Have you been vaccinated?

[cochise]

2nd AZ jab yesterday... A bit tired yesterday but late not and early.morning as well

Weird today.. sore feet and knees when walking

hope you feel better soon mate

 

[Spud_Murphy]

The 1st AZ wrecked me :-( .. I'm of an older vintage so therefore i had my 1st AZ jab several weeks + ago .. within hours of getting the jab I started getting a bad head ache, then i had sweats but feeling very cold .. then in a few days the pain set in across the top of my shoulders and back .. and i developed a throat / chest cough that wouldnt go away and i was now having difficulties breathing .. !!

After ringing my Dr he suggested I go to hospital and I was admitted for 5 days into the infectious disease ward .. a breathing mask and tubes down my throat, drips connected, and in a room that had a plastic screen that people had to use a zipper to get in .. and the nurses wore astronaut like suits .. !!

Speaking with Doctors, they said if I had told them that I had my 1st AZ jab .. they were going to put in down as a fully blown COVID patient .. !! I have been told that the 1st AZ jab kicks ya .. and 2nd one is just a small top up .. but with the Pfizer jabs its the other way round .. 1st jab is a small intro and the 2nd one is the kicker .. !! Good luck folks.

Interesting that they were going to put you down as a Covid case! I wonder how many other vaccine reactions have been marked as Covid cases?

I hope and pray you recover soon tigerskins 🙏🏼

 

[yeti]

Haven't been vaccinated. No intention of being vaccinated.

Why?

I'll keep it as short as possible
Humankind has evolved alongside the virome since our time began.
Our immune system (if kept healthy) is usually capable of dealing with and adapting to changes in the virome.
Occasionally, a virus will evolve that does cause fatalities in the population. However, there is no evolutionary advantage to a virus to kill its host. Therefore a virus will mutate towards being more contagious and less lethal.
Humans adapt by making changes to our DNA to deal with the new virus. Thus an equilibrium is again reached.
Many of you if you are from my generation will remember the 'childhood' diseases such as measles, mumps, chickenpox.
Most of us were encouraged to play with those infected with these diseases so as to build our immunity to these diseases whilst still young.
Both of my sisters got measles. One of them also got mumps. Although exposed to both, I got neither. My immune system took on board the genetic material provided by the virus, and adapted. This of course has led to a life long immunity.
(I did get chickenpox. Bloody annoying as I recall, but not considered particularly serious).
Occasionally, measles would kill a child - tragic for the family. However, the rate of lethality was well below 0.5% even in those that became ill.

This coronavirus is, from my research, more than 99.5% survivable for those that are affected by it, as long as there are no co-morbidities. It is not possible to determine how many people that are exposed to the virus actually become symptomatic. But it would be fair to assume that it is less than 100%.

As to the 'vaccines' themselves ...
There is debate as to whether these 'jabs' can be considered vaccines by the current definition. It has been argued that they are more of a genetic manipulation tool. Leaving this aside, not one of the manufacturers have claimed that their product will create immunity or prevent transmission. The best they can offer is that they are expected to lessen symptoms.
Given that as of 26th February,2021, VAERS (a passive reporting system in the USA that practically captures less than 2% of actual events - as verified by ***), has reported 1265 deaths and 2743 hospitalisations, 4930 urgent care responses and 240 cases of anaphylaxis, I personally see no justification in taking the risk for questionable benefits.

The PCR test is also fundamentally flawed as a diagnostic tool for Covid. The inventor of the original PCR test, Kary Mullis had stated many times prior to his death, that the test was never designed as a diagnostic tool. Rather it is an amplification tool. If used at a sufficiently high cycle, it will find virtually anything, as we are all exposed to the virome all the time - in the air, the water, the soil.

A study published by Oxford Academia in September 2020, found that at a cycle threshold of 25, the test was 70% accurate, at 30 cycles it is 20% accurate and at 35 cycles, (the level used most often in the US and Europe, only 3% of tests were accurate. That is 97% or positive results were false positive.

Anyway, sorry for the ramble, but that is the reason I am not intending on getting jabbed. However, I am always open to new and better research should it be presented.
Cheers



Great post thank you

No it's not, it's a horrendous post.

Yes viruses have existed as long as people have existed, and yes eventually some of the population develops natural immunity to a particular virus. How many people do you have to kill however on the journey to develop that natural immunity?

Even if we take your "own research" data - that COVID is 99.5% survivable for no co-morbidities. If half the Australian population gets COVID at some point in their lives, and none of them have a co-morbidity (and none of them are old), it would still kill 62,500 people (of the 12.5M infected).

Now who is going to decide which of those 60 thousand die, many of those deaths preventable? That's about 40 years combined of your average national road toll death.

The second myth you purport is about living with viruses. OK your sisters got measles and survived. Death rates in the US in the 1980s were 0.3%, so for every ~333 babies catching measles 1 died. If 1000 kids got measles, 3 died. Those deaths have basically gone due to vaccination.

Again, who is going to volunteer their baby up to be one of the 3 per 1000 who dies?

And in impoverished areas, malnourished, immunocompromised - death rates up to 30% from measles.

And measles has been known since at least the 9th century, so that's a 0.3% chance of dying despite our species having lived with measles for at least 1200 years. COVID we are talking about an entirely disease-naive population, not one that has had over a thousand years of exposure to develop a community immunity.

But forget measles, you probably aren't old enough to remember smallpox being common - 30% death rate all ages groups.

Mate, I'm not going to try to convince anyone to take or not to take any vaccine or genetic therapy. Everyone can make up their own mind. Someone asked me a question why I hadn't been vaccinated, and I answered it. You are entitled to do what you wish with your life, as am I. I am neither asking your permission nor seeking your approval.

 

[jirskyr]

Actually even one puff of a cigarette can cause health issues to the body so that rules out that comparison, so the point still stands…however I respect your opinion to be vaccinated straight away, I just can’t in good faith do the same…yet! Given some time and once full effects of the vaccine is shown to be safe my tune will change, as of now with the current climate in the political world, I’ll be staying clear of anything the government tries to force on us. Stay woke my g…trust no one.

I can only say it one more time - the vaccine has been provide to be safe, already. It's already been proven to be safe. Safe it has proven to be.

The FDA (US), TGA (AU), EMA (EU), MFDS (Korea), PMDA (Japan)... all the world's drug regulatory agencies independently assess medications for approval, so you have multiple expert bodies assessing safety and efficacy data for local use.

The vaccines have already gone into the arms of hundreds of millions, and eventually it will be billions of people. You will see safety data very easily with that level of administration. It would be very obvious if there are serious safety concerns with that weight of data.

My other question is, assuming you are a layperson for medical / drug development - what do you believe is "adequate time" to assess safety of a vaccine? 3 months? 6 months? 18 months? 5 years? I am going to guess you don't actually have a clue and have never before assessed safety data for a drug.

Your last comment about politics - you reckon, what, all the governments of the world are colluding to get their people to vaccinate, and you are suspicious? To what end? What is the purpose of getting everyone vaccinated, if not to protect their safety? Every government on Earth encouraging their countrymen and women to get the shot. Aren't most conspiracies supposed to be done clandestine, not as a consensus, not out in the open?

How can a drug have been proven to be completely safe without any long term affects being observed?
I accept the fact that a vaccine may be the only way to combat the virus, but you can’t assure anyone of the safety of this vaccine...considering they keep adapting it and changing it, I’ll be steering clear till a permanent solution is found. My concerns with the political realm whilst tin foil hat, is that it’s littered with corruption...brah it’s literally Star Wars...time to kick chancellor Palps out. But for real tho if you can’t see what’s going on then your better off getting the jab straight away. Being woke ain’t for everyone. Worlds gotta have sheep, just how society works😉

So I can just tell you that you do not understand how vaccines are developed or how they work. That's not a criticism of you personally, just that your comments show that you don't understand.

I can explain the science of it to you, and I'm happy to do so, but I also get worried of "brain shut" type people who don't want to hear the explanation. For example, the nonsense about Star Wars and sheep... that's all political mumbo-jumbo. I'm not a politician, I am a scientist. For once the pollys are actually making decisions based almost entirely on the feedback of medical, scientific and statistical experts. When it comes to climate change, the pollys aren't taking such close advice from environmental and biological experts, but at least with COVID *most* political nonsense has been put to the side.

So I will answer your questions.

>How can a drug have been proven to be completely safe without any long term affects being observed?

No drug can be proven to be completely safe, it's not possible. All drugs have risk. Same as all activities have risk. So if you want something to be proven completely safe, it's not possible for drugs or anything else. There is always a risk from anything - panadol, aspirin, milk, beer, eggs, meat, driving, flying etc.

Also as I explained before, vaccines don't tend to have long-term side effects either. You only get one or two jabs, and the response to those jabs is rapid. You are not taking the vaccine over months or years, and the materials inside the jab will not be in your system after a short while, so it's highly unlikely to observe long-term effects. What we do observe is an immune response, which may be long lasting, but that is your body's own response to the jab, not the jab itself still present in your body.

I accept the fact that a vaccine may be the only way to combat the virus, but you can’t assure anyone of the safety of this vaccine…considering they keep adapting it and changing it, I’ll be steering clear till a permanent solution is found.

There is unlikely to be any "permanent" solution. Permanent suggests we never have to worry about it again, but even with diseases like polio and measles, they aren't entirely eradicated, just heavily suppressed. It is believed that smallpox is the only disease ever eradicated from the human population.

And yes we can provide very robust safety data. "Assuring" someone relies on both parties - some people are more difficult to assure, approaching "impossible to assure". Some people refuse to be assured. But the safety data is huge. I'll repeat again that they've given some 3.5 billion doses of the various vaccines to people. You are going to see very clear safety signals in that kind of huge dataset. In fact I can't even think of a single other risk factor which will have 3.5 billion incidents in a 12 month period. The vaccine safety profiles are becoming one of the most robust datasets on the planet.

You also need to consider the safety profile of being vaccinated vs not being vaccinated. The health authorities aren't suggesting you take a vaccine for no reason, they are suggesting because your risk of serious illness under COVID is very real and very present.

Also with respect to changing and adapting, that's either because the virus mutates (because it does) or because they have another strategy to improve or modify the vaccine. This is normal. The seasonal flu shot is changed annually because influenza mutates that rapidly, and they need to adjust the jab to adapt. That isn't a sign of lack of confidence, it's a sign of diligent science. Same as any other policy or process, including rugby league - you adapt to the situation at hand.

 

[hobbo1]

2nd AZ jab yesterday... A bit tired yesterday but late not and early.morning as well

Weird today.. sore feet and knees when walking

Sounds like gout mate

 

[jirskyr]

Got my first Pfizer with no dramas.

My Mrs and a bunch of people from work also had no problems with Pfizer, nor has anyone I know had a problem with AZ.

I have a lot of anti-vax friends, family and co-workers who urge me to do my "research" but get upset when I tell them I did actually do a lot of research by reading medical journals rather than tinfoilhat.net

At this point, I respect any adult's personal choice to not get vaccinated and am not about to lecture, judge, or call them childish names.

*I'm aware I just labelled them anti-vax but did it for the sake of similicity*

You know I made a comment in this thread, that sometimes I think "doing your own research" is part of the problem.

I wouldn't expect laypersons - i.e. non-medical and non-scientific - to suddenly be able to understand the scientific concepts or the data being presented. Of course people can "read up" and sort of do crash courses, and of course people are much more broadly versed in vaccination / infection concepts than they used to be, but it's still a very recent event and many people do not have the underlying training that is required to absorb the more complicated concepts.

Myself, I'm not some kind of Einstein, but I did go to university for 3 years specifically to study drugs, and I have had a continuously active career in the field for the past 18 years. I hold a senior position in my company in Australia. That's 18 years of working with drug development data and concepts on a daily basis. This simply cannot be replicated with some heavy reading over the course of a year.

You say for example medial journals. And you are correct to some extent. But journal articles are written for peer review, not for general public consumption. You can have a go at reading them of course, but journal articles don't hold your hand, and in many cases assume some level of professional competence in the field.

So I see a lot of folks getting themselves all twisted up and confused with even legitimate sources of information. And because new information is continuously coming in, it makes their job just that more difficult.

Better I think to do a little bit of personal research, then ask an expert, e.g. your doctor, for an informed professional opinion. Also take the government's health expert advice - they have the best access to the latest data. You don't really need to make your mind up for yourself frankly, it's not that kind of consideration. COVID is serious and vaccines will save lives. I don't know what other personal consideration someone needs. Even purely on a risk-reduction basis it's an obvious answer.

 

[jirskyr]

The Australian Government has given us the answer to the first question. In a bad outbreak we could expect 3.5% of the population to catch Covid.

No that's not what they said. They were taking an observed (European) infection rate of 3.5% of population. They are giving risk scenarios, they aren't predicting how many people they think will get COVID if it was to rip through. Those European rates are inclusive of European responses to COVID - lockdowns etc. They are also periodic - cases per 16 weeks. Not cases per year, or per lifetime.

You see, the article you quoted was an attempt to show low relative risk rate of the AZ vaccine vs risk of not being vaccinated. It's trying to show how many deaths could be avoided from a variety of infection projections over a short period of time.

But you have crunched and twisted the data, and I am going to make a guess here that you were already vaccination-skeptic before you read the material. I.e. I am guessing you didn't read the material first, then become concerned about the vaccine.

And why just this one document? There are many resources available if you are that committed to crunching numbers, don't just hang on one document as the bible of vaccine determination.

And even if not AZ, fine, get the Pfizer jab as soon as possible. It's the primary indicator for young people anyway.

You raise many other points that I believe are contestable, but I don’t want to turn this into a long to-ing and fro-ing, so I’ll leave it there.

You are right that the nitty-gritty is irrelevant. AZ confers 80% reduction to risk of death and serious illness. You don't really need to know anything else. The risk of having a vaccine is substantially lower (probably lower) than the risk of contracting and suffering from COVID.

You don't need any more debate than that. Don't take the vaccine, but in doing to you increase your risk of serious illness and death, and increase the risk to the general community.

 

[tiger_one]

2nd AZ jab yesterday... A bit tired yesterday but late not and early.morning as well

Weird today.. sore feet and knees when walking

Keep well champion @innsaneink and tell us how things go as you improve.

 

[Yossarian]

Getting Pfizer dose 2 next week. I'll be very happy to do so.

 

[jirskyr]

Haven't been vaccinated. No intention of being vaccinated.

Why?

I'll keep it as short as possible
Humankind has evolved alongside the virome since our time began.
Our immune system (if kept healthy) is usually capable of dealing with and adapting to changes in the virome.
Occasionally, a virus will evolve that does cause fatalities in the population. However, there is no evolutionary advantage to a virus to kill its host. Therefore a virus will mutate towards being more contagious and less lethal.
Humans adapt by making changes to our DNA to deal with the new virus. Thus an equilibrium is again reached.
Many of you if you are from my generation will remember the 'childhood' diseases such as measles, mumps, chickenpox.
Most of us were encouraged to play with those infected with these diseases so as to build our immunity to these diseases whilst still young.
Both of my sisters got measles. One of them also got mumps. Although exposed to both, I got neither. My immune system took on board the genetic material provided by the virus, and adapted. This of course has led to a life long immunity.
(I did get chickenpox. Bloody annoying as I recall, but not considered particularly serious).
Occasionally, measles would kill a child - tragic for the family. However, the rate of lethality was well below 0.5% even in those that became ill.

This coronavirus is, from my research, more than 99.5% survivable for those that are affected by it, as long as there are no co-morbidities. It is not possible to determine how many people that are exposed to the virus actually become symptomatic. But it would be fair to assume that it is less than 100%.

As to the 'vaccines' themselves ...
There is debate as to whether these 'jabs' can be considered vaccines by the current definition. It has been argued that they are more of a genetic manipulation tool. Leaving this aside, not one of the manufacturers have claimed that their product will create immunity or prevent transmission. The best they can offer is that they are expected to lessen symptoms.
Given that as of 26th February,2021, VAERS (a passive reporting system in the USA that practically captures less than 2% of actual events - as verified by ***), has reported 1265 deaths and 2743 hospitalisations, 4930 urgent care responses and 240 cases of anaphylaxis, I personally see no justification in taking the risk for questionable benefits.

The PCR test is also fundamentally flawed as a diagnostic tool for Covid. The inventor of the original PCR test, Kary Mullis had stated many times prior to his death, that the test was never designed as a diagnostic tool. Rather it is an amplification tool. If used at a sufficiently high cycle, it will find virtually anything, as we are all exposed to the virome all the time - in the air, the water, the soil.

A study published by Oxford Academia in September 2020, found that at a cycle threshold of 25, the test was 70% accurate, at 30 cycles it is 20% accurate and at 35 cycles, (the level used most often in the US and Europe, only 3% of tests were accurate. That is 97% or positive results were false positive.

Anyway, sorry for the ramble, but that is the reason I am not intending on getting jabbed. However, I am always open to new and better research should it be presented.
Cheers



Great post thank you

No it's not, it's a horrendous post.

Yes viruses have existed as long as people have existed, and yes eventually some of the population develops natural immunity to a particular virus. How many people do you have to kill however on the journey to develop that natural immunity?

Even if we take your "own research" data - that COVID is 99.5% survivable for no co-morbidities. If half the Australian population gets COVID at some point in their lives, and none of them have a co-morbidity (and none of them are old), it would still kill 62,500 people (of the 12.5M infected).

Now who is going to decide which of those 60 thousand die, many of those deaths preventable? That's about 40 years combined of your average national road toll death.

The second myth you purport is about living with viruses. OK your sisters got measles and survived. Death rates in the US in the 1980s were 0.3%, so for every ~333 babies catching measles 1 died. If 1000 kids got measles, 3 died. Those deaths have basically gone due to vaccination.

Again, who is going to volunteer their baby up to be one of the 3 per 1000 who dies?

And in impoverished areas, malnourished, immunocompromised - death rates up to 30% from measles.

And measles has been known since at least the 9th century, so that's a 0.3% chance of dying despite our species having lived with measles for at least 1200 years. COVID we are talking about an entirely disease-naive population, not one that has had over a thousand years of exposure to develop a community immunity.

But forget measles, you probably aren't old enough to remember smallpox being common - 30% death rate all ages groups.

Mate, I'm not going to try to convince anyone to take or not to take any vaccine or genetic therapy. Everyone can make up their own mind. Someone asked me a question why I hadn't been vaccinated, and I answered it. You are entitled to do what you wish with your life, as am I. I am neither asking your permission nor seeking your approval.

Fair enough but I was actually responding to someone who said your post was great.

Good luck if you get COVID.

 

[Papacito]

Got my first Pfizer with no dramas.

My Mrs and a bunch of people from work also had no problems with Pfizer, nor has anyone I know had a problem with AZ.

I have a lot of anti-vax friends, family and co-workers who urge me to do my "research" but get upset when I tell them I did actually do a lot of research by reading medical journals rather than tinfoilhat.net

At this point, I respect any adult's personal choice to not get vaccinated and am not about to lecture, judge, or call them childish names.

*I'm aware I just labelled them anti-vax but did it for the sake of similicity*

You know I made a comment in this thread, that sometimes I think "doing your own research" is part of the problem.

I wouldn't expect laypersons - i.e. non-medical and non-scientific - to suddenly be able to understand the scientific concepts or the data being presented. Of course people can "read up" and sort of do crash courses, and of course people are much more broadly versed in vaccination / infection concepts than they used to be, but it's still a very recent event and many people do not have the underlying training that is required to absorb the more complicated concepts.

Myself, I'm not some kind of Einstein, but I did go to university for 3 years specifically to study drugs, and I have had a continuously active career in the field for the past 18 years. I hold a senior position in my company in Australia. That's 18 years of working with drug development data and concepts on a daily basis. This simply cannot be replicated with some heavy reading over the course of a year.

You say for example medial journals. And you are correct to some extent. But journal articles are written for peer review, not for general public consumption. You can have a go at reading them of course, but journal articles don't hold your hand, and in many cases assume some level of professional competence in the field.

So I see a lot of folks getting themselves all twisted up and confused with even legitimate sources of information. And because new information is continuously coming in, it makes their job just that more difficult.

Better I think to do a little bit of personal research, then ask an expert, e.g. your doctor, for an informed professional opinion. Also take the government's health expert advice - they have the best access to the latest data. You don't really need to make your mind up for yourself frankly, it's not that kind of consideration. COVID is serious and vaccines will save lives. I don't know what other personal consideration someone needs. Even purely on a risk-reduction basis it's an obvious answer.

Good points.

To clarify, I'm not diving into peer reviewed articles. They can be difficult enough to fully interpret or apply properly in my field that I've studied and worked in for longer than I care to admit.

However I am happy to listen to the short-hand versions from people who put in the hard yards doing a phd and spending time in the lab and exercise a little common sense when it comes to assessing how reliable they are.

 

[jirskyr]

I have not chosen not to be vaccinated. I have chosen not to be vaccinated with an experimental gene therapy.

Ah, not experimental any more, approved. Every drug pre-approval is experimental, i.e. the AZ vaccine was experimental, the Novavax vaccine IS experimental here (until it isn't).

Also what is specifically wrong with gene therapy, apart from the potential "scare" of the term?

When I say “experimental” I mean that the vaccine trials still have a couple of years to run and that the have been given Emergency Use Authorisation (EAU) at least that’s the term in the USA.

With regard to my concerns with “gene therapy” there is too much to say here. I would simply ask: what does the long term safety data tell us about the gene therapy vaccines ?

Of course, that’s a rhetorical question – there are no long term safety data.

I’ve said too much already on these topics so I think I will exit this thread, otherwise I could go on and on.

I'm sorry but that is a misunderstanding of how trials work. Ongoing trials can deliver definitive results before they completely cease, and often that is actually by design. "Experimental" is actually a meaningless term, as you can submit data to the regulatory authorities whenever you like. The authorities make determination on the volume and analysis of data you present, not the length of time the study ran.

Some studies even finish early because the results are so conclusive.

For example the Pfizer study, you can reference the protocol yourself:
https://cdn.pfizer.com/pfizercom/2020-11/C4591001_Clinical_Protocol_Nov2020.pdf

* The primary Phase 2/3 efficacy endpoints were COVID incidence post-dose
* Primary 2/3 safety endpoints - events up to 7 days, then events up to 6 months.

The Pfizer study actually runs for 24 months post-dose for subjects, but these are not primary endpoints, they are secondary endpoints.

So Pfizer took that primary efficacy/safety data to FDA (and other bodies) and said "this is what we found, do you agree it's safe and effective to administer in this pandemic"? And I don't believe any authority has yet declined Pfizer approval.

TGA made it very clear how and why they approved Pfizer:
https://www.tga.gov.au/media-release/tga-provisionally-approves-pfizer-covid-19-vaccine
The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) has granted provisional approval to Pfizer Australia Pty Ltd for its COVID-19 vaccine, COMIRNATY, making it the first COVID-19 vaccine to receive regulatory approval in Australia.

Following a thorough and independent review of Pfizer's submission, the TGA has decided that this vaccine meets the high safety, efficacy and quality standards required for use in Australia.

COMIRNATY is provisionally approved and included in the Australian Register of Therapeutic Goods (ARTG) for active immunisation to prevent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by SARS-CoV-2, in individuals 16 years of age and older.

Provisional approval of this vaccine is valid for two years and means it can now be legally supplied in Australia. The approval is subject to certain strict conditions, such as the requirement for Pfizer to continue providing information to the TGA on longer term efficacy and safety from ongoing clinical trials and post-market assessment. COMIRNATY has been shown to prevent COVID-19 however it is not yet known whether it prevents transmission or asymptomatic disease.

EUA in the US is a regulatory position to permit faster access to new drugs in an emergency climate, it doesn't necessarily mean they are incomplete or lacking in data. TGA call it "provisional approval".

Most studies are not done in the midst of a pandemic, so it is understood that different datasets may be available at different times, and most of these approvals come with the caveat that the pharma companies are to continue to submit periodic safety reports.

But fundamentally - the idea that a drug is still being researched does not mean it lacks safety or efficacy data. They are still doing research on paracetamol and aspirin and those have been around for decades.

 

[cochise]

Got my first Pfizer with no dramas.

My Mrs and a bunch of people from work also had no problems with Pfizer, nor has anyone I know had a problem with AZ.

I have a lot of anti-vax friends, family and co-workers who urge me to do my "research" but get upset when I tell them I did actually do a lot of research by reading medical journals rather than tinfoilhat.net

At this point, I respect any adult's personal choice to not get vaccinated and am not about to lecture, judge, or call them childish names.

*I'm aware I just labelled them anti-vax but did it for the sake of similicity*

You know I made a comment in this thread, that sometimes I think "doing your own research" is part of the problem.

I wouldn't expect laypersons - i.e. non-medical and non-scientific - to suddenly be able to understand the scientific concepts or the data being presented. Of course people can "read up" and sort of do crash courses, and of course people are much more broadly versed in vaccination / infection concepts than they used to be, but it's still a very recent event and many people do not have the underlying training that is required to absorb the more complicated concepts.

Myself, I'm not some kind of Einstein, but I did go to university for 3 years specifically to study drugs, and I have had a continuously active career in the field for the past 18 years. I hold a senior position in my company in Australia. That's 18 years of working with drug development data and concepts on a daily basis. This simply cannot be replicated with some heavy reading over the course of a year.

You say for example medial journals. And you are correct to some extent. But journal articles are written for peer review, not for general public consumption. You can have a go at reading them of course, but journal articles don't hold your hand, and in many cases assume some level of professional competence in the field.

So I see a lot of folks getting themselves all twisted up and confused with even legitimate sources of information. And because new information is continuously coming in, it makes their job just that more difficult.

Better I think to do a little bit of personal research, then ask an expert, e.g. your doctor, for an informed professional opinion. Also take the government's health expert advice - they have the best access to the latest data. You don't really need to make your mind up for yourself frankly, it's not that kind of consideration. COVID is serious and vaccines will save lives. I don't know what other personal consideration someone needs. Even purely on a risk-reduction basis it's an obvious answer.

My time at uni may or may not have involved drugs, but I doubt you could call it studying them.

 

[voice_of_reason]

You know I made a comment in this thread, that sometimes I think "doing your own research" is part of the problem.

I've read some horrendous things online about vaccines.

One person - who told me to 'do my own research' - suggested 'vaccines are the genocide' and COVID posed no risk to anyone. She then went on to say the Government stuffed things when they could have gotten plenty of Hydroxychloroquine (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is ineffective as has danger side-effects) to prevent disease.

There's some very dangerous, misinformed people out there.

 

[voice_of_reason]

So, AstraZeneca jab one today.

After a pause of a few months, my Dr said the dangers from COVID were sufficient to get a vaccine even if I'm at slightly higher risk of adverse effects.

If I don't report back tomorrow, please may the Tigers win on the weekend in tribute.

 

[tiger_one]

Just heard last night that an extended family member of ours (an Indonesian national) caught Covid this week (along with his wife and 2 children). He lives in Jakarta, & caught it they think from his "driver." Sadly, the father has had a turn for the worst, and is on oxygen support, but has to do his best from home as the hospital system is full and in chaos. And to make things even more sad, his family was going to be the last ones in their close family unit to be vaccinated this coming week - so close!
Kindly remember him (and his family) in your thoughts.
We are so lucky here in Oz.

 

[earl]

that sometimes I think “doing your own research” is part of the problem.

You can only do this if you have somehow developed a robust view of science. It's not perfect but it's pretty good.

So you need to know to be extremely careful with edge case scenarios and opinions. You need to be really careful analyzing data because people don't really get it. I tried stating earlier in this thread people will and have already died when they might not have if they got the vaccine.

One way to view it is there is a consensus view. The consensus view is typically correct. If the consensus view says x and you are doing y you need to be more critical of yourself. People unfortunately are less critical in these situations.

I get that there are holes in science. That is how science develops. The practice of medicine has changed drastically over the years.

 

[earl]

Just heard last night that an extended family member of ours (an Indonesian national) caught Covid this week (along with his wife and 2 children). He lives in Jakarta, & caught it they think from his "driver." Sadly, the father has had a turn for the worst, and is on oxygen support, but has to do his best from home as the hospital system is full and in chaos. And to make things even more sad, his family was going to be the last ones in their close family unit to be vaccinated this coming week - so close!
Kindly remember him (and his family) in your thoughts.
We are so lucky here in Oz.

Sorry to hear. I wish your family well.

 

[innsaneink]

2nd AZ jab yesterday... A bit tired yesterday but late not and early.morning as well

Weird today.. sore feet and knees when walking


Keep well champion @innsaneink and tell us how things go as you improve.

A blues clean sweep tonite will help

 

[mike]

Just heard last night that an extended family member of ours (an Indonesian national) caught Covid this week (along with his wife and 2 children). He lives in Jakarta, & caught it they think from his "driver." Sadly, the father has had a turn for the worst, and is on oxygen support, but has to do his best from home as the hospital system is full and in chaos. And to make things even more sad, his family was going to be the last ones in their close family unit to be vaccinated this coming week - so close!
Kindly remember him (and his family) in your thoughts.
We are so lucky here in Oz.

Terrible news. Wishing your family well and hope the situation turns around and everyone recovers.