COVID-19: Vaccine/antidote and testing procedures Megathread [Mod Warning - Post #1]

Thierry12 wrote: »

Looking at it completely arse ways

They are in fact very accurate

Antigen tests catch sick people, people with the disease, who are very contagious

PCR catches alot of people who are not sick, not contagious and dont have the disease, just the infection

Yeah, 2 out of 4 is very accurate :pac:

Sconsey

Deleted User wrote: »

You still as enthusiastic for the annual vaxxes now with the large number of expected side-effects? :rolleyes:

Some day your posts might make sense...today is not that day.

Hmmzis

Deleted User wrote: »

You still as enthusiastic for the annual vaxxes now with the large number of expected side-effects? :rolleyes:

Bring on the sore arms etc.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

You still as enthusiastic for the annual vaxxes now with the large number of expected side-effects? :rolleyes:

You understand an ADR can be as simple as a fever or a sore arm after injection yeah ??? Much like every other possible side effect of other vaccines

Another day another batch of verbal diarrhoea posts from yourself.

3xh

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I see Bill Gates and "anti-vax" were mentioned prior as "conspiracies".

A lot of us were saying Bill Gates is a main funder of the vaccines that will eventually be approved and rolled out. The reason being is that he's also a primary funder of the UN and WHO, both very influential. Well, the Pfizer/BioNTech vax now seems to be leading the way, which is indeed one of his. So, that turned out to be true. I've said any "support" vaccines rolled out will also be his as well, for similar reasons. Look for AstraZeneca and Moderna in this regard.

Forget the "Bill Gates wants to chip people" malarkey. We were saying, at the very least, this is largely financially driven and the potential profits are astronomical.

As for the "anti-vax" thing; I'm not "anti" or "pro" vax. It's the lack of long-term safety trials, and the fact that this is a new, experimental RNA vaccine, that is concerning. Also how indemnity is being sought by the pharmaceutical companies (and who can blame them).

We were also concerned that these vaccines could eventually become mandatory, which was considered "conspiracy" a few months back. The worry was that they'd coerce through exclusion from travel, concerts, sporting events etc for those not willing to take it. Well, now Ticketmaster have got the ball rolling in this regard. It's a potential sign of things to come, and a slippery slope.

Forget the more out there conspiracies you may be referring to. These concerns are legitimate and understandable.

Find below a procurement notice from the MHRA (UK Gov) seeking software to track "the expected high volume of Covid-19 vaccine adverse drug reactions":
https://ted.europa.eu/udl?uri=TED:NOTICE:506291-2020:TEXT:EN:HTML&tabId=1

Thanks, DrFrost.

Regarding conspiracy theories and crackpot posts etc online, when I see so called anti-vax posts talking about the coming of Christ, quoting biblical text, etc etc, my first thought is these anonymous posters could indeed be ‘pro-vax’ posters deliberately writing such to simply discredit anyone who subsequently has any reticence to vaccines.

Truth is the first victim in war, as they say. And lobbing all the anti-vax quotes about Gates, 5G, rushed vaccines, Dot tattoo, etc. into one catch all group is a lazy shot.

Deleted User wrote: »

You still as enthusiastic for the annual vaxxes now with the large number of expected side-effects? :rolleyes:

I think I said this before but anti-vaxxers and conspiricy theorists are people usually with no scientific understanding or education trying to make sense of things that are probably beyond them. Facebook memes are not an education and people who think they are I personally think suffer from some kind of mental illness....

Side effects and risk is well known, but ultimately that get's weighed up against the risk of the virus.

polesheep

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

You are making a claim here, what I am saying is your claim is based on a poor understanding of how vaccines are developed.

That's an assumption you have no right to make and a false one I might add.

polesheep

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

I think I said this before but anti-vaxxers and conspiricy theorists are people usually with no scientific understanding or education trying to make sense of things that are probably beyond them. Facebook memes are not an education and people who think they are I personally think suffer from some kind of mental illness....

Side effects and risk is well known, but ultimately that get's weighed up against the risk of the virus.

Your condescending attitude and the bit in bold says a lot about you.

3xh wrote: »

Thanks, DrFrost.

Regarding conspiracy theories and crackpot posts etc online, when I see so called anti-vax posts talking about the coming of Christ, quoting biblical text, etc etc, my first thought is these anonymous posters could indeed be ‘pro-vax’ posters deliberately writing such to simply discredit anyone who subsequently has any reticence to vaccines.

Truth is the first victim in war, as they say. And lobbing all the anti-vax quotes about Gates, 5G, rushed vaccines, Dot tattoo, etc. into one catch all group is a lazy shot.

Of course, my friend.

Part of me thinks "sure let them at it" as the more that roll-up for these annual, experimental RNA vaccines (that the majority don't even need), the less chance they'll bother the rest of us who have no interest in it.

On the other hand, the more sensible approach is for everyone to just say "no thanks" and the whole thing falls flat then and there. It's a tricky one

Deeper Blue

Making vaccines mandatory in order to travel, go to concerts etc is 100% the right way to go in my opinion

El Sueño wrote: »

Making vaccines mandatory in order to travel, go to concerts etc is 100% the right way to go in my opinion

Good man. You're a government/big pharma dream citizen.

funnydoggy

Can I just interject and say, it's good to see a civil discussion and not sh*t flinging. Spent too much time on Twitter during the summer and I have PTSD from it :pac:

polesheep wrote: »

That's an assumption you have no right to make and a false one I might add.

It is an assumption but I have every right to make it.

polesheep wrote: »

But even if every related scientist in the world were working on them it would still be hasty

This is a statement of fact you are making with absolultely nothing to back it up. Explain how you come to this conclusion and maybe then you might have an argument... True / False are absolutes something I would avoid when talking about theoritical positions!

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Back to your cave, shadow creature :pac:

Ah, I'm kidding. If that's your opinion, then no problem. Have a good day

Well its more than an opinion, its fact, ADR data includes everything from trial participants, be it a sore arm, a fever, whatever it might be.

Your just jumping to worst case scenario that ADR means everyone had an awful reaction

polesheep wrote: »

Your condescending attitude and the bit in bold says a lot about you.

I would advise gathering more data before trying to extrapolate theories.

polesheep

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

It is an assumption but I have every right to make it.

This is a statement of fact you are making with absolultely nothing to back it up. Explain how you come to this conclusion and maybe then you might have an argument... True / False are absolutes something I would avoid when talking about theoritical positions!

Cut and paste from the Internet, jargon and waffle, and trying to pick holes in HMMZIS'' informative posts. That's all I've seen from you. You are trying very hard to give the impression you are something that you are not. But I won't respond again as it takes from the thread.

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Well its more than an opinion, its fact, ADR data includes everything from trial participants, be it a sore arm, a fever, whatever it might be.

Your just jumping to worst case scenario that ADR means everyone had an awful reaction

By "your opinion", I was referring to the "verbal diarrhea" comment :pac:

Will you be ok taking the vaccines if there's no legal recourse to any side effects or injuries incurred?

hmmm

Is there a way not to see quoted posts from people who are in your "ignore" list?

In news, J&J are unlikely to have trial data readout before the new year which is a pity - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-13/j-j-taps-unitedhealth-to-accelerate-covid-19-vaccine-trial

"So far, J&J has enrolled “just a few thousand” patients in its late-stage clinical trial, in part because it lost two weeks when recruitment was paused over a safety concern".

jobeenfitz

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Well its more than an opinion, its fact, ADR data includes everything from trial participants, be it a sore arm, a fever, whatever it might be.

Your just jumping to worst case scenario that ADR means everyone had an awful reaction

Does the data include possible affects 12 or 28 months after vaccination?

polesheep wrote: »

Cut and paste from the Internet, jargon and waffle, and trying to pick holes in HMMZIS'' informative posts. That's all I've seen from you. You are trying very hard to give the impression you are something that you are not. But I won't respond again as it takes from the thread.

So you do not want to get lumped in with 5G, Bill Gates conspiricy nuts you want to be able to ask the "normal" questions but when challenged on your own assuptions around "hasty vaccines" you give up and throw the nappy out of the pram? What makes conspiricy nuts unreasonable is no matter the explaination you give them they will refuse to acknowledge it.

HMMZIS I probably agree with more than disagree some of his posts where not 100% accurate in that it was correct for some viruses but not all which is fine as we do not know enough yet to be 100% accurate on how the vaccine for Covid is going to work. Picking holes is what scientists do! Being able to come back with reasons for a theory is what scientists do. Making foundless claims and getting upset when challanged is what people who have spent too much time on youtube do!

[Deleted User] wrote: »

By "your opinion", I was referring to the "verbal diarrhea" comment :pac:

Will you be ok taking the vaccines if there's no legal recourse to any side effects or injuries incurred?

Yup because I'm well capable of doing my own research into the trials and the data coming from said trials.

Secondly anyone who did have side effects that adversely impacted on their quality of life does indeed have legal options available, as per the current deals available, the state will partially cover this with the manufacturer the rest.

Sconsey

jobeenfitz wrote: »

Does the data include possible affects 12 or 28 months after vaccination?

I believe that is what phase 4 trials are for....."A type of clinical trial that studies the side effects caused over time by a new treatment after it has been approved and is on the market. These trials look for side effects that were not seen in earlier trials and may also study how well a new treatment works over a long period of time."

So no the data will not include phase 4 trial data but there is nothing unique in the Covid vaccines being approved before phase 4 trials happen.

hmmm wrote: »

Is there a way not to see quoted posts from people who are in your "ignore" list?

In news, J&J are unlikely to have trial data readout before the new year which is a pity - https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-11-13/j-j-taps-unitedhealth-to-accelerate-covid-19-vaccine-trial

"So far, J&J has enrolled “just a few thousand” patients in its late-stage clinical trial, in part because it lost two weeks when recruitment was paused over a safety concern".

Don't think there is , wish there was.

Not surprised with J&J, always seemed a bit more behind than the others and of course the 2 week stop didn't help there but better safe than sorry in that regard.

AstraZeneca data should be due shortly, they appear to have quite a large stockpile produced for once approval is given.

3xh

El Sueño wrote: »

Making vaccines mandatory in order to travel, go to concerts etc is 100% the right way to go in my opinion

Let me guess; you were not saying this pre-Covid.

You’re simply falling into the line of thinking that’s been dripped into society through media, that we’re all dirty and only a vaccine with proof you’ve had it, will make everyones’ lives better.

Come back to us when you can’t earn your current wage or look after your children because you suffer from some debilitating reaction to a vaccine you took so you could watch the next Blockbuster.

jobeenfitz wrote: »

Does the data include possible affects 12 or 28 months after vaccination?

Answered by Sconsey I see, pretty much exactly what I was going to post.