Compulsory vaccinations

In two years? Nobody knows yet many on here have already time travelled and told us that the effects of it last for years.

 

Exactly and yet you bang on about the effects of the vaccine with such certainty

 

Do I? Could you quote that for me please?

 

that do?

 

Where in that quote do I state the effects of the vaccine with certainty?

 

basically you can’t have it both ways you go on about the possible unknown effects of a vaccine that’s not had longer testing but seem to ignore the facts that this horrible virus has killed millions across the world and people are suffering ill effects for months ( which are known effects)
For me that’s the overriding impression that you give.

 

You have missed the point so spectacularly.

We do not know the long term effects of covid. People have guessed but nobody knows the long term effects because it has only existed for a short while.

We do not know the long term effects of the vaccine. People have guessed but nobody knows the long term effects because it has only existed for a short while.

That isn't having it both ways, it's looking at both the same way.


But I'll ask again when have I stated with certainty the long term effects of the vaccine? You seem so sure that I have done that but then quoted me saying completely the opposite. It's absolutely bonkers

 

OK have it your way, I just can’t be arsed to argue with you.We all know you could argue the hind leg of a donkey.
I just said that in my opinion that’s the impression that you leave.

 

No you said that I have stated with certainty the long term effects of the vaccine. I haven't ever done that and when asked to provide evidence you can't and have changed to 'its the impression you give'. An adult would just say 'sorry my mistake, I've checked and no you didn't say that'

 

No I said you bang on about the perceived effects with such certainty, and in my opinion you do

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Question_mark

That will help you understand the difference between certainty and a question

 

You do understand the meaning of the words impression and opinion don’t you ?as in yours isn’t the only one that counts .
I’ve told you how you come across to me and you obviously don’t like it, but that still doesn’t change my opinion.

 

It's fair to say that some people on here have done their level best in trying to create a strong impression that a Covid vaccine could be very harmful to people.

Comparing a vaccine they know nothing about whilst throwing about the words 'cancer' and making comparisons with entirely incomparable drugs that led to birth defects some 65 years ago is just baseless scaremongering.

 

What are the effects 2 years on of taking this vaccine?

Edit: in fact a few questions.

What is the reason that clinical trials usually last for such a long period of time?
Is it true that clinical trials have previously (in recent past) had to be stopped far into phase 3 trials due to the appearance of serious adverse effects?
Has this vaccine been trialed for an extended period of time?
Do you know whether there are any adverse effects of taking the vaccine two years down the line?

If you answer all of those questions honestly you can only draw the conclusion that taking the vaccine is a much higher risk than usual as it has not undergone the rigorous long term testing that is usually required. That isn't scsremon it's factually correct.

Now if you're in the extremely high risk category for covid-19 then it makes sense to try the vaccine anyway as the risk of adverse effects are lower than the risk of serious complications or death from covid.

If you are fit and healthy can you honestly say the same?

 

Depending on which vaccine you are talking about. But probably fairly similar to others that are tested, peer reviewed and administered. Tiredness, sore arm, fatigue.

 

A sore arm for two years? Jesus

 

I’ve had asymptomatic flu all year. Just can’t shake it off.

 

And from my post you came up with that conclusion? Really?? Are you a troll or just plain stupid? What is the comparison with the current situation and Mengele - a sadist who was the antithesis of a medical man researching Eugenics with an endgame of exterminating an entire group of people who he regarded as subhuman. The implication that I would even consider that he had " some good ideas" is actually quite offensive.

Comprehension was not one of your strong points at school was it? Exactly where have I stated "enforced vaccination for the harmless to many covid 19" is my "position"? The latter point is debatable anyway since there are equally many who are badly affected by it and some long term. You have chose to ignore the fact that the more widespread and the longer it lasts the more chance of mutation to something far worse. Re the 99% there is nothing "bizarre" about that statement if you were capable of understanding it. was arguing that there could be a 'tipping point' where the survival of a species could override individual freedoms.at some point in the future if a deadlier virus appeared. It was NOT a reference to the current situation or Covid 19 (which IMO is a 'warning shot' from nature (and one we are not handling very well.)

Oh dear! another one who did not read and comprehend the full post and missed the point. As per my reply to Supertyke above....the more people in circulation who do not have the vaccine and are therefore 'eligible hosts' means it remains in circulation for much longer. This means a greater possibility of it mutating into something that is far more potent. Even if it simply mutates into something that nullifies the current vaccine the whole thing starts again.

I wish people would read and digest my posts rather than seeing my name and using their personal dislike of me to cloud their judgement and misconstrue what I have posted.

 

Again I say that neither option is great but I refer back to my point about 'Known unknowns' and 'unknown unknowns' We all know the vaccine could have long term side effects. That is a 'Known unknown' However with the virus there are many 'unknown unknowns' One is the same as the vaccine i.e. long term effects. However, regarding not vaccinating there are additional unknown unknowns like the potential mutation into a deadlier virus, not to mention the disruption to, or even destruction of, our way of life should the whole pandemic drag on for many months/possibly years if the uptake of the vaccine is muted. I did a simple balance sheet (albeit the plusses were sparse to say the least but vaccination is IMO the lesser of 2 evils)

Overall I do not agree with compulsory vaccination with Covid in its current level of risk but nor to I agree with the 'anti vaccine' views of some (albeit they are entitled to their opinion. I do vehemently disagree with those who actively seek to discourage people through unfounded theories to have the vaccine. To me , it is rather like belief in God , i.e. an Act of Faith. I do not personally believe in a God but millions do and it is NOT for me to discourage them from their views. So it should be with to vaccinate or not. (Unless it becomes obvious that the 99% scenario I referenced and survival of the human race is at stake). That said I trust the science up to a point so would have the vaccine. Conspiracy theories without evidence and anti vax movements are just plain wrong.

 

Which clinical trials, when, and for what vaccine? One that is to be used in the unsafe state?

I'm not sure what an 'extended period of time' is, but no virus in the history of man kind has had the weight of science thrown behind it like this has. A monumental effort which should be applauded.

Please cite peer reviewed papers to suggest this vaccine will be 'unsafe two years down the line'. Historically, vaccinations are incredibly safe. Smallpox, polio, tetanus, diphtheria, measles, mumps etc. Incredible progress in iradicating and/or seriously limiting the effects of historically dangerous viruses.

Nobody has any interest in allowing billions of people to be injected with something that us going to put hundreds of millions of lives at risk. It's just crazy nonsensical Dr Wakefield nonsense.

I don't need the flu vaccine, but I'm having it anyway. If it stops me from catching it and I don't pass it on to other people then why wouldn't I have it? Vaccinations provide great immunity. Historical fact.

You need evidence to suggest it's not safe, not a load of 'what-if-ery' based on your non-expert opinions.