Greenwood2
Member of DD Central
Posts: 4,385
Likes: 2,784
|
Post by Greenwood2 on Jan 1, 2022 21:00:21 GMT
It was born out of a general feeling that should anyone even remotely critisize the vaccines then he (usually me) is asked essentially to shut up. The original comment in this "story" was someone who said he had heard that a person got into serious trouble after taking the vaccine. The fact that it was passed off as completely unrelated to the vaccine "maybe he got run over by a bus" suggested to me that one can not contemplate at all any problems with the vaccine at all and yes I extrapolated to suggest the implication there is that any such bad news about the vaccine must be fake news. IF I have say a 1 in 35,000 of collapsing (dying?) after taking my booster I want to know that. If it is to be balanced by a 1 in 4000 chance (made up for illustration) of me getting into serious difficultues when contracting Covid I'd like to know that too. I certainly don't want any such discussion to be thrown out. Ditto on omicron potency. Incidentally, when the vaccines were being rolled out, I was vocal here in criticising my vaccine, the AZN as being inferior. The fact that at the time numerous EU states weren't rolling it out or were imposing restrictions on its use for younger people was ignored. We now know it is almost certainly an inferior vaccine (with one major exception related to its anti-waning properties) which is why its not being used as a booster. My point here is not to say "look I was right" but to say we should be able to talk about these topics in an adult manner without attempting to close debate. I think that says it all in relation to the credibility of the story. We all know some people get bad reactions to the vaccine, it also seems that people who get bad reactions to the vaccine would also get bad reaction to the virus so are at really high risk from either. You were not right about the AZ vaccine, It now seems that AZ is a very good vaccine in terms of T cell resistance, and may be giving extremely good long protection, better than the other vaccines. I think the idea of a different booster is a sensible idea to give the best possible range of protection. I don't think anyone has asked you to 'shut up' but you have to accept that people are allowed to disagree with you. .
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,710 
Likes: 2,985
|
Post by michaelc on Jan 1, 2022 21:09:00 GMT
It was born out of a general feeling that should anyone even remotely critisize the vaccines then he (usually me) is asked essentially to shut up. No, you're repeatedly asked to re-read what you're claiming, because if it's from a credible source, it usually does the exact opposite. More often, the total lack of credibility of the claimant is pointed out to you. Nope. The first was a BMJ article that you didn't like because the authors were largely but not entirely from the wrong medical profession. Had it been entirely rubbish the BMJ would not have published it. I should add I didn't have to look very hard for it as it was the first link in a google search. The second I've already commented on. It is hard to find the relevant information because most sources don't want to publish it for fear of reducing vaccine uptake. What do you think the chances are of developing a heart condition or other serious medical condition directly from taking any of the vaccines? I suggest you won't answer that question for the same reason.
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,710
Likes: 2,985
|
Post by michaelc on Jan 1, 2022 21:16:07 GMT
I think that says it all in relation to the credibility of the story. We all know some people get bad reactions to the vaccine, it also seems that people who get bad reactions to the vaccine would also get bad reaction to the virus so are at really high risk from either. You were not right about the AZ vaccine, It now seems that AZ is a very good vaccine in terms of T cell resistance, and may be giving extremely good long protection, better than the other vaccines. I think the idea of a different booster is a sensible idea to give the best possible range of protection. I don't think anyone has asked you to 'shut up' but you have to accept that people are allowed to disagree with you.. Yes you may well be right about AZN and clearly studies that show that have clearly come out after the decision in the UK to use Pfizer for the booster. My point was that for a long time it was generally thought that the mrna vaccines were generally superior but in this forum there were some who were very unhappy to here anything bad about the Oxford vaccine. My point is actually that which you have bolded. You are certainly right that people have a right to their views. Why is it then, if someone came to the forum and said "....vaccines are part of a conspiracy from Bill Gates to inject microchips into us all so that his next operating system can control us all..." he would be bullied for that opinion? In my view, that is utterly, utterly wrong and essentially crazy but I would not resort to pushing the person out. I would be interested actually to engage and try to explore where he/she was coming from. Madness maybe but apparently a lot of these flat-earthers are otherwise sane !
|
|
adrianc
Member of DD Central
Posts: 10,024
Likes: 5,149
|
Post by adrianc on Jan 1, 2022 21:19:51 GMT
What do you think the chances are of developing a heart condition or other serious medical condition directly from taking any of the vaccines? I suggest you won't answer that question for the same reason. Oh, I'd be delighted to, since the answer is easily found. It's vanishingly small, even before we compare it to developing similar serious conditions from being infected by the virus. To put it into proportion... to date in this country, there have been about about 45% as many deaths with Covid on the death certificate as TOTAL "yellow card" side effect notifications across the entire country to date - and the "overwhelming majority" of those notifications have been trivial - sore arm, nausea, etc. And that's from roughly twice as many vaccinations given to date as there are people in the country - 59% of over 12s two+boost, another 23.5% two, and a final 7.5% one dose. Just 10% of over 12s have had no vacc. www.gov.uk/government/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-vaccine-adverse-reactions/coronavirus-vaccine-summary-of-yellow-card-reportingSpecifically myocarditis from the vacc? 863 suspected cases nationally, from nearly 52m vaccinated people. About 1 per 60,000 people. Again, for perspective... It's roughly the same number of people who are murdered in the UK in any given year, while about twice as many people die on the roads.
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Jan 1, 2022 22:28:08 GMT
My point is actually that which you have bolded. You are certainly right that people have a right to their views. Why is it then, if someone came to the forum and said "....vaccines are part of a conspiracy from Bill Gates to inject microchips into us all so that his next operating system can control us all..." he would be bullied for that opinion? In my view, that is utterly, utterly wrong and essentially crazy but I would not resort to pushing the person out. I would be interested actually to engage and try to explore where he/she was coming from. Madness maybe but apparently a lot of these flat-earthers are otherwise sane ! It's difficult to debate something with somebody when they have no structure to their argument, and no supporting evidence. Pointing this out doesn't, in my book, constitute "bullying", it's just exposing the weakness inherent in their position. But once you've done that, what is there to debate? Sadly people who believe in the kind of David Icke / lizardmen / microchipping / 5G nonsense we've seen here (thankfully rarely), and elsewhere, are unlikely to change their beliefs when challenged  . But yes, during a global pandemic people espousing such nonsense should expect short shrift. In my opinion the 682(!!!) pages of this thread have shown a remarkable degree of healthy debate, with peoples' understanding evolving over time as the evidence, and our interpretation and understanding of it, has changed. I, for one, am very grateful for it. And even more grateful when somebody has pointed out something I've got wrong or misunderstood, or brought new information to the table.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 1, 2022 22:56:38 GMT
Either a poor example of the UK education system or a fantastic example of a multi-lingual Russian doing his best. Hard to choose.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jan 1, 2022 23:00:24 GMT
No, you're repeatedly asked to re-read what you're claiming, because if it's from a credible source, it usually does the exact opposite. More often, the total lack of credibility of the claimant is pointed out to you. Nope. The first was a BMJ article that you didn't like because the authors were largely but not entirely from the wrong medical profession. Had it been entirely rubbish the BMJ would not have published it. I should add I didn't have to look very hard for it as it was the first link in a google search. The second I've already commented on. It is hard to find the relevant information because most sources don't want to publish it for fear of reducing vaccine uptake. What do you think the chances are of developing a heart condition or other serious medical condition directly from taking any of the vaccines? I suggest you won't answer that question for the same reason.uhh ? Hang on a sec. Earlier you were saying there was 'an increasing body of peer reviewed evidence'. And now you're saying its hard to find because people have a fear of publishing it. And that's after you have posted a link to an article (the second one) supposedly in support of your original position, which contains exactly that information (from the perspective of a couple of studies). So which is it ? Growing body of evidence ? Published material ? Or information so secret no one dare publish it ?
|
|
michaelc
Member of DD Central
Say No To T.D.S.
Posts: 5,710
Likes: 2,985
|
Post by michaelc on Jan 1, 2022 23:45:06 GMT
My point is actually that which you have bolded. You are certainly right that people have a right to their views. Why is it then, if someone came to the forum and said "....vaccines are part of a conspiracy from Bill Gates to inject microchips into us all so that his next operating system can control us all..." he would be bullied for that opinion? In my view, that is utterly, utterly wrong and essentially crazy but I would not resort to pushing the person out. I would be interested actually to engage and try to explore where he/she was coming from. Madness maybe but apparently a lot of these flat-earthers are otherwise sane ! It's difficult to debate something with somebody when they have no structure to their argument, and no supporting evidence. Pointing this out doesn't, in my book, constitute "bullying", it's just exposing the weakness inherent in their position. But once you've done that, what is there to debate? Sadly people who believe in the kind of David Icke / lizardmen / microchipping / 5G nonsense we've seen here (thankfully rarely), and elsewhere, are unlikely to change their beliefs when challenged . But yes, during a global pandemic people espousing such nonsense should expect short shrift. In my opinion the 682(!!!) pages of this thread have shown a remarkable degree of healthy debate, with peoples' understanding evolving over time as the evidence, and our interpretation and understanding of it, has changed. I, for one, am very grateful for it. And even more grateful when somebody has pointed out something I've got wrong or misunderstood, or brought new information to the table. So what proportion of people have died over say 65 vs those under 20 ? Why are you so happy to worry about yourself? (assuming like me you're somewhat closer to 65 than under 20) As for Mr Icke I suggest you don't know whether or not they have any structure to their arguments since nobody has come here promoting them. Not yet anyway. In the meantime I'll have fun filling in the middle ground.... 
|
|
iano
Member of DD Central
Posts: 141
Likes: 177
|
Post by iano on Jan 2, 2022 3:10:16 GMT
It's difficult to debate something with somebody when they have no structure to their argument, and no supporting evidence. Pointing this out doesn't, in my book, constitute "bullying", it's just exposing the weakness inherent in their position. But once you've done that, what is there to debate? Sadly people who believe in the kind of David Icke / lizardmen / microchipping / 5G nonsense we've seen here (thankfully rarely), and elsewhere, are unlikely to change their beliefs when challenged . But yes, during a global pandemic people espousing such nonsense should expect short shrift. In my opinion the 682(!!!) pages of this thread have shown a remarkable degree of healthy debate, with peoples' understanding evolving over time as the evidence, and our interpretation and understanding of it, has changed. I, for one, am very grateful for it. And even more grateful when somebody has pointed out something I've got wrong or misunderstood, or brought new information to the table. So what proportion of people have died over say 65 vs those under 20 ? Why are you so happy to worry about yourself? (assuming like me you're somewhat closer to 65 than under 20) As for Mr Icke I suggest you don't know whether or not they have any structure to their arguments since nobody has come here promoting them. Not yet anyway. In the meantime I'll have fun filling in the middle ground.... So more under 20s are likely to suffer under Covid than any side-effects of vaccines are likely to cause and you seem to be painting the older generation as selfish (for the record I'm nowhere near 65 - by decades)? That's based on several links provided above which you seem intent on ignoring. I once stated you had a respectable opinion, those days are gone. Have as much 'fun' as you like but I'm deeply heartened to see, given the vaccination rates, the younger generation have more common sense than you. Additionally for the record, when you post a link that says the opposite of what you thought it did, then admit you didn't read it, don't you dare think you have credibility. That stardust is earned not granted and you have exceptionally squandered it. The patience of this board is monumental.
|
|
|
|
Post by bernythedolt on Jan 2, 2022 3:51:32 GMT
Come on guys, time to stop the bullying now. I can’t help noticing that many of those clobbering michaelc here for his concern over vaccinating children are not actually parents themselves (or their offspring have flown the nest). There appears to be some polarisation along these lines in the positions taken. Of course, non-parents on this forum can afford to take a completely dispassionate view of affairs, with nothing to lose, no skin in the game. If a couple of children were to die or be seriously harmed directly from the vaccine, it doesn’t affect them personally, they can be dismissed as collateral damage. Indeed, one could even argue further, that this group has a selfish vested interest in every child being vaccinated… that way their own age group becomes better protected, the country gets back to work and returns on their investments start to pick up. A parent, however, (perhaps like michaelc) faces a much more difficult choice, where emotions come into play. I wouldn’t expect everyone here to understand the very strong emotions involved, but where your own flesh & blood is concerned, you become far more questioning… and far more concerned about the consequences either way. I may be wrong, but did I read recently that vaccine trials in children only started in early/mid 2021? Can anyone truly state with 100% confidence that there will be no short- or longer-term negative consequences for children? No, they cannot. So, for thinking parents, it's a trying time and they face a difficult choice. Which risk is the greater to their child, to vaccinate or not? Now while most of us here accept it’s probably, on balance, safer to vaccinate children, as a (grand)parent I can still sympathise with parents who can’t quite get over that line just yet. I understand their dilemma. I don’t agree with them, but nor could I outright vilify them right now. Perhaps in a year or so when the ongoing real-time trial becomes clearer, but not right now. Shoot me down, by all means, but I trust we are still free to express an opinion here. |
|
iano
Member of DD Central
Posts: 141
Likes: 177
|
Post by iano on Jan 2, 2022 5:20:03 GMT
Berny, please!
There is no bullying (or clobbering), there is however a group that have pre-determined their own outcome on this, failed to validate it and then decided to play the victim when their arguments have been shown to be inaccurate. Do I have kids, well, do you know that answer (unjustified presumption on your part) and more importantly does it matter? Is there information however to say that across the board the evidence states vaccinated kids fare much better than unvaccinated ones and that there is a knock on effect on preventing infection on other members of their family - yes there is!
For the record, every thinking parent, as you put it, I know who I've mentioned this to has a hard time understanding your thought process, the phrase 'what the **** are they playing at given their age and what could happen to the kids if this goes on long enough?' is a common response (and their kids are as vaccinated as they can be - including smallpox, MMR and TB as well).
Your opinion and michaelc's is as valued as it's always has been.
|
|
|
|
Post by bracknellboy on Jan 2, 2022 6:57:44 GMT
.... Can anyone truly state with 100% confidence that there will be no short- or longer-term negative consequences for children? No, they cannot. So, for thinking parents, it's a trying time and they face a difficult choice. Which risk is the greater to their child, to vaccinate or not? Now while most of us here accept it’s probably, on balance, safer to vaccinate children, as a (grand)parent I can still sympathise with parents who can’t quite get over that line just yet. I understand their dilemma. I don’t agree with them, but nor could I outright vilify them right now. Perhaps in a year or so when the ongoing real-time trial becomes clearer, but not right now. ..... From what I've seen on here, nobody is villifying anyone for having considered concerns about vaccinating kids. Personally, if I had children in the sub 12 y/o bracket I'd be thinking very carefully about it and weighing it up - and of course as of now in the UK its a non-question anyway as it is not offered to that age group. Nonetheless, with a number of non-UK developed countries having taken a lead on this I'd also be feeling fairly confident that any emergent data on the risks coming from the larger population would be there. And I would also have thought carefully about under 15 yr group as well TBH - as did the JCVI which made its reasoning for being neutral transparently available. However, this is pretty much irrelevant to the 'debate' that is going on here. No-one is being vilified or bullied for an opinion. Someone makes claims of fact or belief, are asked to present evidence to back it up and fail to do so. When they do present stuff as 'evidence' of their merits of their 'opinion', it most times turns to dust, and in many cases actually makes the counter case. When pointed out, the argument then turns to one of "I'm being shutdown/closed out because I have a differing opinion". And "the evidence is being hidden", apparently. When specific counter points are highlighted and offered up for challenge, they are completely ignored and again the line that "I'm being persecuted for having a contra opinion" is bought out instead. If someone says "I'm dubious about getting my kid vaccinated because I think the risks/benefits are not strong enough" then fine. If they argue that "the powers" and the "rest of the population" are pressurising others to get kids jabbed when it is not in their best interest, and it is part of a conspiracy to help the broader population only, then they should be prepared to back that up. If they are challenged on it, that ain't bullying. When in general thinking about today's world, I am reminded of a quote I saw recently: "A fact is information without emotion. An opinion is information plus experience. Ignorance is an opinion lacking information. And, stupidity is an opinion that ignores a fact"
While not saying that any of that applies specifically to anything on here, it is perhaps one useful yardstick to keep at hand.
|
|
agent69
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,049
Likes: 4,438
Member is Online
|
Post by agent69 on Jan 2, 2022 9:23:50 GMT
Come on guys, time to stop the bullying now.I can’t help noticing that many of those clobbering michaelc here for his concern over vaccinating children are not actually parents themselves (or their offspring have flown the nest). There appears to be some polarisation along these lines in the positions taken. Of course, non-parents on this forum can afford to take a completely dispassionate view of affairs, with nothing to lose, no skin in the game. If a couple of children were to die or be seriously harmed directly from the vaccine, it doesn’t affect them personally, they can be dismissed as collateral damage. Indeed, one could even argue further, that this group has a selfish vested interest in every child being vaccinated… that way their own age group becomes better protected, the country gets back to work and returns on their investments start to pick up. A parent, however, (perhaps like michaelc) faces a much more difficult choice, where emotions come into play. I wouldn’t expect everyone here to understand the very strong emotions involved, but where your own flesh & blood is concerned, you become far more questioning… and far more concerned about the consequences either way. I may be wrong, but did I read recently that vaccine trials in children only started in early/mid 2021? Can anyone truly state with 100% confidence that there will be no short- or longer-term negative consequences for children? No, they cannot. So, for thinking parents, it's a trying time and they face a difficult choice. Which risk is the greater to their child, to vaccinate or not? Now while most of us here accept it’s probably, on balance, safer to vaccinate children, as a (grand)parent I can still sympathise with parents who can’t quite get over that line just yet. I understand their dilemma. I don’t agree with them, but nor could I outright vilify them right now. Perhaps in a year or so when the ongoing real-time trial becomes clearer, but not right now. Shoot me down, by all means, but I trust we are still free to express an opinion here. as ye sow, so shall ye reap
|
|
registerme
Member of DD Central
Posts: 6,624
Likes: 6,437
|
Post by registerme on Jan 2, 2022 9:49:45 GMT
|
|
keitha
Member of DD Central
2024, hopefully the year I get out of P2P
Posts: 4,594
Likes: 2,624
|
Post by keitha on Jan 2, 2022 9:50:50 GMT
|
|
.
