Have you been vaccinated?

[momo_amp_medo]

AZ first dose no side effects. Second shot next week.

 

[voice_of_reason]

Blackheath ?

Yep.

Did you have to provide some sort of medical verification that you couldn't have AZ?

 

[fibrodreaming]

Not how it works mate.
Vaccination does 3 things:
(1) reduces your chance of getting COVID
(2) reduces your chance of getting seriously ill from COVID
(3) reduces the chance you pass COVID onto someone else
So maybe you can roll the dice yourself and there’s good odds you’d be OK. However the odds aren’t THAT good

I disagree with your statement “However the odds aren’t THAT good´.

The issue is: how much does vaccination reduces one’s risk of Covid and, more importantly, of dying of Covid.

According to the Pfizer vaccine study, the absolute risk reduction (ARR) for catching Covid was 0.84%. This was because only 0.88% of the control group actually caught Covid.

With regard to how much vaccination would reduce one’s risk of dying of Covid, I looked at the Australian Government’s own data for information. See:

covid-19-vaccination-weighing-up-the-potential-benefits-against-risk-of-harm-from-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca_2.pdf

Their worst-case scenario assumes 3,544 infections per 100,000 people over a 16 week period. Thus, a risk of catching Covid of 3.5% in a bad outbreak.

They assume vaccination (AZ) reduces risk of serious disease or death by 80%.

I used this information to discuss risk with one of my daughters, who is in her mid-30s.

For her age group (30-39) the Government assumes that if all 100,000 were vaccinated, 3 deaths would be prevented. Thus, if no one were vaccinated in that group then 3.75 people would die (3 is 80% of 3.75) and 0.75 would die in the vaccinated group (3.75 – 3).

0.75 deaths per 100,000 is an absolute risk of 0.00075%. While 3.75 deaths per 100,000 is an absolute risk of 0.00375%. This gives an ARR of 0.003% (0.000375% - 0.00075%).

So, vaccination for my daughter would reduce her risk of dying of Covid by 0.003%. Or, put another way, would reduce her risk of dying by 1 chance in 33,333.

Everybody has to make their own personal decision based on their assessment of risk, and that will depend on many factors, the most important of which is underlying health.

Vaccination will make sense for many people, for others, not so much.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

Blackheath ?

Yep.

Did you have to provide some sort of medical verification that you couldn't have AZ?

I haven't been prompted yet, no.

I did see that it could be asked of me. I have my post operation report and cardiologist yearly follow up reports, and if all that fails, they can look at the 11 inch scar on my chest and listen to the valve ticking.

 

[WeststigsRdaBest]

It's a very easy scenario peeps - free medicine. You are lucky enough to live in an era and country where they will give you free medicine, no tricks, no catch.

Without the free medicine, there is a reasonable chance you get very sick and/or risk death.

Makes your life and everyone else's lives easier, scientifically and economically proven.

If you are risk adverse, take solace in the FACT that the vaccine risks are extremely low and after literally hundreds of millions of doses now been given, the safety data pool is very very big. I can understand if you don't like risk, but if you are so risk intolerant: don't drive, ride in a commercial aircraft, swim in the ocean, golf in bad weather, operate heavy machinery, rock climb, ride a horse, run a marathon, handle a weapon, own a motorbike etc.

Also take heart that since vaccines were first invented, we've basically eradicated the threat in Australia from polio, smallpox, tetanus, measles, diptheria, rabies, TB, mumps, whooping cough, rubella, typhoid, cholera. Hoping to add COVID to that list.

No reason not to get vaccinated except for special health concerns. Nerves are also understandable, but if you gave into nerves you'd never kiss a girl/boy, get a job or ride a bike.

So go get your free medicine and let's everyone get our freedoms back.

Driving a car etc the risks are containable and well known..the vaccine has barley started to run out And you say we have a large sample size to judge it..whilst true you are only judging the vaccine from its early stage in the body...smoking comes to mind...everyone did it, wasn’t bad, relieved stress...then oh no, years down the line we find out it’s killing people. I for one am not against a vaccine but to be so blind and say it’s safe it’s ludicrous imo.

If you had 5-24 vaccines a day, every day, then maybe you'd have a point. That's what cigarettes are. One or two ciggies won't do anything to you.

Driving risks are only partially containable - selt belts, drive safe, avoid bad conditions, be rested. Still an awful lot of people die on the roads every year - between 1,000 and 1,500 people every year for the past 15 years.

It seems some folks misunderstand how vaccines work? You take the shots once or twice initially, then your body has an immune response. After this, there's no further activity - the immune response is remembered by your body, and depending on vaccine, it may be life-long or require a booster at some point.

But the vaccine itself is no long present after the initial administration. You aren't taking the vaccine over and over. The risk of safety event from the vaccine itself is tied to the short period after the event, not 1-5 years, or 10 years later.

There have been approx 3.4 BILLION doses of a COVID vaccine given to date. That's huge data; I would imagine much bigger consumption than most average drugs experience in years.

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.

 

[fibrodreaming]

10% of delta variants in the current outbreak are being hospitalised, and 2.5% ending up in ICU.

I decided to reply to your post in two parts to keep the length down.

When you say “10% of delta variants in the current outbreak are being hospitalised, and 2.5% ending up in ICU” I assume you are speaking of the current situation in Australia.

Public Health England (PHE) recently published an interesting study which provides details of the delta variant. The study is entitled “SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern and variants under investigation in England, Technical briefing 17”.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/997418/Variants_of_Concern_VOC_Technical_Briefing_17.pdf

The table relating to the delta variant is on pages 13/14.

From 1 February to 21 June 2021 a total of 92,029 have been infected. Of these, a total of 2,065 have been hospitalised, or, 2.2%.

A total of 117 people have died of the delta variant, which, when one considers that over 92k have been infected gives a case fatality rate (CFR) of only 0.12%. Perhaps the virus is mutating into a more infectious and less lethal form.

Interestingly, there were 7,235 persons who had been fully vaccinated (two doses) that were infected and, of these, 50 died. While 53,822 unvaccinated persons were infected and 44 died.

There would be good explanations for the large difference in mortality between the fully vaccinated and the unvaccinated, presumably because the most at risk were vaccinated first. However, it is a surprise given the avalanche of propaganda supporting vaccination.

My take on this is that the delta variant is not as lethal as being portrayed and that vaccination is no panacea.

 

[earl]

My take on this is that the delta variant is not as lethal as being portrayed and that vaccination is no panacea.

I think you are partially right but in a lot of ways you aren't thinking about this correctly.

I don't believe it is as lethal as being portrayed. It's COVID. It's not ebola. Viruses also tend to over time become more infectious but less virulent. At the same time vaccines save lives and even stating saving lives is underselling vaccines. My dad (nearly 80) has a friend who wasn't vaccinated for polio. He is a hunchback and I'm not exaggerating at all. He didn't die from polio but geez it impacted his life long term.

Weighing up your individual risk is very risky. You are doing assessments based on data which will have a tonne of assumptions but the big one is you are giving your daughter a lower risk of getting the virus than what will probably occur. The real individual risk is the risk of the vaccine causing your daughter to have some unforseen incident compared to getting the vaccine and being at a much lower risk of catching COVID and if she catches COIVD a much lower risk of developing more severe symptoms.

You are basically doing mental gymnastics but you aren't really assessing your personal risks accurately. Your daughter has a much lower chance of having negative impacts from COVID or taking the vaccine compared to not taking the vaccine.

Of course if everyone takes the vaccine and your daughter doesn't get COVID that may be a good personal risk for your daughter to take but for the vast majority of people it's a really poor decision.

Lastly of course the vaccine is no pancea. My youngest son class at school had an outbreak of chicken pox. I think like 33% of them got it. They were vaccinated and the vaccine efficacy is something like 90%. It doesn't mean you won't get it but your risk profile should decline.

I should add that I have told my 20 yo daughter to get the Pfizer vaccine and not the AZ vaccine. I don't see why younger people should take on the risk of the AZ blood clot issue compared to getting an mRNA vaccine. I don't think it's a big risk though.

 

[fibrodreaming]

With regard to how much vaccination would reduce one’s risk of dying of Covid, I looked at the Australian Government’s own data for information. See:
covid-19-vaccination-weighing-up-the-potential-benefits-against-risk-of-harm-from-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca_2.pdf

Sorry I stuffed up the link. The link to the document is here:

https://www.health.gov.au/resources/publications/covid-19-vaccination-weighing-up-the-potential-benefits-against-risk-of-harm-from-covid-19-vaccine-astrazeneca

 

[fibrodreaming]

Weighing up your individual risk is very risky. You are doing assessments based on data which will have a tonne of assumptions but the big one is you are giving your daughter a lower risk of getting the virus than what will probably occur. The real individual risk is the risk of the vaccine causing your daughter to have some unforseen incident compared to getting the vaccine and being at a much lower risk of catching COVID and if she catches COIVD a much lower risk of developing more severe symptoms.

I did the calculation based on the Australian Government's worst case scenario. The assumptions are contained in that scenario. I wanted to use official numbers otherwise I would have been accused of making the numbers up.

So, when you say "...you are giving your daughter a lower risk....". It's not a risk assigned by me, it's assigned by the Government.

 

[earl]

Weighing up your individual risk is very risky. You are doing assessments based on data which will have a tonne of assumptions but the big one is you are giving your daughter a lower risk of getting the virus than what will probably occur. The real individual risk is the risk of the vaccine causing your daughter to have some unforseen incident compared to getting the vaccine and being at a much lower risk of catching COVID and if she catches COIVD a much lower risk of developing more severe symptoms.

I did the calculation based on the Australian Government's worst case scenario. The assumptions are contained in that scenario. I wanted to use official numbers otherwise I would have been accused of making the numbers up.

So, when you say "...you are giving your daughter a lower risk....". It's not a risk assigned by me, it's assigned by the Government.

I get it but you are placing too much faith in those numbers as well as bending them to your argument.

It's cool because it's your life and your responsibility to manage your health risks. I tell you what has already happened and will continue to happen. People will have your same argument. They won't get vaccinated. They will get much more sick than what might have happened and they will die. Sure lots of people will be okay without a vaccine but their risk will be much higher.

I think it's a really poor way for you to assess yourself and your families risk and I pray that you and your family don't suffer because of it.

My opinion is we will have to open up soon and you better be vaccinated. It's the only real tool that we can use to fight this virus long term. People who choose not to get vaccinated and suffer health effects for it are going to be collateral damage because they made that choice. The worst case has already happened and it will happen again.

It's your call though. I'm cool with people doing whatever it is they want to do. I'd like the people who choose not to get vaccinated to understand the risks they are taking on but it's not my problem.

 

[fibrodreaming]

I get it but you are placing too much faith in those numbers as well as bending them to your argument.

As I say, they are the Government's numbers, not mine. And how am I bending them to my argument ? Unless I have made a mistake about the ARR, which is possible, but unintentional. If I have made a mistake, I'd be pleased for it to be pointed out.

I think it’s a really poor way for you to assess yourself and your families risk and I pray that you and your family don’t suffer because of it.

I think it's the ONLY way to assess the situation. Cool and dispassionate. As for the family, they make their own decisions. We discussed it once and that's it. I'm not haranguing them.

People who choose not to get vaccinated and suffer health effects for it

I have not chosen not to be vaccinated. I have chosen not to be vaccinated with an experimental gene therapy. The Government has announced that they will be acquiring Novavax later this year. This interests me because it is a traditional vaccine and had good efficacy especially against the South African strain (against which AZ was not effective at all). I will be following Novavax very carefully.

It’s your call though. I’m cool with people doing whatever it is they want to do. I’d like the people who choose not to get vaccinated to understand the risks they are taking on but it’s not my problem.

I think that's fair enough. We all have to take responsibility for our health and understand the consequences of our decisions. I will tell you this, if I decide not to get vaccinated and then contract Covid, you won't hear me complaining.

 

[Elderslie_Tiger]

If you were booking a Limousine or ride share vehicle would you ask for a vaccinated driver to be supplied.

 

[851]

If you were booking a Limousine or ride share vehicle would you ask for a vaccinated driver to be supplied.

Would be hypocritical if you are not vaccinated yourself

 

[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

 

[hobbo1]

If you were booking a Limousine or ride share vehicle would you ask for a vaccinated driver to be supplied.

Nah
Just a bottle of Jack

 

[Harvey]

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

Hopefully none of you passed any of those childhood illnesses on to someone that suffered the worst complications such as deafness, infertility, encephalitis or Pneumonia.

Whooping Cough doesn't kill a huge percentage of those that have it, but watching my kid who was too young to be vaccinated catch it and end up in hospital was pretty scary.

Love the attitude. People will die, but it wasn't me or anyone I know, so all good.

 

[voice_of_reason]

I haven't been prompted yet, no.

I did see that it could be asked of me. I have my post operation report and cardiologist yearly follow up reports, and if all that fails, they can look at the 11 inch scar on my chest and listen to the valve ticking.

Appreciate the information.

I've just received an email from my Doctor saying the risk of COVID is too high so has (reluctantly) said if I can't get Pfizer to get the AZ. My regular medical centre has no appointments until October. A different centre (even closer to home) had bookings for tomorrow so I'm booked for 12:45.

A couple of the questions on the form regarding clots were interesting - I expect I may have to discuss it with them before getting jabbed. Unfortunately they don't appear to do Pfizer.

 

[Cultured_Bogan]

I haven't been prompted yet, no.

I did see that it could be asked of me. I have my post operation report and cardiologist yearly follow up reports, and if all that fails, they can look at the 11 inch scar on my chest and listen to the valve ticking.

Appreciate the information.

I've just received an email from my Doctor saying the risk of COVID is too high so has (reluctantly) said if I can't get Pfizer to get the AZ. My regular medical centre has no appointments until October. A different centre (even closer to home) had bookings for tomorrow so I'm booked for 12:45.

A couple of the questions on the form regarding clots were interesting - I expect I may have to discuss it with them before getting jabbed. Unfortunately they don't appear to do Pfizer.

Pfizer is a 12 week wait now mate, unless they expedite doses like they have announced. I'm hoping for the best but expecting the worst,

 

[voice_of_reason]

Love the attitude. People will die, but it wasn't me or anyone I know, so all good.

Indeed. I think people are forgetting there has already been 4,000,000 deaths. That's 40x full Olympic stadiums.

Maybe we do adapt, but I think 4 millions deaths is rolling the dice too much.

I recall things like measles when I was a kid, I also remember things like Typhoid, Yellow fever and Polio which have been eliminated with vaccines.

 

[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?