Will you take an approved COVID-19 vaccine?

seamus · 03-12-2020 11:14pm

feedmindc19 wrote: »

What do you make of this interview. https://youtu.be/IMAkFKprzRQ

I can tell perfectly well by the summary that there's nothing incredible in it.

People have been fantasising for a century that there's shadow cabal hellbent on culling the population through bio weapons, engineered viruses or vaccines. For reasons unknown.

The irony is that when a serious illness did appear with the potential to kill them, they all claimed it was a hoax.

feedmindc19 · 03-12-2020 11:19pm

hmmm wrote: »

Whoever posted that Youtube video is an idiot who thinks the discussion about "sterlization" means rendering people infertile. This is why you shouldn't take your advice from Youtube.

"Sterilising immunity" which the scientist is talking about is the ability of a vaccine to prevent a virus from reproducing.

Unless you were living in West Africa and were a close contact of someone who contracted Ebola, you were not offered an Ebola vaccine. Go on out of that with yer spoofery.

Its blantantly obvious what he ws suggesting.

Yes I wasn't offered the ebola vaccine obviously, I was reccomended the swine flu and the flu vaccine didn't take either , by your standards back then I would of been a moron too , to not of taken it wouldn't I.

As for the video, come on now it's blatant what he was suggesting. Jon snow porposley interrupted him.

ExMachina1000 · 03-12-2020 11:56pm

johnire wrote: »

I hear what you're saying but can I ask a genuine question that I've asked before both here and in person to aquantantices that are opposed to the vaccine for whatever reason..... what's the alternative? Seriously please give me an answer- a real answer. We as a world and as a society cannot continue to live the way we have for the last nine months with social distancing, masks , lockdowns , lack of contact with friends and family. It's simply not sustainable.
So in a world without a vaccine what do we do ?
Will someone PLEASE give me their view on what that future would be - I really really want to hear it.

There are 6 categories of people in my eyes

1Those willing and happy to take the vaccine. They have complete faith. First in the queue if they could etc

2Those who will put any concerns they have to the side because they want to do their part in stopping the virus and getting life back to normal

3Those who are concerned about the vaccine and possible side effects. They have taken previous vaccines but are unsure about this one

4Those who have other health problems can have nobody to turn to to give them reassurances or information specific to their particular health ailment. They are worried about side effects and what might happen to them

5 People who dont want to take the vaccine as they feel that if they catch covid they are not at risk. A mild illness etc.

6 Antivaxxers who believe it's a conspiracy, population control etc

I'm a number 4. People harping on at me and calling me a number 6 or saying I should be a number 1 are no more informed than anyone else. I cannot go to my gp or anyone else for reassurances related to my personal situation as they dont exist. The vaccine is new.

I wont be taking the vaccine at worst or at best will prolong taking it as long as possible until my fears and questions can be answered. That might never happen. In the grand scheme of things I'm just a pps number on a database.

It's a very rough analogy as there are millions of different opinions but i tried to lay it out to explain as best I could. But I still couldn't answer your question

04-12-2020 12:10am

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

There are 6 categories of people in my eyes

1Those willing and happy to take the vaccine. They have complete faith. First in the queue if they could etc

2Those who will put any concerns they have to the side because they want to do their part in stopping the virus and getting life back to normal

3Those who are concerned about the vaccine and possible side effects. They have taken previous vaccines but are unsure about this one

4Those who have other health problems can have nobody to turn to to give them reassurances or information specific to their particular health ailment. They are worried about side effects and what might happen to them

5 People who dont want to take the vaccine as they feel that if they catch covid they are not at risk. A mild illness etc. They are not overly concerned about society as a whole.

6 Antivaxxers who believe it's a conspiracy, population control etc

I'm a number 4. People harping on at me and calling me a number 6 or saying I should be a number 1 are no more informed than anyone else. I cannot go to my gp or anyone else for reassurances related to my personal situation as they dont exist. The vaccine is new.

I wont be taking the vaccine at worst or at best will prolong taking it as long as possible until my fears and questions can be answered. That might never happen. In the grand scheme of things I'm just a pps number on a database.

It's a very rough analogy as there are millions of different opinions but i tried to lay it out to explain as best I could.

I’d be between 2-3 on this scale. I probably will take it because I want life to get back to some normality and want to protect people in my life but I am concerned about the lack of long term data. People saying anyone who is hesitant about this vaccine are anti vaxers is unfair. You can be pro vaccine in general but unsure about taking something with no long term track record

wes · 04-12-2020 12:11am

diaper dude wrote: »

You can be "pro" whatever you like, it won't matter an iota. Vaccines are not becoming mandatory and there will be no newly created subdivision of second class citizens, no matter how much the idea thrills you. I intend to get the vaccine, but the fact that you cannot see the philosophical implications of what you are saying does not reflect well on you.

I never called for mandatory vaccines, and people choosing to not have vaccinations will have only themselves to blame if they have some freedoms limited. I can tell you plenty of countries will be happy to ban people refusing vaccines etc.

The fact that so many people are ok with the re-emergence of deadly diseases and children dieing from them is appalling. That does not reflect well on you and your ilk.

BryanMartin21 · 04-12-2020 12:15am

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

There are 6 categories of people in my eyes

1Those willing and happy to take the vaccine. They have complete faith. First in the queue if they could etc

2Those who will put any concerns they have to the side because they want to do their part in stopping the virus and getting life back to normal

3Those who are concerned about the vaccine and possible side effects. They have taken previous vaccines but are unsure about this one

4Those who have other health problems can have nobody to turn to to give them reassurances or information specific to their particular health ailment. They are worried about side effects and what might happen to them

5 People who dont want to take the vaccine as they feel that if they catch covid they are not at risk. A mild illness etc. They are not overly concerned about society as a whole.

6 Antivaxxers who believe it's a conspiracy, population control etc

I'm a number 4. People harping on at me and calling me a number 6 or saying I should be a number 1 are no more informed than anyone else. I cannot go to my gp or anyone else for reassurances related to my personal situation as they dont exist. The vaccine is new.

I wont be taking the vaccine at worst or at best will prolong taking it as long as possible until my fears and questions can be answered. That might never happen. In the grand scheme of things I'm just a pps number on a database.

It's a very rough analogy as there are millions of different opinions but i tried to lay it out to explain as best I could.

Number 5 has a vague, hollow, spiteful extra sentence tagged on at the end which should be deleted as there is no objective way to measure whether someone is overly concerned about society as a whole.

Someone who eats meat or flies in a plane could be said to not be overly concerned about society on a subjective measure.

ExMachina1000 · 04-12-2020 12:16am

BryanMartin21 wrote: »

Number 5 has a vague, hollow, spiteful extra sentence tagged on at the end which should be deleted as there is no objective way to measure whether someone is overly concerned about society as a whole.

Fair call. I will delete. I didn't mean it in a nasty way but can see how it could be interpreted

BryanMartin21 · 04-12-2020 12:17am

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

Fair call. I will delete. I didn't mean it in a nasty way but can see how it could be interpreted

Some would insinuate it, others would not. I agree with category 6. I'm 5 but not 6!

eagle eye · 04-12-2020 12:19am

seamus wrote:

I can tell perfectly well by the summary that there's nothing incredible in it.

People have been fantasising for a century that there's shadow cabal hellbent on culling the population through bio weapons, engineered viruses or vaccines. For reasons unknown.

The irony is that when a serious illness did appear with the potential to kill them, they all claimed it was a hoax.

And despite all their efforts we are living longer too.

feedmindc19 · 04-12-2020 12:27am

wes wrote: »

I never called for mandatory vaccines, and people choosing to not have vaccinations will have only themselves to blame if they have some freedoms limited. I can tell you plenty of countries will be happy to ban people refusing vaccines etc.

The fact that so many people are ok with the re-emergence of deadly diseases and children dieing from them is appalling. That does not reflect well on you and your ilk.

I was wondering what they would ban the unvaccinated from, will they still accept blood donations from people that don't get vaccinated from covid , I' make regular donations. I am not so worried about travel as I never agreed with having so many cheap airlines flying and adding to the pollution of countries that are pretty much third world ****holes. Some of these places that don't even have proper sewage systems and everything is basically dumped in the ocean.

How could they stop me from working and providing for my family and would you support the government if they did.
My children too , should they be banned from school ,and their hobbies from football, swimming?

Lex Luthor · 04-12-2020 12:45am

No thanks

speckle · 04-12-2020 1:08am

They accept blood donations from people who have had covid.

Caraibh · 04-12-2020 1:20am

An interesting post on Twitter:

"So just to recap, they changed the criteria for a pandemic, and how deaths are attributed, used a fraudulent test to scare you, they now want you to take an experimental improperly tested vaccine, and l'm the crazy one for saying no?"

eagle eye · 04-12-2020 2:27am

wes wrote:

The fact that so many people are ok with the re-emergence of deadly diseases and children dieing from them is appalling. That does not reflect well on you and your ilk.

You need to take off the blinkers and see things from everybody's side.
I'm not taking any vaccine. I read about things from unbiased sources, that's hard to find these days but can be got. What I've learned about mRNA is not good, no way I'm trusting that drug without years of data. The Oxford vaccine looks good and I'd be willing to take it. I realise for any vaccine you should have more days before you take it but these people seem to have been open and honest about the good and the bad in their trials.
For you to even suggest that somebody with serious medical problems not taking the vaccine straight away should have any limits put on their freedom is pathetic and well I'd put you in the same category as the anti-vaxxer as thoroughly unlikeable people who only see things one way no matter what.

skimpydoo · 04-12-2020 3:28am

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

There are 6 categories of people in my eyes

1Those willing and happy to take the vaccine. They have complete faith. First in the queue if they could etc

2Those who will put any concerns they have to the side because they want to do their part in stopping the virus and getting life back to normal

3Those who are concerned about the vaccine and possible side effects. They have taken previous vaccines but are unsure about this one

4Those who have other health problems can have nobody to turn to to give them reassurances or information specific to their particular health ailment. They are worried about side effects and what might happen to them

5 People who dont want to take the vaccine as they feel that if they catch covid they are not at risk. A mild illness etc.

6 Antivaxxers who believe it's a conspiracy, population control etc

I'm a number 4. People harping on at me and calling me a number 6 or saying I should be a number 1 are no more informed than anyone else. I cannot go to my gp or anyone else for reassurances related to my personal situation as they dont exist. The vaccine is new.

I wont be taking the vaccine at worst or at best will prolong taking it as long as possible until my fears and questions can be answered. That might never happen. In the grand scheme of things I'm just a pps number on a database.

It's a very rough analogy as there are millions of different opinions but i tried to lay it out to explain as best I could. But I still couldn't answer your question

I am also a number 4 because I have a blood cancer and a weakened immune system. My specialists don't know if I can take any vaccines as no clinicians have been given any information or specifics on any of the vaccines which have not been tested on anyone with a blood cancer and or weakened immune system.

schmoo2k · 04-12-2020 5:55am

BloodBath wrote: »

There's been 65 million cases worldwide. 26 or even 1000 cases of reinfection are well inside the margin of error. A small minority of people have terrible immune systems as well but they wouldn't be taking a vaccine anyway.

The majority of the science shows good immunity after infection.

Even with the 1000 figure, its still a lower reinfection rate than things like Chicken Pox and Measles...

schmoo2k · 04-12-2020 6:05am

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

There are 6 categories of people in my eyes

1Those willing and happy to take the vaccine. They have complete faith. First in the queue if they could etc

2Those who will put any concerns they have to the side because they want to do their part in stopping the virus and getting life back to normal

3Those who are concerned about the vaccine and possible side effects. They have taken previous vaccines but are unsure about this one

4Those who have other health problems can have nobody to turn to to give them reassurances or information specific to their particular health ailment. They are worried about side effects and what might happen to them

5 People who dont want to take the vaccine as they feel that if they catch covid they are not at risk. A mild illness etc.

6 Antivaxxers who believe it's a conspiracy, population control etc

I'm a number 4. People harping on at me and calling me a number 6 or saying I should be a number 1 are no more informed than anyone else. I cannot go to my gp or anyone else for reassurances related to my personal situation as they dont exist. The vaccine is new.

I wont be taking the vaccine at worst or at best will prolong taking it as long as possible until my fears and questions can be answered. That might never happen. In the grand scheme of things I'm just a pps number on a database.

It's a very rough analogy as there are millions of different opinions but i tried to lay it out to explain as best I could. But I still couldn't answer your question

IMO I think we will see 60+% willing to take it, but from your point of view I would be more concerned about how long its going to take for that 60% to be eligible to even get the vaccine - the majority of those folks will be in the low risk camp and at the bottom of the list.

FWIW In this poll I selected "Yes, but not immediately" - because I realistically don't think I will be offered it until the end of 2021 at the earliest.

JacksonHeightsOwn · 04-12-2020 7:52am

Caraibh wrote: »

An interesting post on Twitter:

"So just to recap, they changed the criteria for a pandemic, and how deaths are attributed, used a fraudulent test to scare you, they now want you to take an experimental improperly tested vaccine, and l'm the crazy one for saying no?"

So the pandemic has simply been a big fib then?

I wish someone could have told all those people that died, the big fakers!

plodder · 04-12-2020 8:51am

speckle wrote: »

They accept blood donations from people who have had covid.

That's not surprising as they have used blood plasma from recovered patients as a treatment for covid, with limited success as it happens, but it's certainly not harmful, and there could be a mild benefit from it, but nothing like as much as from a vaccine.

Regarding people with medical issues, who have "no-one to turn to", you can talk to your GP and I'd say there will be some form of questionaire to answer before you can get these vaccines anyway.

Children, pregnant women and people with some conditions aren't going to be given it, and that's not because it is unsafe, but because it hasn't been tested on those groups.

brisan · 04-12-2020 9:03am

schmoo2k wrote: »

IMO I think we will see 60+% willing to take it, but from your point of view I would be more concerned about how long its going to take for that 60% to be eligible to even get the vaccine - the majority of those folks will be in the low risk camp and at the bottom of the list.

FWIW In this poll I selected "Yes, but not immediately" - because I realistically don't think I will be offered it until the end of 2021 at the earliest.

There is no logical reason why anybody over the age of 18 should not be offered the vaccine before the end of June
At that stage there will possibly be 7 vaccines available .its just a matter of weather the HSE can deliver the roll out in a timely manner

Caraibh · 04-12-2020 9:13am

chrisbonnie wrote: »

So the pandemic has simply been a big fib then?

I wish someone could have told all those people that died, the big fakers!

What in that post isn't true?

They did change the criteria for a pandemic.

They did change how deaths are attributed.

They are using a fraudulent test to scare people.

And the vaccine is experimental.

Where in the tweet does it say that the people who died were fakers?

plodder · 04-12-2020 9:18am

Caraibh wrote: »

What in that post isn't true?

They are using a fraudulent test to scare people.

And the vaccine is experimental.

Both false.

schmoo2k · 04-12-2020 9:31am

plodder wrote: »

Children, pregnant women and people with some conditions aren't going to be given it, and that's not because it is unsafe, but because it hasn't been tested on those groups.

Children <15 account for 21.15% of our population.

From the WHO: "The percentage of people who need to have antibodies in order to achieve herd immunity against a particular disease varies with each disease. For example, herd immunity against measles requires about 95% of a population to be vaccinated. The remaining 5% will be protected by the fact that measles will not spread among those who are vaccinated. For polio, the threshold is about 80%."

I wonder what % will be required for Covid?

schmoo2k · 04-12-2020 9:43am

Caraibh wrote: »

What in that post isn't true?

They did change the criteria for a pandemic.

They did change how deaths are attributed.

They are using a fraudulent test to scare people.

And the vaccine is experimental.

Where in the tweet does it say that the people who died were fakers?

"They did change the criteria for a pandemic." - not for Covid they didn't and Covid meets the requirement of both anyway.

"They did change how deaths are attributed." - this is only an argument for the total numbers. Covid is killing people without the need of a bus to run them over etc.

"They are using a fraudulent test to scare people." - Don't mix up bad journalism / facbook posts with the actual numbers (hint: the tests aren't 100% accurate, but the accuracy rate they publish is correct).

"And the vaccine is experimental" - correct, but there are three which are have finished up their "testing" phases and are awaiting final approval, at which point they are not "experimental". Note: The number of test patients in the trials has been a lot higher than previous similar (non expedited) trials.

plodder · 04-12-2020 9:44am

schmoo2k wrote: »

Children <15 account for 21.15% of our population.

From the WHO: "The percentage of people who need to have antibodies in order to achieve herd immunity against a particular disease varies with each disease. For example, herd immunity against measles requires about 95% of a population to be vaccinated. The remaining 5% will be protected by the fact that measles will not spread among those who are vaccinated. For polio, the threshold is about 80%."

I wonder what % will be required for Covid?

Apparently, Moderna are about to start a trial with children (and Pfizer already have started). So, maybe it will actually be available for kids eventually.

paw patrol · 04-12-2020 10:28am

Parabellum9 wrote: »

We don’t need anything draconian like that but they should have life made as hard and restricted as possible. It’s their choice if they don’t want to take it but that should come with severe consequences for being able to access services or live life as normal.

Caraibh wrote: »

It's frightening to hear such talk, isn't it? A society of 1st and 2nd class citizens.

but there you have it above - he doesnt want anything draconian but wants life ...wait for it....

life made as hard and restricted as possible

that's the mentality. the inner Chinese communist party coming to the fore. The individual means nothing only the state matters.
Collectivism cheered on by others too.

paw patrol · 04-12-2020 10:32am

ExMachina1000 wrote: »

There are 6 categories of people in my eyes

1Those willing and happy to take the vaccine. They have complete faith. First in the queue if they could etc

2Those who will put any concerns they have to the side because they want to do their part in stopping the virus and getting life back to normal

3Those who are concerned about the vaccine and possible side effects. They have taken previous vaccines but are unsure about this one

4Those who have other health problems can have nobody to turn to to give them reassurances or information specific to their particular health ailment. They are worried about side effects and what might happen to them

5 People who dont want to take the vaccine as they feel that if they catch covid they are not at risk. A mild illness etc.

6 Antivaxxers who believe it's a conspiracy, population control etc

I am both 3 and 5.

prob more on 5 but hard to say.

If i take it won't be for a long time, i'll let the worthy along with the virtue signalling politicians and celebs go first. No need to keep me a place in the queue.

Seweryn · 04-12-2020 10:57am

Interesting to read, here is the instruction published by the UK Government:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/940565/Information_for_Healthcare_Professionals_on_Pfizer_BioNTech_COVID-19_vaccine.pdf

The Belly · 04-12-2020 11:16am

CEO of Pfizer said this on NBC when interviewed last night.

On whether someone can still transmit the virus after vaccination, Pfizer Chairman & CEO Dr. Albert Bourla tells @LesterHoltNBC
“I think this is something that needs to be examined. We are not certain about that right now with what we know.” #Dateline

tobefrank321 · 04-12-2020 11:26am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Jesus christ, should we wear a badge or label to identify ourselves as not taken the vaccine, or maybe herded into compounds and left out under armed guard.

Nope. But you will find your options limited in life going forward.
If you want a proceedure done in hospital, elective or otherwise, the first question you'll be asked is did you receive the vaccine? This will be done to protect the medical staff, vulnerable patients who might share a ward with you but mostly YOURSELF.
After that if you want to travel to a large number of countries who take covid serioualy you'll be asked for proof. The last thing they need is a "Paddy" sick with covid taking up their hospital resources.
No badges or labels, but proof of responsible adult behaviour.

tobefrank321 · 04-12-2020 11:28am

The Belly wrote: »

CEO of Pfizer said this on NBC when interviewed last night.

On whether someone can still transmit the virus after vaccination, Pfizer Chairman & CEO Dr. Albert Bourla tells @LesterHoltNBC
“I think this is something that needs to be examined. We are not certain about that right now with what we know.” #Dateline

If it shortens the symptomatic period and stops people shedding huge amounts of virus through coughing etc this should be enough to reduce spread.

eagle eye · 04-12-2020 11:29am

The Belly wrote:

On whether someone can still transmit the virus after vaccination, Pfizer Chairman & CEO Dr. Albert Bourla tells @LesterHoltNBC â€œI think this is something that needs to be examined. We are not certain about that right now with what we know.â€ #Dateline

CEO of Pfizer said this on NBC when interviewed last night.

Not being certain sounds to me like the vaccine isn't ready.

tobefrank321 · 04-12-2020 11:32am

If you want to be part of society then at least make an effort to boost the herd immunity of society.
Most anti vaxxers benefit from herd immunity without them knowing it. And without vaccines we'd be stuck in permanent lockdown to avoid often fatal diseases.

ebbsy · 04-12-2020 11:37am

I have diabetes but even if I did not I would still get it anyway.

I used to suffer a lot before I got the flu jab. Now things are a lot better.

It is common sense in my view to get this vaccine. If it was not safe it would not be approved.

ebbsy · 04-12-2020 11:40am

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Nope. But you will find your options limited in life going forward.
If you want a proceedure done in hospital, elective or otherwise, the first question you'll be asked is did you receive the vaccine? This will be done to protect the medical staff, vulnerable patients who might share a ward with you but mostly YOURSELF.
After that if you want to travel to a large number of countries who take covid serioualy you'll be asked for proof. The last thing they need is a "Paddy" sick with covid taking up their hospital resources.
No badges or labels, but proof of responsible adult behaviour.

Good point. I think certain airlines will need to see proof of vaccination.

And I agree with them.

Das Reich · 04-12-2020 11:46am

What about people that got the covid already they also have to take the vaccine?

GreeBo · 04-12-2020 11:54am

breezy1985 wrote: »

Or cake

Well we're out of cake.

paw patrol · 04-12-2020 11:54am

tobefrank321 wrote: »

Nope. But you will find your options limited in life going forward.
If you want a proceedure done in hospital, elective or otherwise, the first question you'll be asked is did you receive the vaccine? This will be done to protect the medical staff, vulnerable patients who might share a ward with you but mostly YOURSELF.
After that if you want to travel to a large number of countries who take covid serioualy you'll be asked for proof. The last thing they need is a "Paddy" sick with covid taking up their hospital resources.
No badges or labels, but proof of responsible adult behaviour.

without the numbers of positive results which in itself begs the questiin are you actually sick is asymptotic.

How serious is covdi19 as an illness ?

It doesn't appear to be a bad illness - remember we are flattening the curve and all that jazz.

It would appear to be a numbers game because bar extreme cases it doesn't seem that bad - the current numbers are

47000 active cases only 239 in hospital (remember not all those hospital cases are in there cos of covid either).

In the future when people are immune with the vaccine or with the own immunity* why would a covid case cause any issue for a hospital or HSE equivalent anywhere in the world.

*research is showing that T-Cells are showing a response to covid in people who had it. Funny that isn't mentioned . Vaccine works on TCells too.

The numbers don't tally with the aggression in your post toward people without a vaccine

Ashbourne hoop · 04-12-2020 11:56am

Das Reich wrote: »

What about people that got the covid already they also have to take the vaccine?

It's a good question. With the rate of re-infection barely worth mentioning, its perhaps unlikely to be needed, but its one of the unknowns at this stage.

average_runner · 04-12-2020 11:57am

Das Reich wrote: »

What about people that got the covid already they also have to take the vaccine?

Yes they will. Test on people who had the virus, shown they lost the antibodies after 6 months.

GreeBo · 04-12-2020 11:58am

eagle eye wrote: »

Not being certain sounds to me like the vaccine isn't ready.

Not really, they are certain (up to the demonstrated efficacy levels) that the person taking the vaccine wont get it, they just dont know if you can still be a carrier.

But even if the vaccine meant you couldn't get it or carry it, its still 100% possible to transmit it on your hands, clothes etc.
Its not like its some blood borne disease, its spread by droplets, they dont have to originate *from* you to be *on* you.

Think of it like a bullet proof vest, it is likely going to stop you from getting shot, but if you shoot someone else who isnt wearing a vest they still die.

polesheep · 04-12-2020 12:03pm

average_runner wrote: »

Yes they will. Test on people who had the virus, shown they lost the antibodies after 6 months.

That doesn't mean that they don't have immunity.

paw patrol · 04-12-2020 12:05pm

average_runner wrote: »

Yes they will. Test on people who had the virus, shown they lost the antibodies after 6 months.

what about T-Cells?
Research I read is the T-Cells adapt to fight covid.

in laymans terms:

Antibodes stop you getting the illlness
T-Cells beat up the illness when you get it

the vaccines (ones I read - cos i'm aware there are now millions and billions of vaccines) appear to be related to T-Cells.
You should read more of my posts - I was lashing this stuff out like mad in September

grogi · 04-12-2020 12:06pm

average_runner wrote: »

Yes they will. Test on people who had the virus, shown they lost the antibodies after 6 months.

You don't need a sea of antibodies to have immunity. As long as your body can quickly identify the perpetrator and produce antibodies, you're fine.

average_runner · 04-12-2020 12:15pm

grogi wrote: »

You don't need a sea of antibodies to have immunity. As long as your body can quickly identify the perpetrator and produce antibodies, you're fine.

But when will we know this?

polesheep · 04-12-2020 12:18pm

average_runner wrote: »

But when will we know this?

Having immunity is the norm. You really wouldn't expect the body not to be immune after an initial infection.

average_runner · 04-12-2020 12:21pm

polesheep wrote: »

Having immunity is the norm. You really wouldn't expect the body not to be immune after an initial infection.

But its a respiratory virus which means it can change strain like the flu can.
So reinfection is possible?

eagle eye · 04-12-2020 12:29pm

GreeBo wrote: »

Not really, they are certain (up to the demonstrated efficacy levels) that the person taking the vaccine wont get it, they just dont know if you can still be a carrier.

But even if the vaccine meant you couldn't get it or carry it, its still 100% possible to transmit it on your hands, clothes etc.
Its not like its some blood borne disease, its spread by droplets, they dont have to originate *from* you to be *on* you.

Think of it like a bullet proof vest, it is likely going to stop you from getting shot, but if you shoot someone else who isnt wearing a vest they still die.

He wasn't talking about clothes or any other way you could spread the virus, he was literally talking about the potential for the person to still be a transmitter.
If he said yes or no that's a hell of a lot different to being uncertain. Uncertainty is not acceptable.
I've always had a lot of respect for Pfizer but I'm uncomfortable with this vaccine.
I certainly will not be taking it or the moderna vaccine anyways due to my concerns over mRNA.
I will take the Oxford one.

polesheep · 04-12-2020 12:36pm

average_runner wrote: »

But its a respiratory virus which means it can change strain like the flu can.
So reinfection is possible?

It can but thankfully it seems to be quite stable. If it were to change strain with ease then immunity through vaccination would also be much more difficult to achieve. I'm not advocating that we can do without vaccines and wait for herd immunity through infection, but there is immunity through infection.

average_runner · 04-12-2020 12:38pm

polesheep wrote: »

It can but thankfully it seems to be quite stable. If it were to change strain with ease then immunity through vaccination would also be much more difficult to achieve. I'm not advocating that we can do without vaccines and wait for herd immunity through infection, but there is immunity through infection.

Ok, i was thinking we might need vaccine every year!!

Will you take an approved COVID-19 vaccine?

Comments