Vaccine anyone?
- Thread starter Newchodge
- Start date
Non-story as far as I am concerned but no doubt the anrti vaccine squad will twist this as much as they can
---------------------
From the BBC - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55244122
People with a history of significant allergic reactions should not have the Pfizer/BioNTech Covid jab, regulators say.
It came after two NHS workers had allergic reactions on Tuesday.
The advice applies to those who have had reactions to medicines, food or vaccines, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency said.
The two people had a reaction shortly after having the new jab, had treatment and are both fine now.
They are understood to have had an anaphylactoid reaction, which tends to involve a skin rash, breathlessness and sometimes a drop in blood pressure. This is not the same as anaphylaxis which can be fatal.
Both NHS workers have a history of serious allergies and carry adrenaline pens around with them.
Professor Stephen Powis, medical director for the NHS in England, said both individuals were recovering well.
He said this was "common with new vaccines", describing it as a precautionary measure.
---------------------
From the BBC - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55244122
People with a history of significant allergic reactions should not have the Pfizer/BioNTech Covid jab, regulators say.
It came after two NHS workers had allergic reactions on Tuesday.
The advice applies to those who have had reactions to medicines, food or vaccines, the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency said.
The two people had a reaction shortly after having the new jab, had treatment and are both fine now.
They are understood to have had an anaphylactoid reaction, which tends to involve a skin rash, breathlessness and sometimes a drop in blood pressure. This is not the same as anaphylaxis which can be fatal.
Both NHS workers have a history of serious allergies and carry adrenaline pens around with them.
Professor Stephen Powis, medical director for the NHS in England, said both individuals were recovering well.
He said this was "common with new vaccines", describing it as a precautionary measure.
Upvote
0
There are people who should not take this vaccine. That is not a new situation - we are not permitted to take the flu jab due to allergies.
I suspect the number is relatively small. But, of course, the 'vaccinate everyone' heavy mob do need to allow for that. It is possible, of course, that later vaccines, when they are approached, will fill in some of those gaps.
I am concerned the story has been slightly mis reported, though. It is relevant, and of interest, but not that much of a set back.
I suspect the number is relatively small. But, of course, the 'vaccinate everyone' heavy mob do need to allow for that. It is possible, of course, that later vaccines, when they are approached, will fill in some of those gaps.
I am concerned the story has been slightly mis reported, though. It is relevant, and of interest, but not that much of a set back.
Upvote
0
I agree that does sound bizarre. One would expect that this would be covered by testing, but even if not, that those knowing they have severe allergies might express some caution themselves.
Upvote
0
How do you know warnings weren't given? have you had the vaccine and were not warned?
I am pretty sure those administering the vaccine go through this sort of stuff with those receiving it beforehand. This isn't an off the shelf vaccination anyone can take whenever they want so no need for mass media warnings about it.
Just like any other vaccination or trial it will be discussed with each individual beforehand
It is an absolute scare mongering non-story
Upvote
0
Maybe not though? Considering they gave this to people with allergies and are now saying "WOAH! allergies? Don't take it!"
The sensationalist headlines have been coming thick and fast though - I think The Sun ran with 'V Day for Britons' or something didn't they? In that peculiar 40's wartime tone of voice they use.
It would have been more helpful to have a balanced approach to this. Instead, we have the country tearing itself down the middle again. If you don't take it, you're anti vaccine and should be banned from leaving your home or shot. If you do take it, you're a hero and shall receive a knighthood.
What if you just want to see what happens first and see some data from real life results? That's not allowed now. We have to knee jerk straight in to another calamity.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Unless the vaccine content is known to be the trigger then makes no more difference them having it than you.
Was it the vaccine that was the trigger or was it something else that happened while they were having the vaccine? Makes a difference.
Upvote
0
And those unable to get a particular vaccine will benefit from herd immunity. You benefit from those around you getting the flu jab.
Unless not enough get it..... in which case still somewhat in danger like you were a couple of months back.
Upvote
0
All medical procedures and medications have risks and side effects, and this vaccine is no exception. It's up to the individual to decide.
But a big problem is we have an unclear picture of the risks of catching Covid. We have death stats that are clearly false because most are 'with Covid' rather than 'because of Covid'. And we have the nonsense of 'confirmed cases' where what is really meant is positive results from a test that is known to produce false positives to an unknown extent. [I've just seen some data from Cambridge University where the PCR test is shown to be 100% wrong].
So it's hard to make a proper judgement. Personally I will refuse the vaccine until such time as the picture is clearer.
But a big problem is we have an unclear picture of the risks of catching Covid. We have death stats that are clearly false because most are 'with Covid' rather than 'because of Covid'. And we have the nonsense of 'confirmed cases' where what is really meant is positive results from a test that is known to produce false positives to an unknown extent. [I've just seen some data from Cambridge University where the PCR test is shown to be 100% wrong].
So it's hard to make a proper judgement. Personally I will refuse the vaccine until such time as the picture is clearer.
Upvote
0
If death causes use the same method for a long period of time in a particular country are they death stats false? Or simply that you want them to be different because you want figures to support a particular view?
Fair enough that you want to wait to get the vaccine later. Each to their own and its not a decision someone else should be making for you anyway.
In the meantime if enough people wait then expect measures to remain in place to deal with the virus besides issuing vaccine. Immunising the 20% of the population who don't go out much won't do anything to reduce spread of the virus elsewhere.
Possible we will have a lockdown early next year. I'm betting second half of January for 4 weeks.
Could well be another in spring.
Upvote
0
If the method is wrong it matters not whether for a long time or a short time. The stats are false.
Upvote
0
All vaccinations require that you remain on the premises for 20 minutes post injection for exactly this reason; on rare occasions patients have an allergic reaction.
The recipients who had reactions today all carried epi-pens, so it was on the cards they would react badly.
No drug trial will get the go ahead to include pregnant women, it is just not ethical. What will happen is, as the numbers of women immunised increases there will be those who are unaware they are pregnant and they will be closely monitored, this will increase the database on the vaccine and pregnancy. There will have been testing in animals who are pregnant so no gross abnormalities will have been detected.
The recipients who had reactions today all carried epi-pens, so it was on the cards they would react badly.
No drug trial will get the go ahead to include pregnant women, it is just not ethical. What will happen is, as the numbers of women immunised increases there will be those who are unaware they are pregnant and they will be closely monitored, this will increase the database on the vaccine and pregnancy. There will have been testing in animals who are pregnant so no gross abnormalities will have been detected.
Upvote
0
@Newchodge
Cyndy Why did you start this
Nobody on here knows anything about it but they are extremely good at putting their point across even when wrong
Some timid google searchers are going to stumble across this and get all sorts of ideas about it and not get the jab . Then start a company because we said that is a good idea
Im getting it done because those that know what they are doing said it is a good idea
A lot of you took drugs in the 60s 70s 80s and 90s
You got these strange narcotics from dealers that you knew nothing about They could have had novichok or radioactive waste in them but you never cared about that
You pumped it in your system without question or care
Now your questioning approved NHS vaccines
ha ha ha ha ha ha
Im falling off the chair
Cyndy Why did you start this
Nobody on here knows anything about it but they are extremely good at putting their point across even when wrong
Some timid google searchers are going to stumble across this and get all sorts of ideas about it and not get the jab . Then start a company because we said that is a good idea
Im getting it done because those that know what they are doing said it is a good idea
A lot of you took drugs in the 60s 70s 80s and 90s
You got these strange narcotics from dealers that you knew nothing about They could have had novichok or radioactive waste in them but you never cared about that
You pumped it in your system without question or care
Now your questioning approved NHS vaccines
ha ha ha ha ha ha
Im falling off the chair
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Just imagine the outcry if it came out that the pharmas were using pregnant women for drug trials
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
That is true. I am, however, quietly hopeful that I will not be allergic to this vaccine as it is produced very differently to the flu jab.
Upvote
0
There are a large group of people (including myself) who are absolutely not anti-vaxxers but who question the vaccine.
My main concern is how quickly it’s rolled out, but also (and more crucially) that the UK is the first to sign up for it, which is slightly concerning given how badly we appear to have messed everything else up.
On the other side of the coin, I can see that the shortened time frame is down to the large amount of money that has been put into developing these vaccines and the sheer number of people working on it.
On a purely selfish level, I am so far down the list anyway that if there is any real danger in the vaccine it will emerge long before I have the chance to receive it. So by the time it comes around, I’ll have one. But I wouldn’t be remotely surprised if something goes awry in the meantime. Although I hope it doesn’t.
My main concern is how quickly it’s rolled out, but also (and more crucially) that the UK is the first to sign up for it, which is slightly concerning given how badly we appear to have messed everything else up.
On the other side of the coin, I can see that the shortened time frame is down to the large amount of money that has been put into developing these vaccines and the sheer number of people working on it.
On a purely selfish level, I am so far down the list anyway that if there is any real danger in the vaccine it will emerge long before I have the chance to receive it. So by the time it comes around, I’ll have one. But I wouldn’t be remotely surprised if something goes awry in the meantime. Although I hope it doesn’t.
Upvote
0
I’m 5th on the list so it will probably be spring before I get offered the vaccine. Possibly later if it’s the usual cock up.
At which point, being a largely respiratory illness the cases will have dropped through the floor anyway.
Which will be the cue for the Government to give themselves a big public pat on the back about how they defeated Covid and saved granny.
At which point, being a largely respiratory illness the cases will have dropped through the floor anyway.
Which will be the cue for the Government to give themselves a big public pat on the back about how they defeated Covid and saved granny.
Upvote
0
I will 100% get the vaccine, but although I fall under category 4 or 5 (I have Asthma), I wont be getting it until maybe September, I would prefer to just let others more comfortable get it beforehand.
I trust that the companies have done their job right, but there will always be little surprises with these things, it is inevitable.
2 people out of the the what 20-30,000 who had the vaccine and both of those people carried epi pens as they were prone to allergic reactions. Obviously that is good to know and they will learn from that, but it is hardly bad news as it presumably means 19,998 or 29,998 were ok that means 0.0006% had a problem and those were people who have severe enough reactions to other things to need to carry an epi pen, but even then the epi pen was not needed, so its a reaction but not as bad as someone with a nut allergy having a nut?
Thats what I more or less took from it when reading the BBC yesterday.
I trust that the companies have done their job right, but there will always be little surprises with these things, it is inevitable.
2 people out of the the what 20-30,000 who had the vaccine and both of those people carried epi pens as they were prone to allergic reactions. Obviously that is good to know and they will learn from that, but it is hardly bad news as it presumably means 19,998 or 29,998 were ok that means 0.0006% had a problem and those were people who have severe enough reactions to other things to need to carry an epi pen, but even then the epi pen was not needed, so its a reaction but not as bad as someone with a nut allergy having a nut?
Thats what I more or less took from it when reading the BBC yesterday.
Upvote
0
- Original Poster
- #37
I think that is a fair assessment of what happened. However, as I stated, my concern is that this is something that should have been picked up during testing. The way it works, if insufficient people of a certain profile (like pregnant women, none of whom will have been knowingly included in the trials) have been clear, there should have been a warning not to use it for them until further notice. That is what they have now said. It should have been said before it went live.
Upvote
0
I agree and it could be any number of reasons why it slipped through - rushed job, luck of the draw on who participated etc other people with similar conditions were ok or not severe enough reactions to be picked up on?
Upvote
0
Having worked in “Big Pharma” for 20 years before changing careers and being party to the design of clinical trials I can say that there is no way on earth that the vulnerable groups you say should have been included in the trials for this vaccine (or any other drug trial) would have been allowed to take part.
Upvote
0
Latest Articles
-
Should you crowdfund? A framework for UK founders in 2026Three articles into a series on what crowdfunding actually costs, the...- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
The polls, the reframing, and the billion dollarsHow three letters from the early years of Star Citizen's development...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
The values trap: what the Punks actually ownedWhy BrewDog's Equity for Punks investors were structurally locked out...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
When belief is the business modelWhat BrewDog's collapse and Star Citizen's billion-dollar climb are...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
-
AI, Virtual Influencers and the Copyright Minefield: What Entrepreneurs Need to KnowI'll be upfront: this article was written with the assistance of an AI...
- Ozzy
- Updated:
