Club to trial NHS COVID Pass at Arsenal double header

[Shadydan]

Had my 2nd vaccine recently so have my vaccine passport thankfully.

Gonna be a bit weird allowing someone with 2 heads and 3 arms onto the stadium though.

 

[carmeldevil]

Had my 2nd vaccine recently so have my vaccine passport thankfully.

Gonna be a bit weird allowing someone with 2 heads and 3 arms onto the stadium though.

Ya'll be connected to each other via 5G so it'll be awesome.

 

[Shadydan]

Ya'll be connected to each other via 5G so it'll be awesome.

Powered by EE, awesome ?

 

[WannaDanceWithUdogie]

I hope my jab activates 5G cos I get crap signal in the ground...

 

[Humbolt]

Not really, there are a lot of legitimate reasons to doubt this vaccine, specially given how rushed the process was

*clears throat*

Do your research!!!

(Did I get that right? That is how you people say it?)

Opinion: COVID-19 vaccines – are they safe, or have they been rushed?

Professor Bryony Dean Franklin, Professor of Medication Safety, shares her thoughts on the latest vaccine developments.

www.ucl.ac.uk

Can we trust a vaccine that's been rushed through?

phw.nhs.wales

Covid: Is the Pfizer BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine safe and effective? | ITV News

The process from concept to approval has taken only 10 months which has generated a lot of suspicion. Here are the answers to some of your questions. | ITV National News

www.itv.com

Fact Check-Vaccine trials were not rushed; possible link to extremely rare blood clots is unlikely to be detected in trials 

A potential link between blood clots and the Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine is not evidence the jab was “rushed” through clinical trials, experts have told Reuters. The vaccine was tested under all the usual conditions; however, blood clots are hard to detect as an...

www.reuters.com

Is it true? Were COVID-19 vaccines rushed through approvals or given emergency use authorisations in Australia?

The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) provisionally approved these vaccines after a complete assessment of all the available data. The TGA does not have an "Emergency Use Authorisation" pathway for COVID-19 vaccines. Find out more below.

www.health.gov.au

and how it's being pushed so heavily by government agencies and actors who have proven to not be reliable on these type of issues.

Who's unreliable? What have actors got to do with this? Source?

 

[ralvy]

I did get your point, but was trying to emphasise that although your choosing to sign up to a lottery it's actually reducing your overall risk...even if it doesn't feel like it.

I had my second jab of the Pfizer vaccine a few days ago. Both times it felt a bit like I'd been punched in the arm by Mike Tyson the following day, but nothing other than that.

Maybe you're right, but I personally don't know the actual probabilities involved to properly do a Bayesian test on the matter (I do think probabilities of infection are far less in my particular case, since social distancing and germ-phobia come natural to me ).

But I want you to know that after reading some of what you had to say but, mainly, after talking with my older brother, who is a cardiologist and works for a major pharmaceutical company, I have decided to go on with my vaccination plans for this Friday. I guess I won't be having any side effects, since last year I had the influenza shot and my body didn't seem to react at all.

This is a point that most people (even those choosing to get vaccinated) seem to misunderstand.
Coronavirus vaccinations have been researched for years - the mRNA approach was developed specifically for coronaviruses - due to the known global risk that coronaviruses present. This meant researchers didn't have to start from square one when COVID-19 (a specific type of coronavirus), which knocked years off the process for developing new vaccines.
The three stages of clinical trials (on humans) were run with overlapping finishes/starts, rather than one starting before the other. Findings of each stage were reviewed while the subsequent stage was underway, rather than having long periods of time between stages (but as much review took place overall prior to approval). This put trial participants at higher risk, but not those of us receiving the vaccines following completion of the trials.
Governments committed £billions to the research efforts - even though it meant committing to purchasing more vaccines in total than their population could use - so that pharmaceutical companies could progress things more quickly without taking on untenable financial risks.
Staff resources (in addition to finances) were refocused to enable progress to be made at the highest pace possible.
It was easy to get high numbers of trial participants, because it's such a widespread virus and loads of people were keen to volunteer, so that meant they could progress trials without any recruitment delays.

Interesting, and all of that is good to know. However, since vaccine roll outs began less than a year ago, and testing didn't took as much either, do you think probable long term effects have properly being assessed by now?

Also, all that money invested can also be a bit of a double-edge sword, given human nature and the need to show positive results to your investors.

 

[ralvy]

*clears throat*

Do your research!!!

(Did I get that right? That is how you people say it?)

Opinion: COVID-19 vaccines – are they safe, or have they been rushed?

Professor Bryony Dean Franklin, Professor of Medication Safety, shares her thoughts on the latest vaccine developments.

www.ucl.ac.uk

Can we trust a vaccine that's been rushed through?

phw.nhs.wales

Covid: Is the Pfizer BioNTech Covid-19 vaccine safe and effective? | ITV News

The process from concept to approval has taken only 10 months which has generated a lot of suspicion. Here are the answers to some of your questions. | ITV National News

www.itv.com

Fact Check-Vaccine trials were not rushed; possible link to extremely rare blood clots is unlikely to be detected in trials 

A potential link between blood clots and the Oxford/AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine is not evidence the jab was “rushed” through clinical trials, experts have told Reuters. The vaccine was tested under all the usual conditions; however, blood clots are hard to detect as an...

www.reuters.com

Is it true? Were COVID-19 vaccines rushed through approvals or given emergency use authorisations in Australia?

The Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) provisionally approved these vaccines after a complete assessment of all the available data. The TGA does not have an "Emergency Use Authorisation" pathway for COVID-19 vaccines. Find out more below.

www.health.gov.au

What, so you think a bunch of links somehow proves that there are no legitimate concerns regarding drug treatments which officially are still on an experimental phase and which have been proven to pose a risk of major health side-effects, no matter how low the probability of such risks may be? I thought you people were supposed to be all about the science.

Who's unreliable? What have actors got to do with this? Source?

Pretty much anyone appearing on msm these days is unreliable, everyone seems to have an agenda. Just look in the US, how the same people who are begging everyone to take the vaccine are the same people who just a few months ago were saying they wouldn't be taking what they deemed to be Trump's vaccine (meaning Moderna and Pfizer, I think), since they couldn't trust it. [/QUOTE]

 

[Phantom]

Pretty much anyone appearing on msm these days is unreliable, everyone seems to have an agenda. Just look in the US, how the same people who are begging everyone to take the vaccine are the same people who just a few months ago were saying they wouldn't be taking what they deemed to be Trump's vaccine (meaning Moderna and Pfizer, I think), since they couldn't trust it.

[/QUOTE]

I'd be seriously interested in where you heard people say they won't trust trumps vaccine. I watch a lot of American news and nobody ever says its trumps vaccine as he had fuck all to do with it. Operation warp speed had nothing to do with Pfizer.

And the only people who were saying they didn't trust it were on the Republican side... Who have very recently in the last 3 days started to advocate it as they see the delta variant soar in red states.

 

[Metalhead]

We've already got one thread where people can argue the toss, New World Order, Bill Gates hacking into your brain or whatever you like. Do we need another one?

 

[newbie]

I might have missed it but I can't see anywhere in it that says your immune system will let other diseases in with the vaccine just that there might be no need to take the vaccine if you already had it. It also states some statistics about the danger of taking the vaccines but it doesn't show the danger of not taking the vaccine. Anecdotally I know several people that have caught it twice but that doesn't really prove anything. Generally the scientists seem to think that you need 2 exposures to the virus to get your immune system up to the best it can be.

Mercola is an absolute despicable person that has spread some terrible lies and just wants to sell his own products.

I know plenty of ppl who have had it twice and second time was far far worse

 

[ralvy]

I'd be seriously interested in where you heard people say they won't trust trumps vaccine. I watch a lot of American news and nobody ever says its trumps vaccine as he had fuck all to do with it. Operation warp speed had nothing to do with Pfizer.

And the only people who were saying they didn't trust it were on the Republican side... Who have very recently in the last 3 days started to advocate it as they see the delta variant soar in red states.

At around 11:30 minutes, the soon to be elected as vice president, Kamala Harris, basically said on the vice-presidential debate she wouldn't follow the advice of the president at the time, Donald Trump, if he had asked her to take the vaccine. I think this was back in October of last year, when vaccines were getting quite close of being approved for massive distribution.

Yes, I know she was just playing politics, but that's precisely what I mean, that these people can't be trusted with anything they say, even when lives are at stake.

 

[ralvy]

I know plenty of ppl who have had it twice and second time was far far worse

My dad, who's 68 years old and a diabetic, barely felt his second shot. But the first one gave him a fever and weakened him, I think.

 

[newbie]

My dad, who's 68 years old and a diabetic, barely felt his second shot. But the first one gave him a fever and weakened him, I think.

I meant had COVID twice

Hope he is ok

 

[Neon_Knight_]

Maybe you're right, but I personally don't know the actual probabilities involved to properly do a Bayesian test on the matter (I do think probabilities of infection are far less in my particular case, since social distancing and germ-phobia come natural to me ).

But I want you to know that after reading some of what you had to say but, mainly, after talking with my older brother, who is a cardiologist and works for a major pharmaceutical company, I have decided to go on with my vaccination plans for this Friday. I guess I won't be having any side effects, since last year I had the influenza shot and my body didn't seem to react at all.



Interesting, and all of that is good to know. However, since vaccine roll outs began less than a year ago, and testing didn't took as much either, do you think probable long term effects have properly being assessed by now?

Also, all that money invested can also be a bit of a double-edge sword, given human nature and the need to show positive results to your investors.

As I mentioned in one of my earlier replies to you, it's routine for treatments to be rolled out before they have existed long enough for long-term side effects to have been ruled out. The alternative is to delay all developments in healthcare by decades / generations, while people suffer in the meantime.

All established medications (including plenty that are available without prescription, e.g. aspirin) have confirmed issues (known side effects) in addition to the risk of other unidentified side effects. Rather than taking them off the market, the side-effects are added to the warnings on the packaging / instructions - unless the risk posed by a potential side effect (severity x probability) is deemed too high...in which case it is taken off the market.

To put your mind at ease:
If you take something on a one off basis, or only very occasionally (like with a vaccine), any side effects would be likely to occur at or soon after administration. It's extremely unlikely that any toxicity from the treatment would remain in your body for an extended period of time, so there is nothing to cause delayed side-effects.
Taking repeated doses of something over a prolonged period of time will increase the risk of long-term side effects, because the substance spends more time in your body (and could accrue) and you are therefore more exposed to any toxicity.

 

[Phantom]

At around 11:30 minutes, the soon to be elected as vice president, Kamala Harris, basically said on the vice-presidential debate she wouldn't follow the advice of the president at the time, Donald Trump, if he had asked her to take the vaccine. I think this was back in October of last year, when vaccines were getting quite close of being approved for massive distribution.

Yes, I know she was just playing politics, but that's precisely what I mean, that these people can't be trusted with anything they say, even when lives are at stake.

There is a difference between emphasising distrust of a man who is a habitual liar and con man and saying they wouldn't get a vaccine. She didn't say she would not get it, she merely said she would not get it based on Trump telling her too and she said she would follow the experts advice. Maybe there are other examples but I don't think that really demonstrated your point very well at all.

 

[ralvy]

There is a difference between emphasising distrust of a man who is a habitual liar and con man and saying they wouldn't get a vaccine. She didn't say she would not get it, she merely said she would not get it based on Trump telling her too and she said she would follow the experts advice. Maybe there are other examples but I don't think that really demonstrated your point very well at all.

Yeah, because in the middle of a pandemic, it's a really healthy practice to tell people that their current president isn't to be trusted when he asks its population to take on a vaccine produced with the intent of fighting such pandemic.

And yes, there are. There are a few examples of Joe Biden casting doubt on the vaccine testing process and such, I can't look them out right now since I'm on a hurry, but if you really want to go down that rabbit whole you could look them up for yourself.

But really, if you don't see how what Kamala said could make some people second guess themselves about vaccination, specially since at that time the election hadn't even taken place, then I doubt anything I show you will convince you otherwise.

 

[Phantom]

Yeah, because in the middle of a pandemic, it's a really healthy practice to tell people that their current president isn't to be trusted when he asks its population to take on a vaccine produced with the intent of fighting such pandemic.

And yes, there are. There are a few examples of Joe Biden casting doubt on the vaccine testing process and such, I can't look them out right now since I'm on a hurry, but if you really want to go down that rabbit whole you could look them up for yourself.

But really, if you don't see how what Kamala said could make some people second guess themselves about vaccination, specially since at that time the election hadn't even taken place, then I doubt anything I show you will convince you otherwise.

In most circumstances you would be correct but trump is not a normal president and if people paid attention to his advice there would probably be even more deaths (bleach use, not wearing masks, relying on medication with no evidence behind it like hydroxy whatever its name was etc).. He actually has only recently for the second time recommended people should get it, he was hardly promoting it as most world leaders have been. Almost every statement he made about it was that he was so brilliant for coming up with it.

I've looked it up for you, Joe Biden said he wasn't sure he would trust a vaccine approved by the Trump administration because he was not sure that Trump would put peoples lives before political gain. Which is a fair enough statement to me, Trump lies almost as easily as he breathes.

But at the same time your comment was that people have flipped their position on the vaccine on mainstream media. There may well be examples but what we are seeing right now is fox news have gone from basically anti-vax to pro vax in the last 5 days or so.

 

[Pochemon94]

Why anyone would want to take the risk of the covid lottery is beyond me, I've seen healthy young people get really ill, thankfully nothing worse by many have. Let's not forget a large part of this is to try and protect others too so sometimes we need to act a little more selflessly.

If I read correctly you can also get a covid pass with a negative test, is that correct?

Let me just say this, my whole family has gotten it barring me, all with varying symptoms, my dad was just bad cold, sister was a symptomatic, my mom got so ill she almost had to go to the hospital couldn’t get out of bed lost all taste and smell and it’s been 6 months and still hasn’t felt right, I know multiple people my age (26) who have gotten insanely sick from it, I also know younger kids who have nearly died from it. One of my coworkers a healthy marathon running guy who died from it out of nowhere, he openly said the whole thing was a hoax. If you don’t want to get vaccinated that’s up to you, but don’t be mad when there are consequences for not getting it.

 

[Neon_Knight_]

There is a difference between emphasising distrust of a man who is a habitual liar and con man and saying they wouldn't get a vaccine. She didn't say she would not get it, she merely said she would not get it based on Trump telling her too and she said she would follow the experts advice. Maybe there are other examples but I don't think that really demonstrated your point very well at all.

I agree with you, but she's intelligent enough to know her comment risked detering people from getting vaccinated even after it was approved. She could have chosen to leave it at "once the medical experts have approved it" without the comment about Trump, or at least have been more explicit by say "I wouldn't take before it has been formally approved by medical experts, even if Trump told me to". I couldn't be more delighted that Trump is gone, but I'm never in favour of people playing at politics when it comes to serious issues like a global pandemic.

Yeah, because in the middle of a pandemic, it's a really healthy practice to tell people that their current president isn't to be trusted when he asks its population to take on a vaccine produced with the intent of fighting such pandemic.

And yes, there are. There are a few examples of Joe Biden casting doubt on the vaccine testing process and such, I can't look them out right now since I'm on a hurry, but if you really want to go down that rabbit whole you could look them up for yourself.

But really, if you don't see how what Kamala said could make some people second guess themselves about vaccination, specially since at that time the election hadn't even taken place, then I doubt anything I show you will convince you otherwise.

Considering the way Trump behaved while president and how heavily he had staked his reputation on getting a vaccine out before the end of the year, I wouldn't trust him any more than Putin (who literally did start pushing out a vaccine to the Russian public before the clinical trials were complete). This was the same guy who had recently encouraged healthy people to take a random antiviral (hydroxychloroquine), with known risk of cardiac side effects...which him and his close relatives just happened to have a financial stake in.

As soon as Trump had lost the election, he was no longer in favour of everyone getting vaccinated. Having tried to benefit politically by taking credit for rolling out the first vaccine, he then tried to discredit the exact same vaccine in a sick attempt to make the recently elected Democrats look bad.

We've probably derailed this thread more than enough. If anyone wants to carry on the vaccine discussions with me, feel free to tag me in the General Chat boards or DM me. @ralvy I hope you go ahead with the vaccine and don't grow a second head ;P

 

[doom]

I don't honestly think the Covid vaccination can be described seriously as an experimental treatment. But some might think it's better to catch Covid, or Long Covid or possibly infect fellow fans by going to a match unvaccinated.

I'm fully behind the Government on this and, to be honest, I think it's going to be a long time before anyone will be able to go to a match without having had a jab.

for real, the trials end in 2023 most vaccines take 10-15 years to get right and in that time you get a picture of long term effects. There has not even been testing on pregnant woman and now we see an increase of overall mortality in countries that have higher covid vaccine roll.
out