23 minutes ago, robblok said:

Your the one with a narrow mind, wanting a free ride. Not much conviction letting others take a risk and you having the free ride. Whatever convictions you have obviously they are not that important as your not willing to pay a price for it. Not like Innosiem. Him i respect. 

You keep on repeating that I just want a 'free ride' on the back of those who voluntarily choose to take the vaccine.

But it is actually the contrary > I will strongly argue against taking the covid-19 vaccine and try to persuade people NOT to take it.  Where's the 'free ride' in that?

Also I will not stigmatize or punish people that want to take the vaccine or even deny them the right to take it.

Unfortunately your view on this is less tolerant, and utterly selfish. 

Your motive for wanting to punish those that have their legitimate reasons for not taking it is two-fold:

- it would make you even 'safer' when everybody is vaccinated;

- free-riders should be punished because you voluntarily opted to take it, from which they would benefit by being 'safer' now. 

 

Just now, bodga said:

Hmmmm unfortunately things like Thalidomide can rear their  ugly  head, I suspect many who refuse would  want to wait and see how the other guinea pigs  fair  first

I don't 100% disagree with waiting a bit. There should be some good peer reviews and so on. I have a problem with those who will not take it at all. (it all depends how long a wait ect) But those that don't want to take it do want to benefit from countries opening up economies going well again but at the same time not doing their part. 

 

As stated they put groups at risk who can't take the vaccin or don't respond to it. 

1 minute ago, robblok said:

Id be agreeing with you if it were not for the fact that those who don't take it risk others. 

 

There will be always non responders to vaccin. There will be those who cannot take it for medical reasons. The larger the pool of people who refuse to take it the larger the risk to the two before mentioned groups.

 

I ride a motorbike I got insurance for it i pay for it. But if i get hit on it I don't risk others like anti vaxers do (like i just explained). 

 

You forget Thailand is quite a totalitarian state already and you did not move out of it. (not saying that i like totalitarian states but you said move to China or North Korea) So that would also mean you would move out of a totalitarian state so why are you still  here with the army in charge ?

if there are always non responders and people who cannot have vaccines
then your statement of everyone needs to take it is moot

more vehicles on the road, means more risk of an accident, so better you don't ever ride your bike ever again
to reduce the risk of an accident for the rest of us????

and now you already implying people should leave here because they are not prioritizing your fears????‍♂️
 

1 minute ago, Peter Denis said:

You keep on repeating that I just want a 'free ride' on the back of those who voluntarily choose to take the vaccine.

But it is actually the contrary > I will strongly argue against taking the covid-19 vaccine and try to persuade people NOT to take it.  Where's the 'free ride' in that?

Also I will not stigmatize or punish people that want to take the vaccine or even deny them the right to take it.

Unfortunately your view on this is less tolerant, and utterly selfish. 

Your motive for wanting to punish those that have their legitimate reasons for not taking it is two-fold:

- it would make you even 'safer' when everybody is vaccinated;

- free-riders should be punished because you voluntarily opted to take it, from which they would benefit by being 'safer' now. 

 

Does not make me even safer as I would have taken the vaccin already. So it would not help me any extra. 

Vaccins do need a large group of people to take it to be effective. You want all the economical benefits and opening up of countries gone of restrictions but not willing to pay a price. Selfish nothing more nothing less. You keep trying to sell it but in the end your not willing to accept that there is a price. 

 

18 minutes ago, robblok said:

Its ok to stand up for your freedoms but not at the cost of others. 

so you want a "free ride" at the cost of those who want freedom ?

2 minutes ago, innosiem said:

if there are always non responders and people who cannot have vaccines
then your statement of everyone needs to take it is moot

more vehicles on the road, means more risk of an accident, so better you don't ever ride your bike ever again
to reduce the risk of an accident for the rest of us????

and now you already implying people should leave here because they are not prioritizing your fears????‍♂️
 

I can tell you me getting hit by you in a car is not going to end well for me. So not much risk for you ???? I will be a bloody mess and you will be totally safe.

 

Of course the statement is not moot , because the more people who take the vaccine the higher coverage there is the lower the risk to the non responders and people who don't take it.

 

The larger the group of people not taking it the lower the coverage and the larger the risk who are non responders. 

those who want to take it, should take it

 

those who can read the label of ingredients and never took a flu vaccine and survived great without them for the last decades, SHOULD NOT BE FORCED !

 

if people believe the vaccine works, they are protected and have nothing to fear, right ?

 

always speak about the young & old ... vulnerable... right ?

 

new born babies don't have the immune system where a vaccine can do anything and 65+ people , their immune already is down by old age and vaccination is less effective

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=flu+vaccine+not+effective+in+elderly

 

this is just about flu vaccine

 

The flu vaccine can be less effective in elderly adults. That's because the flu vaccine works by priming the body's own immune system to mount a response to the virus if it's encountered. Older adults may have weaker immune systems, and therefore a weaker immune response to the vaccine.

1 minute ago, robblok said:

I can tell you me getting hit by you in a car is not going to end well for me. So not much risk for you ???? I will be a bloody mess and you will be totally safe.

you keep assuming you are Mr. Perfect
and would never be the cause of an accident????‍♂️

Ok, enough of the imagined facts about the Oxford vaccine. let's deal with the reality.

 

1. It is wonderful that some British will not want a vaccine.  It will be impossible to manufacture, distribute and dose the amount of vaccine needed to protect the population. It is estimated that only 1 million doses of the vaccine will be available in the UK by Christmas. Therefore, if some idiots do not wish to be vaccinated, they are doing others a service. It will take at least 2-3 years to have enough  people vaccinated. We do not have enough vials or syringes to distribute the vaccine. Therefore, no one is going to be forcing the vaccine on anyone for 2-5 years. On the contrary, we will see wide scale panic and fights over the scarce availability.

 

2. There are corona virus vaccines  available and they have been successfully used on  cats, dogs, cattle and swine herds for some time. For those of you citing movies and imaginary  outcomes, you have been eating pork and beef products that were vaccinated against the animal's specific  corona virus type and yet you are still alive. 

 

3. Although the  SARS Cov-2 vaccine will be new,  a large part of the work is not. Heroic advances were made during the SARS and MERS  crises. The Oxford  Vaccine Group has a history of successful vaccine development. The  French, Canadian and US  governments also have a history of vaccine development that has been directly applied to the current  vaccines in development. One of the reasons why the Russians and chinese  specifically targeted the UK, US and Canadian researchers was that they were trying to steal the knowledge and/or sabotage  advances.  Whoever gets the   vaccine to market first will earn enormous prestige  and political clout. This is why the Chinese have been pushing their vaccines.

 

4. I would avoid a Chinese  sourced or originated vaccine. Unfortunately, some countries have put their faith in the Chinese options.

 

5. Much of the anti vaxx campaigns are based upon false information and are encouraged by charlatans who make a healthy profit from the promotion of such falsehoods. The evil scoundrel who promoted the autism fraud is now promoting false  claims about  Covid19 vaccines. He  makes a very lucrative living from his activities.

 

1 hour ago, BKKBike09 said:

Maybe they are of the view that until a vaccine has been properly trialled clinically (tens of thousands of patients over years: not 45 people over 30 days wtc), and possible complications and potential side-effects properly understood, the risk for them might not be worth it.

 

Ironically the potential for an adverse reaction to a hurriedly produced vaccine is greatest in the elderly and those with weakened immune systems or other serious underlying health issues - the groups most at risk from serious illness from Covid.

The Oxford vaccine has already been shown to be safe at very high doses (Phase I). Phase II has shown that it is  safe in respect to those who have the infection.  Phase III is what  is now being launched and will verify the vaccine safety.  Typically  for the majority of patients we see most  adverse reactions  within the first 30-60 days. Obviously there are  extended discovery tails and adverse reactions can sometimes be identified at a later time. However, with a vaccine of this nature, it is unlikely there will be long term discoveries. BTW, there are few clinical trials that  use  tens of thousands of patients. it is too expensive. Also too difficult to  find participants. Typically  2500 -5000 patient range for  Phase III. And usual Phase III trial period is 1-2 years.  The Oxford vaccine Phase III trial will have 10,000 patients in Britain, 30,000 in the USA and brazil  and South Africa at least  7,000 patients. tyhere will be a special subset of patients age 70+ to measure efficacy and safety.

In respect to the Phase II  Oxford trial, there were 1007 patients, not 45 and those patients are still being monitored.

 

53 minutes ago, meechai said:

I am neither here not there about who takes what but.......

When I see someone like you who otherwise seems intelligent say such a silly thing I wonder.....

Obviously your pro vaccination so that is fine & you will have it if it materializes but.... Why the vitriol towards someone who does not want it?

 

Where you the same every year towards anyone previously? If someone didn't take say the Polio vaccine would you want them also cast into outer darkness?

Do you not believe in your vaccine? You took it so does your worry not end there?

 

On a side note my Thai cousin is a lifetime polio wheelchair case as she contracted Polio as a child in Thailand after receiving the Polio Vaccination

(hot batch happens more often than many realize)

But on the good side the Queen of Thailand has a program for such folks & has taken care of her/supported her in school etc.

 

YOu do not understand   a vaccine. And because you do not understand, you dismiss it.

1. Vaccines are not guaranteed.  Some people do not develop immunity. We see this with hepatitis B. Because it does not work on about 10% of the population, does not mean it is a failure. The 90%  of the population it  works for are protected, and 90% is a pretty good result.

 

2. Vaccines do not promise complete immunity. They can rpromote an immune response such that the full symptoms of the infection are not manifested. This is typical of flu vaccines. Instead of ending up in an ICU or a serious respiratory illness, the infection may be mild and pass in a few days.

Your example of the polio infection is unreasonable. Without identifying the type of vaccine and the numberr of times   your cousin was vaccinated, one doesn't know if she was  fully vaccinated. It's 3-4 doses and at specified ages. Many people did not follow through on their schedules. Also people can be infected before they  were vaccinated.

 

39 minutes ago, Peter Denis said:

Did it ever occur to you that those 'selfish people' you want to punish, might have very good reasons for refusing vaccination?

The only selfish one here is yourself, who wants to punish those with other convictions because they would - in your opinion - benefit from the 'free ride' by those that choose to get vaccinated.

I am disgusted by such attitude!

With the exception of some  rare medical conditions, there are no good reasons to not vaccinate.

You  should be disgusted with yourself for  supporting a large number of ignorant selfish people. outside of a medical condition, what  reasonable justification is there to not be vaccinated if one wishes to avail himself of medical care paid for by others and to access public venues? It is  quite accurate to use the term 'free ride'. basically, these selfish people ask that others accept the small risk of vaccination so that they can   slide through life.

31 minutes ago, innosiem said:

this is exactly my point above

Pro vaxxers want everyone to do the same as them or be punished????‍♂️

this is the whole problem

Its your choice not to get vaccinated.

By doing so of course you will be risking the lives of others.

Why should everyone else be expected to pick up the bill for your decision? You made it not us.

So by refusing the vaccination if you end up in the NHS needing treatment then pay for it yourself. Or get insurance to cover it. Up to you.

Id  suggest the daily mail and mirror  for Yinns pleasure to  keep those stories  rolling in.

Or the Star,  shame the Daily Sports  gone I miss the Hamster  eating, aliens stole  my girlfriend stories

From now on ill refer to post 101 

 

Perfectly done @geriatrickid

 

You explain it far better then i this part

YOu do not understand   a vaccine. And because you do not understand, you dismiss it.

1. Vaccines are not guaranteed.  Some people do not develop immunity. We see this with hepatitis B. Because it does not work on about 10% of the population, does not mean it is a failure. The 90%  of the population it  works for are protected, and 90% is a pretty good result.

 

2. Vaccines do not promise complete immunity. They can rpromote an immune response such that the full symptoms of the infection are not manifested. This is typical of flu vaccines. Instead of ending up in an ICU or a serious respiratory illness, the infection may be mild and pass in a few days.

Your example of the polio infection is unreasonable. Without identifying the type of vaccine and the numberr of times   your cousin was vaccinated, one doesn't know if she was  fully vaccinated. It's 3-4 doses and at specified ages. Many people did not follow through on their schedules. Also people can be infected before they  were vaccinated.

 

People who don't vaccinate put others at risk because some of those who do take it are non responders. The larger the group of people taking it the smaller the group that can be infected (someone not taking the vaccine has a large chance to get it) while of those who take the vaccine a small number can still take it. But with enough people taking it the risk for that group is lower. 

Just now, Rookiescot said:

Its your choice not to get vaccinated.

By doing so of course you will be risking the lives of others.

Why should everyone else be expected to pick up the bill for your decision? You made it not us.

So by refusing the vaccination if you end up in the NHS needing treatment then pay for it yourself. Or get insurance to cover it. Up to you.

along with smokers  drinkers  none  exercisers non vegans gamblers,  fatties, too  thinnies etc etc?

1 minute ago, bodga said:

along with smokers  drinkers  none  exercisers non vegans gamblers,  fatties, too  thinnies etc etc?

And how do any of those things contribute to the spread of a virus?

32 minutes ago, PatOngo said:

Thai plus motorcycle equals tens of thousands of dead!

I've  had my anti Thai  vaccine and I can tell you it  does  work!????

2 minutes ago, Rookiescot said:

And how do any of those things contribute to the spread of a virus?

You said  anti vaxxers  should be made to pay at NHS  hospitals so why stop with just that category

9 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

...

1. It is wonderful that some British will not want a vaccine.  It will be impossible to manufacture, distribute and dose the amount of vaccine needed to protect the population. It is estimated that only 1 million doses of the vaccine will be available in the UK by Christmas. Therefore, if some idiots do not wish to be vaccinated, they are doing others a service. It will take at least 2-3 years to have enough  people vaccinated. We do not have enough vials or syringes to distribute the vaccine. Therefore, no one is going to be forcing the vaccine on anyone for 2-5 years. On the contrary, we will see wide scale panic and fights over the scarce availability.

...

So instead of a selfish 'free-rider' I am now a responsible citizen (labelled 'idiot') doing society a favor by voluntarily giving my place in the queue to those wanting to get vaccinated.

But in 2-3 years when most of the population has received the shot, I would morph again into a selfish free-rider for not taking it.

This discussion is getting crazier by the minute... ????

2 hours ago, robblok said:

They should not allow anyone who refuses the vaccine in this country.

i'm in the country for 10+ years, never had the flu, never took any vaccine here

 

raise my children, but I should not be allowed into the country ?

 

4 minutes ago, bodga said:

You said  anti vaxxers  should be made to pay at NHS  hospitals so why stop with just that category

Because your decisions directly effect other people. I'm not saying you have to have it. Its your body. 

But your actions should have consequences.

Or do you want the benefits of herd immunity without contributing to the effort and then expect the state to help you if you end up getting corona?

3 minutes ago, Bender Rodriguez said:

i'm in the country for 10+ years, never had the flu, never took any vaccine here

 

raise my children, but I should not be allowed into the country ?

 

Up to the Thai government but if it was up to me they would not allow any foreigner to stay here who was not vaccinated. Just to put some cost to those who are taking a free ride. see the post of geriatickid of why i consider people who don't vaccinate having a free ride.

 

But of course its up to the Thai government and public. 

1 hour ago, robblok said:

I think Thais are far more likely to take the vaccine then the selfish gits that post here complaining about masks, social distancing and tracking.

well how many thais read/see actually anything except lakorns ?

 

I am reading SCIENCE all the time, no not just TV, that is for fun

 

but strangely, most people PRETEND to know more without reading the science, than people that actually do/did on a daily basis

19 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

...

With the exception of some  rare medical conditions, there are no good reasons to not vaccinate.

You  should be disgusted with yourself for  supporting a large number of ignorant selfish people. outside of a medical condition, what  reasonable justification is there to not be vaccinated if one wishes to avail himself of medical care paid for by others and to access public venues? It is  quite accurate to use the term 'free ride'. basically, these selfish people ask that others accept the small risk of vaccination so that they can slide through life.

Professor Know-It-All has spoken > there are no good reasons to not vaccinate.  This is the Final Word, no arguments from medical professionals contesting this opinion (because that's what it is) are allowed anymore.

The arrogance of the ignorants that have total confidence in the allopathic medical consensus view is truly unbelievable!

1 minute ago, Bender Rodriguez said:

well how many thais read/see actually anything except lakorns ?

 

I am reading SCIENCE all the time, no not just TV, that is for fun

 

but strangely, most people PRETEND to know more without reading the science, than people that actually do/did on a daily basis

If that was true you would not have such a low opinion about vaccinations. You said you raised your kids here. Did they get vaccinated or did you refuse ?

1 hour ago, robblok said:

Because in general vaccines help more then they don't those that not want to take it want to benefit from others without themselves taking risks. Those kind of selfish people should be punished. You see it in my country in the bible belt. So yea i have a thing against anti vaxers. 

 

Also the risks are low (this will be tested well) and I believe in that without some stick you get more and more selfish people who want a free ride. I doubt they will release a vaccine that has serious risks not when its for the whole world.

 

You can't deny that over all the vaccines safe more lives then they ever affect negatively. So why would some people then get a free ride (as a matter of speech). Let them then pay for their free ride in other ways with limitations to certain things like travel to certain countries. I for one am totally for that.

 

They can still refuse but have to give up something, just like those who don't refuse take a small risk for the greater good. 

Instead of penalizing the people you have repeatedly labelled as selfish etc why not charge 100 quid a pop for everyone who wants a vaccine & see how enthusiastic they still are?

1 hour ago, robblok said:

No i don't different thing. Anti vaxers want a free ride benefiting from the (small) risk others take. So let them pay one way or the other. 

So often so true ! The  anti vaccination proponents take advantage of the lower risk umbrella the  majority provide. Let them have their choice and also take  responsibility  for repercussions of refusal in whatever form that presents.

 

Just now, evadgib said:

Instead of penalizing the people you have repeatedly labelled as selfish etc why not charge 100 quid a pop for everyone who wants a vaccine & see how enthusiastic they still are?

Just read the post of geriatrickid on why people who don't vaccinate are selfish. 

 

The best post so far im sure you will understand better then.

 

Anti vaxers just want all the benefits and basically risk others while taking no risk themselves. Its all explained in that post and mine quoting part of it. Gets boring if i have to put it down too many times.

Just now, Dumbastheycome said:

So often so true ! The  anti vaccination proponents take advantage of the lower risk umbrella the  majority provide. Let them have their choice and also take  responsibility  for repercussions of refusal in whatever form that presents.

 

Agreed if they are so principal then let them pay in whatever form it presents. I sincerely hope the Thai goverment will make it  mandatory for long term visa's and such. They already want COVID insurance so there is a good chance they will do something like this once a good vaccine is available.

32 minutes ago, geriatrickid said:

Ok, enough of the imagined facts about the Oxford vaccine. let's deal with the reality.

 

1. It is wonderful that some British will not want a vaccine.  It will be impossible to manufacture, distribute and dose the amount of vaccine needed to protect the population. It is estimated that only 1 million doses of the vaccine will be available in the UK by Christmas. Therefore, if some idiots do not wish to be vaccinated, they are doing others a service. It will take at least 2-3 years to have enough  people vaccinated. We do not have enough vials or syringes to distribute the vaccine. Therefore, no one is going to be forcing the vaccine on anyone for 2-5 years. On the contrary, we will see wide scale panic and fights over the scarce availability.

 

2. There are corona virus vaccines  available and they have been successfully used on  cats, dogs, cattle and swine herds for some time. For those of you citing movies and imaginary  outcomes, you have been eating pork and beef products that were vaccinated against the animal's specific  corona virus type and yet you are still alive. 

 

3. Although the  SARS Cov-2 vaccine will be new,  a large part of the work is not. Heroic advances were made during the SARS and MERS  crises. The Oxford  Vaccine Group has a history of successful vaccine development. The  French, Canadian and US  governments also have a history of vaccine development that has been directly applied to the current  vaccines in development. One of the reasons why the Russians and chinese  specifically targeted the UK, US and Canadian researchers was that they were trying to steal the knowledge and/or sabotage  advances.  Whoever gets the   vaccine to market first will earn enormous prestige  and political clout. This is why the Chinese have been pushing their vaccines.

 

4. I would avoid a Chinese  sourced or originated vaccine. Unfortunately, some countries have put their faith in the Chinese options.

 

5. Much of the anti vaxx campaigns are based upon false information and are encouraged by charlatans who make a healthy profit from the promotion of such falsehoods. The evil scoundrel who promoted the autism fraud is now promoting false  claims about  Covid19 vaccines. He  makes a very lucrative living from his activities.

 

The Oxford vaccine has already been shown to be safe at very high doses (Phase I). Phase II has shown that it is  safe in respect to those who have the infection.  Phase III is what  is now being launched and will verify the vaccine safety.  Typically  for the majority of patients we see most  adverse reactions  within the first 30-60 days. Obviously there are  extended discovery tails and adverse reactions can sometimes be identified at a later time. However, with a vaccine of this nature, it is unlikely there will be long term discoveries. BTW, there are few clinical trials that  use  tens of thousands of patients. it is too expensive. Also too difficult to  find participants. Typically  2500 -5000 patient range for  Phase III. And usual Phase III trial period is 1-2 years.  The Oxford vaccine Phase III trial will have 10,000 patients in Britain, 30,000 in the USA and brazil  and South Africa at least  7,000 patients. tyhere will be a special subset of patients age 70+ to measure efficacy and safety.

In respect to the Phase II  Oxford trial, there were 1007 patients, not 45 and those patients are still being monitored.

 

 

YOu do not understand   a vaccine. And because you do not understand, you dismiss it.

1. Vaccines are not guaranteed.  Some people do not develop immunity. We see this with hepatitis B. Because it does not work on about 10% of the population, does not mean it is a failure. The 90%  of the population it  works for are protected, and 90% is a pretty good result.

 

2. Vaccines do not promise complete immunity. They can rpromote an immune response such that the full symptoms of the infection are not manifested. This is typical of flu vaccines. Instead of ending up in an ICU or a serious respiratory illness, the infection may be mild and pass in a few days.

Your example of the polio infection is unreasonable. Without identifying the type of vaccine and the numberr of times   your cousin was vaccinated, one doesn't know if she was  fully vaccinated. It's 3-4 doses and at specified ages. Many people did not follow through on their schedules. Also people can be infected before they  were vaccinated.

 

With the exception of some  rare medical conditions, there are no good reasons to not vaccinate.

You  should be disgusted with yourself for  supporting a large number of ignorant selfish people. outside of a medical condition, what  reasonable justification is there to not be vaccinated if one wishes to avail himself of medical care paid for by others and to access public venues? It is  quite accurate to use the term 'free ride'. basically, these selfish people ask that others accept the small risk of vaccination so that they can   slide through life.

The media seems to be overlooking all the downsides of a vaccine, especially a rushed vaccine.

 

https://www.wired.com/story/covid-19-vaccines-with-minor-side-effects-could-still-be-pretty-bad/

1 hour ago, robblok said:

Also the risks are low (this will be tested well) and I believe in that without some stick you get more and more selfish people who want a free ride. I doubt they will release a vaccine that has serious risks not when its for the whole world.

before 1986, after the 1976 pandemic swine flu, people were getting sick from the swine flu vaccine and could and did sue big pharma, which became almost bankrupt at that time.

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=1976+flu+vaccine+litigation

 

Human Health services (HHS) were SUPPOSED to test the safety of vaccines, but never did in 34 YEARS and nobody forced them.

 

if you can profit BILLIONS and cannot be sued over your product, what is the incentive to make it safe ?  I got 10-12 shots when I was young, now children get 72 ?

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, Bender Rodriguez said:

before 1986, after the 1976 pandemic swine flu, people were getting sick from the swine flu vaccine and could and did sue big pharma, which became almost bankrupt at that time.

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=1976+flu+vaccine+litigation

 

Human Health services (HHS) were SUPPOSED to test the safety of vaccines, but never did in 34 YEARS and nobody forced them.

 

if you can profit BILLIONS and cannot be sued over your product, what is the incentive to make it safe ?  I got 10-12 shots when I was young, now children get 72 ?

 

 

 

Its ok to refuse. Some will develop natural immune responses from mild infections and some will die because of their stupidity. It's all about survival of the fittest. The refusal should include refusal for treatment though.