"
So explain how come most deaths around the world was with people who had other underlying health issues and they died with' instead of died of covid!!!
You test for anything so much and sure you are going to find something. If I thought it was as serious as they were making it out to be, with younger and healthy people dropping like flies, I would have been one of the first to line up to get vaccinated.
Sure covid is real, but I think the narrative of fear around it is blown way out of proportion. I know plenty of people who have had it and recovered and even 1 or 2 that still suffer with long covid. But sure even if you catch the flu or pneumonia they can have long lasting effects too. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout
Are you denying that this vaccine has fallen far short of the standards that it was pushed on to the public with?
I'm using your logic. Anything less than perfect is failure.
Quite clearly medicine is genocide. The greatest genocide in all humanity. Billions of innocent people murdered.
Nobody on here has said anything less than perfect is failure. A few more people are now questioning the claims that were being made only a few months ago and crowed about to bully and belittle those who were not as comfortable believing the stories. It seems 3 months on the numbers and the narrative have changed. Nobody is saying they are a failure. Just that they are not the miracle that we were being sold a few months ago. "
It depends on which 'miracle' people think they were sold. The trials research evidence is freely available and hasn't changed, this includes the efficacy and safety data. There are many vaccines in use here and overseas, each of them quite different. None of the published evidence made any promises, including of miracles.
We have 2 tools to reduce the damage of the virus - restrictions and vaccines. In the real world, the context changes in many ways, including viral mutations, behaviour and restrictions in place.
It obviously was the right thing to introduce the vaccines to us, especially now as the restrictions are reduced. It has saved tens of thousands of lives. The virus also causes Organ damage and, including to the lungs, heart and brain. Prevention of lifelong disabilities is a key benefit for us all.
Over time we will have more research evidence that's peer reviewed being published. That's the only news that counts.
The UK has yet to publish its policy on booster jabs. They may be offered to many. In any event, the vaccines are very safe and have turned the UK around and are largely all that is keeping us alive. I do wonder if a lot of the song and dance that's ongoing is from a fair few who aren't vaccinated and want to diminish how phenomenal they have been for every single one of us. Some of them perhaps were also against restrictions and we'd have had a much worse nightmare that we'd be dealing with, without the intelligent use of those 2 tools. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout
Are you denying that this vaccine has fallen far short of the standards that it was pushed on to the public with?
I'm using your logic. Anything less than perfect is failure.
Quite clearly medicine is genocide. The greatest genocide in all humanity. Billions of innocent people murdered.
Nobody on here has said anything less than perfect is failure. A few more people are now questioning the claims that were being made only a few months ago and crowed about to bully and belittle those who were not as comfortable believing the stories. It seems 3 months on the numbers and the narrative have changed. Nobody is saying they are a failure. Just that they are not the miracle that we were being sold a few months ago.
It depends on which 'miracle' people think they were sold. The trials research evidence is freely available and hasn't changed, this includes the efficacy and safety data. There are many vaccines in use here and overseas, each of them quite different. None of the published evidence made any promises, including of miracles.
We have 2 tools to reduce the damage of the virus - restrictions and vaccines. In the real world, the context changes in many ways, including viral mutations, behaviour and restrictions in place.
It obviously was the right thing to introduce the vaccines to us, especially now as the restrictions are reduced. It has saved tens of thousands of lives. The virus also causes Organ damage and, including to the lungs, heart and brain. Prevention of lifelong disabilities is a key benefit for us all.
Over time we will have more research evidence that's peer reviewed being published. That's the only news that counts.
The UK has yet to publish its policy on booster jabs. They may be offered to many. In any event, the vaccines are very safe and have turned the UK around and are largely all that is keeping us alive. I do wonder if a lot of the song and dance that's ongoing is from a fair few who aren't vaccinated and want to diminish how phenomenal they have been for every single one of us. Some of them perhaps were also against restrictions and we'd have had a much worse nightmare that we'd be dealing with, without the intelligent use of those 2 tools. "
So 200 deaths and x amount of thousands of daily infections in the middle of summer is a sign of success to you of the vaccine rollout !!!?
Staggard once again on the lack of critical thought abd mindless repeating of the government mantra that all is okay ....wait for winter
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
The problem we have is that we locked down and not enough fit healthy people had it when the should have. Now if we had not have locked down we would almost certainly be seeing less infections now |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The problem we have is that we locked down and not enough fit healthy people had it when the should have. Now if we had not have locked down we would almost certainly be seeing less infections now "
only 7 mil confirmed infections in this country since January last year.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"The problem we have is that we locked down and not enough fit healthy people had it when the should have. Now if we had not have locked down we would almost certainly be seeing less infections now only 7 mil confirmed infections in this country since January last year. "
less than 11% of the country by this stage for the vaccines to actually be effective at least 40% of the population would needed to have had covid to be able to really slow the spread.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Effectiveness can be divided into several categories. Prevention of: infection (asymptomatic), symptomatic infection, hospitalisation, ventilation, and death. (The categories aren't always used or consistently)
Waning immunity tends to refer to asymptomatic and mild disease.
The vaccines were developed to prevent hospitalisation and death - and they still do that quite well.
It's amazing that the vaccines can block infection at all, but we tend not to expect this of other vaccines and it's not what the Covid vaccines were tested for.
The media is horrendously unclear on all of this. "
I completely agree with you that the media has been horrendous with this as they have pretty much everything in the last twenty years.
Iraq war,wmds, Syrian gas attacks, Russian meddling, trump, Brexit, banking crisis.
Is it any wonder at all people have lost faith in there institutions!. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Effectiveness can be divided into several categories. Prevention of: infection (asymptomatic), symptomatic infection, hospitalisation, ventilation, and death. (The categories aren't always used or consistently)
Waning immunity tends to refer to asymptomatic and mild disease.
The vaccines were developed to prevent hospitalisation and death - and they still do that quite well.
It's amazing that the vaccines can block infection at all, but we tend not to expect this of other vaccines and it's not what the Covid vaccines were tested for.
The media is horrendously unclear on all of this.
I completely agree with you that the media has been horrendous with this as they have pretty much everything in the last twenty years.
Iraq war,wmds, Syrian gas attacks, Russian meddling, trump, Brexit, banking crisis.
Is it any wonder at all people have lost faith in there institutions!."
It's why I ignored the media and went straight to scientists |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout
Are you denying that this vaccine has fallen far short of the standards that it was pushed on to the public with?
I'm using your logic. Anything less than perfect is failure.
Quite clearly medicine is genocide. The greatest genocide in all humanity. Billions of innocent people murdered.
Nobody on here has said anything less than perfect is failure. A few more people are now questioning the claims that were being made only a few months ago and crowed about to bully and belittle those who were not as comfortable believing the stories. It seems 3 months on the numbers and the narrative have changed. Nobody is saying they are a failure. Just that they are not the miracle that we were being sold a few months ago.
It depends on which 'miracle' people think they were sold. The trials research evidence is freely available and hasn't changed, this includes the efficacy and safety data. There are many vaccines in use here and overseas, each of them quite different. None of the published evidence made any promises, including of miracles.
We have 2 tools to reduce the damage of the virus - restrictions and vaccines. In the real world, the context changes in many ways, including viral mutations, behaviour and restrictions in place.
It obviously was the right thing to introduce the vaccines to us, especially now as the restrictions are reduced. It has saved tens of thousands of lives. The virus also causes Organ damage and, including to the lungs, heart and brain. Prevention of lifelong disabilities is a key benefit for us all.
Over time we will have more research evidence that's peer reviewed being published. That's the only news that counts.
The UK has yet to publish its policy on booster jabs. They may be offered to many. In any event, the vaccines are very safe and have turned the UK around and are largely all that is keeping us alive. I do wonder if a lot of the song and dance that's ongoing is from a fair few who aren't vaccinated and want to diminish how phenomenal they have been for every single one of us. Some of them perhaps were also against restrictions and we'd have had a much worse nightmare that we'd be dealing with, without the intelligent use of those 2 tools.
So 200 deaths and x amount of thousands of daily infections in the middle of summer is a sign of success to you of the vaccine rollout !!!?
Staggard once again on the lack of critical thought abd mindless repeating of the government mantra that all is okay ....wait for winter
"
success is relative I suspect. Without vaccines what would these numbers had looked like ? What rate of death would have been a success ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It just sounds like one big con to me now to make money from the jabs
Making money from the jabs we can get for FREE. Make it make sense!
They are not free. They are (currently) paid for by the Govt. Guess where the Govt gets the money? Our taxes. So we are paying. The profit motive will be long term as any discounted price now will be discontinued and boosters become the norm.
The pharma companies are and will make a LOT of money and we are paying them (indirectly through tax)."
Obviously, but nothing immediately comes out of your pocket was the point being made here. Nobody is paying Pfizer or AstraZeneca for a jab directly.
How much extra are we being taxed for the vaccines per person? £0.000001p? It's not something you can easily quantify because taxes pay for so many things and unless there is a tax rise linked directly to the Covid jab itself it's basically free to the end user. Also if you don't work for whatever reason then you don't pay taxes, so there goes that argument. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"If we only did anything that was 100% guaranteed success in the way we want it to be then we would never do anything, nothing would ever advance. Success comes from failing well.
Behave. That made up trope may work for the gym or trying a cooking recipe, but not when lives are literally on the line. It's not good enough but if you think it is, cool.
By your logic doctors are murderers. Lives are on the line. All medical intervention has a success rate under 100%. As a result, people die.
Shut the hospitals. Abolish the NHS. End medicine and prosecute the mass murderers.
Medicine is the greatest crime against humanity that's ever been perpetrated, going on for thousands of years.
Chewing bark thousands of years ago did not bring about immortality!
Why, it makes Hitler look like a Boy Scout
Are you denying that this vaccine has fallen far short of the standards that it was pushed on to the public with?
I'm using your logic. Anything less than perfect is failure.
Quite clearly medicine is genocide. The greatest genocide in all humanity. Billions of innocent people murdered.
Nobody on here has said anything less than perfect is failure. A few more people are now questioning the claims that were being made only a few months ago and crowed about to bully and belittle those who were not as comfortable believing the stories. It seems 3 months on the numbers and the narrative have changed. Nobody is saying they are a failure. Just that they are not the miracle that we were being sold a few months ago.
It depends on which 'miracle' people think they were sold. The trials research evidence is freely available and hasn't changed, this includes the efficacy and safety data. There are many vaccines in use here and overseas, each of them quite different. None of the published evidence made any promises, including of miracles.
We have 2 tools to reduce the damage of the virus - restrictions and vaccines. In the real world, the context changes in many ways, including viral mutations, behaviour and restrictions in place.
It obviously was the right thing to introduce the vaccines to us, especially now as the restrictions are reduced. It has saved tens of thousands of lives. The virus also causes Organ damage and, including to the lungs, heart and brain. Prevention of lifelong disabilities is a key benefit for us all.
Over time we will have more research evidence that's peer reviewed being published. That's the only news that counts.
The UK has yet to publish its policy on booster jabs. They may be offered to many. In any event, the vaccines are very safe and have turned the UK around and are largely all that is keeping us alive. I do wonder if a lot of the song and dance that's ongoing is from a fair few who aren't vaccinated and want to diminish how phenomenal they have been for every single one of us. Some of them perhaps were also against restrictions and we'd have had a much worse nightmare that we'd be dealing with, without the intelligent use of those 2 tools. "
Firstly there are more than 2 tools available, and we need to be looking at expanding our toolkit.
Seconvly the statement "the only news that counts" is arrogant. Perception is reality. The news that matters to you may be one thing. The news that matters to other people may be something else.
The numbers for delta are different. The narrative in the media is different. The benefits are now different. Doesn't mean they are useless. It means they are different and that people are thankfully now starting to look a little more at what's been said. That's not a bad thing. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *irldnCouple
over a year ago
Brighton |
"It just sounds like one big con to me now to make money from the jabs
Making money from the jabs we can get for FREE. Make it make sense!
They are not free. They are (currently) paid for by the Govt. Guess where the Govt gets the money? Our taxes. So we are paying. The profit motive will be long term as any discounted price now will be discontinued and boosters become the norm.
The pharma companies are and will make a LOT of money and we are paying them (indirectly through tax).
Obviously, but nothing immediately comes out of your pocket was the point being made here. Nobody is paying Pfizer or AstraZeneca for a jab directly.
How much extra are we being taxed for the vaccines per person? £0.000001p? It's not something you can easily quantify because taxes pay for so many things and unless there is a tax rise linked directly to the Covid jab itself it's basically free to the end user. Also if you don't work for whatever reason then you don't pay taxes, so there goes that argument. "
The full cost will be recovered through taxation. Clearly spread across a year it will be hard to spot and disaggregate from all the other tax rises we can expect as a result of govt spending due to the pandemic. No idea what the current price per dose is or what the future price per dose, but it will be paid in full by those of us who work and pay tax. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It just sounds like one big con to me now to make money from the jabs
Making money from the jabs we can get for FREE. Make it make sense!
They are not free. They are (currently) paid for by the Govt. Guess where the Govt gets the money? Our taxes. So we are paying. The profit motive will be long term as any discounted price now will be discontinued and boosters become the norm.
The pharma companies are and will make a LOT of money and we are paying them (indirectly through tax).
Obviously, but nothing immediately comes out of your pocket was the point being made here. Nobody is paying Pfizer or AstraZeneca for a jab directly.
How much extra are we being taxed for the vaccines per person? £0.000001p? It's not something you can easily quantify because taxes pay for so many things and unless there is a tax rise linked directly to the Covid jab itself it's basically free to the end user. Also if you don't work for whatever reason then you don't pay taxes, so there goes that argument. "
if it isn't the tax payer who is paying ?
And not all taxes are via income (having seen a later comment)
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
