The jab ..
- Thread starter pvr
- Start date
ronk said:
Not really, there are 70% who have a YOLO attitude, 19% that are a bit iffy and not so sure and 11% that are against it.
It’s only the 11% who probably won’t for whatever reason - eventually the other 89% will get it once it’s seen as safe and effective.
I think It will give me my freedom back even if I’m required to wear a mask in the short term until the majority are jabbed.
There’s things I want to do after all this time. Things that can’t really be done remotely.
I want to go and see about some new garage doors, take both our watches for service, Mrs ronk needs a new iPhone etc etc - I need a couple of Euro trips in the Z and a few trips away in the U.K.Duxford, Suffolk, Scotland trips to the Borderlands etc - the list goes on and on.
No time to waste.
I think It will give me my freedom back even if I’m required to wear a mask in the short term until the majority are jabbed.
There’s things I want to do after all this time. Things that can’t really be done remotely.
I want to go and see about some new garage doors, take both our watches for service, Mrs ronk needs a new iPhone etc etc - I need a couple of Euro trips in the Z and a few trips away in the U.K.Duxford, Suffolk, Scotland trips to the Borderlands etc - the list goes on and on.
No time to waste.
Basically your comments were saying if you question 'the jab', you're an anti-vaxxer. Which isn't true. My quip back was that it seems that you feel that there is no question of the vaccine being 100% legit, and that anyone else's view is plain wrong. The link was tied into that as a snide comment that you probably feel the big pharmas are 100% above board and that their intentions are always for the benefit of the customer.ronk said:
Obviously they're not. As I've said before, they're just a business.
The previous mention of the polio vaccine shows that the makers of the vaccines can and do make mistakes.
With all vaccinations and medicines there is a risk that individuals need to evaluate for themselves. What is good and safe for one is not for another.
Just think how many medicines and tablets GPs give out that dont work for some but work for others. One springs to mind for myself where the GP changed my dads pills and the result nearly killed him. The hospital said that if he stayed alone he would have died.
With all vaccinations and medicines there is a risk that individuals need to evaluate for themselves. What is good and safe for one is not for another.
Just think how many medicines and tablets GPs give out that dont work for some but work for others. One springs to mind for myself where the GP changed my dads pills and the result nearly killed him. The hospital said that if he stayed alone he would have died.
Flyingfifer said:
There’s lots of things that do that, and they’re bu99er all to do with this thread
Perjorative
Member
Modern society is a two-way street, people reap the benefits but have to be prepared to 'do their bit'. Previous generations understood this and tens of thousands of people put their lives on the line in two World Wars to protect their society and those that they loved - each of them had a much greater chance of serious injury or death than we do but we wouldn't be here if it wasn't for them.
There are a number of people on here that obviously feel that they owe nothing to the society that they live in and that they should put their own needs/concerns before that of society as a whole. There is currently a very grave public health emergency and anyone who refuses the vaccination without genuine health reasons is putting their own needs before that of the society that they live in - they claim that they don't want to take a risk, tiny though it may be, with a new vaccine but are quite happy to put others at risk by refusing it.
There is a word for this - cowardice - a hundred years ago there would have been ladies on the street handing out white feathers to these people.
Man up, grow a pair, and stand in line for the jab...
There are a number of people on here that obviously feel that they owe nothing to the society that they live in and that they should put their own needs/concerns before that of society as a whole. There is currently a very grave public health emergency and anyone who refuses the vaccination without genuine health reasons is putting their own needs before that of the society that they live in - they claim that they don't want to take a risk, tiny though it may be, with a new vaccine but are quite happy to put others at risk by refusing it.
There is a word for this - cowardice - a hundred years ago there would have been ladies on the street handing out white feathers to these people.
Man up, grow a pair, and stand in line for the jab...
Perjorative said:
I'm not getting any of your reasoning there at all , feel free to explain if i have the wrong end of the stick but why are you so uppity if someone doesn't want the jab ?
The jab doesn't prevent a person from carrying or spreading the virus , its aim is to prevent serious reaction /hospitalisation / death for those deemed most at risk .
I don't see any issue whatsoever if someone should decide they do or don't want it , isn't it their loss ? i certainly don't see it as cowardice & by the time the first 20-30% of the country ( approx 2omillion) have been done it will be time for them to have it again the way this virus mutates so unlikely the ones deemed not at risk will ever get to the part in line where they will get a choice .
I'm 52 , good health , nt overweight & non smoker , when exactly would you forecast my appointment for the vaccine ? :? i'm certainly not expecting it anytime this year .
It surprises me that so many pin the hopes of a return to "normality" with a vaccine & even more so that people expect it to be all good in a short period of time
i only see it protecting the most vulnerable from worse case scenario but unless the jab can be given to the whole of the UK within a short period of time the infection cycle will continue to peak & trough as it has done for the last 9/10 months . If we are to believe the blurb that current admissions are from all age groups including many under 40 so likely to be 6-8-10 months before they were next up for the needle .
Bearing in mind the priority jabs are being given to the those with recognised illness or aged 70/80/90 isn't it those people who already don't work , socialise infrequently & likely spend long periods of time either alone or at home :? therefore unlikely they are the ones creating a surge in cases so until the other 60 million in uk get immunity we will all either have to stay isolated / locked down or go back to life where cases rise again & so on & so on & so on .
maxman said:The above hits the nail on the head without waffle
Really :? i bet given the chance to opt in or opt of going to war there would have been a lot more not wanting to go than wanting to go , it wasn't a choice taken " to protect society & their loved ones"
All i read is just nostalgic blurb