Total Members Voted: 49
The approved vaccine has been developed using "Emergency Regulations" and has not undergone the extensive trails that normally take place. Its much akin to a war, where desperate need shoves aside longer term plans. The companies will be aware that, should longer term effects result, there will be no shortage of people dragging them through the courts.
Quote from: agricola on 05 December 2020, 04:39:12 pmThe approved vaccine has been developed using "Emergency Regulations" and has not undergone the extensive trails that normally take place. Its much akin to a war, where desperate need shoves aside longer term plans. The companies will be aware that, should longer term effects result, there will be no shortage of people dragging them through the courts.No one will be allowed to take them to court.The UK government has granted pharmaceutical giant Pfizer a legal indemnity protecting it from being sued, enabling its coronavirus vaccine to be rolled out across the country as early as next week.The Department of Health and Social Care has confirmed the company has been given an indemnity protecting it from legal action as a result of any problems with the vaccine.Ministers have also changed the law in recent weeks to give new protections to companies such as Pfizer, giving them immunity from being sued by patients in the event of any complications.
The government is taking on the liability under the Vaccine Damages Payments Act.
Well so much for not forcing it on people 🙄 http://news.sky.com/story/covid-19-britons-back-air-travel-ban-for-people-whove-not-received-coronavirus-vaccine-poll-suggests-12154203Surely if you've been vaccinated then your immune and you have nothing to fear from people that haven't
Well so much for not forcing it on people 🙄 Surely if you've been vaccinated then your immune and you have nothing to fear from people that haven't 🤔
Well so much for not forcing it on people 🙄
Quote from: Dudeofrude on 07 December 2020, 06:01:33 pmWell so much for not forcing it on people 🙄 I was one of the people on that YouGov poll and IMO the question was phrased poorly.What they asked was "Once a vaccine against the coronavirus is freely available to all, do you think it would or would not be acceptable to only allow people who have had a vaccination to...."Travel by plane?"When phrased like that, it's almost guaranteed that a majority would think "Well, I suppose it's only sensible..."However if they'd phrased it as "Do you think it would be acceptable to ban people from travelling by plane if they hadn't had the vaccine", I think the results would have been somewhat different.
Wealthy countries are buying up all the vaccines. Covid will continue to thrive in the '3rd World'.
As far as I can find out it has not been tested on the very vunerable that are first in line to get it.
As Fazersharp said save it for the elderly and vulnerable. Those of us young or healthy enough to not worry about it will be fine, just like the seasonal flu.
But, if you'd rather take heed of some mumbo-jumbo off some random Facebook group of clueless Luddites, go for it. But spreading disinformation is as damaging as spreading the virus itself.
My wife and all her coleages in the materiality ward have been given 3 months worth of 'rapid tests' that they will be using twice a week. I've not seen her use one yet but from my understanding the results are shown within half an hour!
As for the vaccine, I doubt it worth trying to vaccinate everyone as there are just too many that don't want it.
Those of us young or healthy enough to not worry about it will be fine, just like the seasonal flu.
I think faster more accurate testing it the most viable option
Either way that along with this vaccine is a promising step in the right direction for a change
Did she also tell you that if she gets a positive result from the lateral flow test that she then has to get a proper pcr test to confirm it. Seems that they are happy to accept a negative LFT but not a positive.
Quote from: fazersharp on 07 December 2020, 11:11:05 pmDid she also tell you that if she gets a positive result from the lateral flow test that she then has to get a proper pcr test to confirm it. Seems that they are happy to accept a negative LFT but not a positive.Probably because:a) It's still a good way to catch asymptomatic patients or those not yet showing symptoms. Even though its not a 100% accurate test, it's still good to catch those who wouldn't be tested otherwise. Whilst those showing symptoms will likely be pretty ill and be given a PCR test anyway.b) Although it has a low false positive rate (0.32% ish), the socio-economically ramifications of telling someone (and housemates) to isolate for 14 days is great, so why not double check them with a PCR test to confirm they do indeed have covid? c) To test everyone with the PCR test is a huge drain on resources, with resources needing to go to screening labs etc. The LFT is a reasonable first pass test to help bring cases down.
I can see a time in the future at an airport a "fast track" lane for people with a vaccine stamp in the passport and another line for people without it
Standing out for me in this crisis has been the sheer number of people who appear to have an utter disregard for the health and safety of others. They dont appear to have grasped the severity of the effects, both on people and the economy. Sadly, most appear to be the younger generation, the Snowflakes, who require total freedom without any responsibility, and they appear to have demonstrated that, in a crisis, the government can no longer expect citizens to "do their duty".
Proof of this can be seen in places like Medway and Swale where despite the lockdown, numbers are still rising