I researched both sides of the debate and decided not to get the vaccine ( thankfully I am under no mandate like many were ). I'm not medically trained (don't need to be) but knew the vaccines had not been through extensive clinical trials ( I guess you know influenza vaccines are in no shape or form similar to Mrna covid vaccines) and given that I am not in the vulnerable category I am satisfied that natural immunity was a better option ((given the survival rates). Still doesn't explain how the advice concerning pregnant women appears to me to be contradictory - a worthy supposition if ever there was one.
Coronavirus
- Thread starter Norman Deeley
- Start date
I researched both sides of the debate and decided not to get the vaccine ( thankfully I am under no mandate like many were ). I'm not medically trained (don't need to be) but knew the vaccines had not been through extensive clinical trials ( I guess you know influenza vaccines are in no shape or form similar to Mrna covid vaccines) and given that I am not in the vulnerable category I am satisfied that natural immunity was a better option ((given the survival rates). Still doesn't explain how the advice concerning pregnant women appears to me to be contradictory - a worthy supposition if ever there was one.
Paul
Jeff Moxshi
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2010
- Messages
- 10,841
- Reaction score
- 2,740
An internet researcher who only reads articles that reinforce his already jaundiced view of the topic
Peer-reviewed research by medical professionals.
Serious adverse events of special interest following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in randomized trials in adults
In 2020, prior to COVID-19 vaccine rollout, the Brighton Collaboration created a priority list, endorsed by the World Health Organization, of potentia…
PuntsWolf
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2010
- Messages
- 15,951
- Reaction score
- 7,769
i can only assume you haven’t read it or are unable to understand it because it doesn’t support your view at allPeer-reviewed research by medical professionals.
Serious adverse events of special interest following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination in randomized trials in adults
In 2020, prior to COVID-19 vaccine rollout, the Brighton Collaboration created a priority list, endorsed by the World Health Organization, of potentia…www.sciencedirect.com
It was a reply to the rather irritating Paul (to put it in context) who like the rather forgetful Kenny probably thinks I organise my thoughts after reading Bob on Twatter.
I understand it completely (and also the limitations it highlights) but then again I am not anti-vaccine. My vaccine hesitancy (covid) relates to the lack of extensive clinical trials and some of the bullshit claims that were made. Please pay attention to the segment in my previous post that reads " given that I am not in the vulnerable category I am satisfied that natural immunity was a better option "
Hopefully the participant level data is made available as it is quite clear in the study that their investigation at this stage is preliminary.
Last edited:
PuntsWolf
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2010
- Messages
- 15,951
- Reaction score
- 7,769
So what is your conclusion from that study?
Despite severe limitations they feel the vaccine may have slightly more SAEs than initially reported. Although 30% more than a really really small number is still a really small number.
And the best clinical trial that could have been done was vaccinating nearly the whole adult population and finding out it significantly decreased death compared to SAEs from the vaccine.
You started off with the vaccine for pregnant ladies. They are an AT RISK group so yes they were advised to have the vaccine.
I didn’t have a booster. Because after having two doses and Covid. The benefit from be having the booster was 0 and the risk was more than 0. That’s common sense. Whether you declare yourself non vulnerable not I don’t really care. It could have bitten you on the arse if you had the susceptible gene but that’s not my problem.
However, this all started with your rant about pregnancy and the vaccine. What you were saying was wrong. As I stated in my original post. I don’t really know what point you’ve tried to make since.
The study is a step in the right direction and I hope they get access to the missing data they point to (which I believe they have requested). No politician will convince me - only the science, so at this stage I am still hesitant.
I strongly disagree about vaccinating nearly the whole adult population (specifically the mandates). In the absence of data and lack of extensive clinical trials ( and in light of the survival rates ) there should be bodily autonomy when I personally feel there has been a degree of coercion. Many have quit their jobs and are being excluded from campuses.
My point in respect of pregnant women (and it is more of an observation than anything else) is that what appears to me to be a contradiction between the promotion of the vaccine against what is detailed in that document ( again I stand to be corrected) . No vaccine is 100% safe but Mrna is a whole new ball game and for the time being I will reserve judgment.
My point is quite clear and I refer you again to the segment I highlighted in bold. I was not ranting I was making a valid observation and presenting it for discussion. Whether you feel qualified enough to tell me I am wrong is totally up to you and your condescending/patronising tone matters little - in fact it humours me.
As you were ..
PuntsWolf
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2010
- Messages
- 15,951
- Reaction score
- 7,769
Agreed
There was no mandates.
There was data and it wasn’t just made up science. The technology was years in the making. There was a degree of coercion, but if there wasn’t we may have suffered more and for longer as a nation. Everyday doctors coerce people into making the right decision, they know what they are talking about (in most cases), the patient doesn’t.
News to me
I corrected you but you haven’t listened.
Your distrust of mRNA is weird. You don’t know what it is clearly or you wouldn’t distrust it. On a par with the vaccine is a microchip for stupidness.
Your initial point was regarding pregnancy. As Above, I corrected you but you haven’t listened. Your weren’t wrong on not taking the vaccine because you didn’t die, that is a fact. Arguably selfish but that is debateable and not factual
"There’s also no evidence it is harmful for pregnant/breastfeeding, there’s just no evidence it isn’t"
"Absence of Data"
Your logic. You are preaching to me. You are more than a contradiction.
Amen ..
I know I wasn't wrong for not taking the vaccine. You are coming across as a sort of deity and your analogy with parachuting somewhat belies the epistemological approach that underpins science. To suggest that mass vaccination is ' the best clinical trial ' ( in the absence of data) scares the shit out of me. Some people had no choice but to give up their livelihoods because they chose bodily autonomy.
COVID-19 vaccination is strongly recommended for pregnant and breastfeeding women
COVID-19 vaccination: women who are pregnant or breastfeeding
Information for women who are pregnant or breastfeeding on coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccination.
In the context of supply under Regulation 174, it is considered that sufficient reassurance of safe use of the vaccine in pregnant women cannot be provided at the present time: however, use in women of childbearing potential could be supported provided healthcare professionals are advised to rule out known or suspected pregnancy prior to vaccination. Women who are breastfeeding should also not be vaccinated.
Last edited:
lemonjelly
Housecoat, la
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2010
- Messages
- 20,615
- Reaction score
- 2,302
Take it easy matey! Hopefully you'll ride it out & it'll be a minor inconvenience.
lemonjelly
Housecoat, la
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2010
- Messages
- 20,615
- Reaction score
- 2,302
Just heard that 2 of our bowls colleagues have tested positive. Another tested positive a couple of weeks ago. It's clearly still circulating.
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2011
- Messages
- 60,430
- Reaction score
- -45,387
It will never stop doing so. Slowly it just becomes another normal illness
lemonjelly
Housecoat, la
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2010
- Messages
- 20,615
- Reaction score
- 2,302
Yeah, I meant it's a handy reminder for good practice (such as good hygiene & not going to work when ill for example). Happy that nowadays when friends test positive they just feel a little unwell & have minor inconvenience for a short period, in contrast to 2 years ago 
Wolf Hunting
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2010
- Messages
- 17,708
- Reaction score
- 653
Could I suggest that whatever level of activity you were at before you got it, Take it easy and DON'T try to get back to it once your 10-14 days have passed. Learn quickly that it's ok to do nothing, rest, rest, and even more rest. Then little bits slowly. If you rush it, you'll be welcomed into the 'Long Covid Club.'. I and almost everyone I know that's had it, all said it's the lack of energy that gets to you.Feel like crap, like mega congestion and a muggy head, very flu like !
I may be lethargic but am struggling to find previous incidence to compare
"A fortnight after, I took the dog for a short walk and I was absolutely wrecked" kind of thing.
Oh, my wife had it before me and she still hasn't got her full sense of taste back, or her sense of smell.
It's a bastard and from my own experience, the tiredness thing will come back in waves! a week apart...
