(12-02-2021, 04:55 PM)baggiebuckster Wrote: So are you saying everyone is either pro Vax and follows the experts like you do or a complete anti vaxxer like your mate?

The majority of people against these mandates are at neither end of that scale.

(12-02-2021, 04:53 PM)backsidebaggie Wrote: I also heard some say nearly 12 months ago they wanted to see what they were "signing up to". The fact it looks like jabs 4 and 5 are coming vindicates them. Its looking like one a year or second class citizen. Or in Greece and Austria, they'll be bankrupted instead. fucking hell!

(12-02-2021, 05:00 PM)baggy1 Wrote:

(12-02-2021, 04:53 PM)backsidebaggie Wrote: I also heard some say nearly 12 months ago they wanted to see what they were "signing up to". The fact it looks like jabs 4 and 5 are coming vindicates them. Its looking like one a year or second class citizen. Or in Greece and Austria, they'll be bankrupted instead. fucking hell!

This is the bit that I just can't get my head around - we can show conclusively that jabs work, we can show conclusively that they are safe, we can show conclusively that the best way out of this mess to gain our freedoms that people are marching for is to have the vaccines. So what exactly is the problem of having to have a 6 monthly vaccination until we see a global improvement.

On a side note I see they have identified the reason why one of the rare side affects is the blood clotting and are working to solve that problem.

Quote:Not being able to visit the odd holiday destination is not the same as being fined, imprisoned, not being able to work, being locked down. Just a slight difference!!

Experts are experts, but should policies be totally determined by them? They are experts in a field, but are they experts on knock on effects? What are the knock on effects of a mandation? There's plenty!

Now, I'll throw a totally hypothetical situation out there:

Say someone does 10,000 miles in a car a year. They do many of those miles going to see their elderly family on weekends who live out in the sticks. The experts decide that due to climate change, every individual can do max 3000 miles. That's it. Its a climate emergency. Max 3000 miles a year, per person. We can't argue. They're experts. There's no way any of us can argue with their science. Its "the science".

This severely limits that person's quality of life with their family. They can't see them very often. There's no way they can do public transport due to the area of the country their parents live. It would be a ridiculous journey or bus/train/change train/bus/bus, and the times make it impossible as this person travels after working long hours and has to travel late Saturday and come back Sunday night.

But that's it. The expert says its required to get to net zero. So no questions, put up with it. One word against it, and that person gets called a "climate denier". Its required, there's definitely a climate emergency, no one can argue with that. So that's it, if the expert in THAT field says its required, its required. You can only see the family 10 times a year instead of every saturday night/sunday. The experts said so. Disagree and you're a "climate change denier". This is what is happening RIGHT NOW with vaccines. There are about half a million true anti vax people in the uk. Covid propaganda has ensured that's now 5 million. Even though the vast majority have taken tons of vaccines, and still would. I must also be a vegetarian because I don't eat rabbit according to this logic.

That the kind of world you want to live in? This is where I talk about the bigger picture.

I'm not arguing with the vaccine scientists. But is the expert on viruses also an expert on social and economic effects of mandation? An expert on effects of segregation? A behavioural expert? Will crime go up? Will people in poverty be more effected? Ethnic minorities? Are they experts on all this? Or are they experts on just the vaccines? Therefore is there more to it than simply following experts? In addition, are the experts compromised by money? 'Follow the money' is always a good idea. Do you trust the government experts to be absolutely 100% true to science and not be affected by financial gain?

I have to admit, the lack of seeing the bigger picture here absolutely fucking staggers me. I'm dumbfounded.

(12-02-2021, 05:00 PM)baggy1 Wrote:

(12-02-2021, 04:53 PM)backsidebaggie Wrote: I also heard some say nearly 12 months ago they wanted to see what they were "signing up to". The fact it looks like jabs 4 and 5 are coming vindicates them. Its looking like one a year or second class citizen. Or in Greece and Austria, they'll be bankrupted instead. fucking hell!

This is the bit that I just can't get my head around - we can show conclusively that jabs work, we can show conclusively that they are safe, we can show conclusively that the best way out of this mess to gain our freedoms that people are marching for is to have the vaccines. So what exactly is the problem of having to have a 6 monthly vaccination until we see a global improvement.

On a side note I see they have identified the reason why one of the rare side affects is the blood clotting and are working to solve that problem.

(12-02-2021, 05:04 PM)baggiebuckster Wrote:

(12-02-2021, 05:00 PM)baggy1 Wrote:

(12-02-2021, 04:53 PM)backsidebaggie Wrote: I also heard some say nearly 12 months ago they wanted to see what they were "signing up to". The fact it looks like jabs 4 and 5 are coming vindicates them. Its looking like one a year or second class citizen. Or in Greece and Austria, they'll be bankrupted instead. fucking hell!

This is the bit that I just can't get my head around - we can show conclusively that jabs work, we can show conclusively that they are safe, we can show conclusively that the best way out of this mess to gain our freedoms that people are marching for is to have the vaccines. So what exactly is the problem of having to have a 6 monthly vaccination until we see a global improvement.

On a side note I see they have identified the reason why one of the rare side affects is the blood clotting and are working to solve that problem.

Not for everyone they are not.

(12-02-2021, 05:08 PM)Ted Maul Wrote:

Quote:Not being able to visit the odd holiday destination is not the same as being fined, imprisoned, not being able to work, being locked down. Just a slight difference!!

Experts are experts, but should policies be totally determined by them? They are experts in a field, but are they experts on knock on effects? What are the knock on effects of a mandation? There's plenty!

Now, I'll throw a totally hypothetical situation out there:

Say someone does 10,000 miles in a car a year. They do many of those miles going to see their elderly family on weekends who live out in the sticks. The experts decide that due to climate change, every individual can do max 3000 miles. That's it. Its a climate emergency. Max 3000 miles a year, per person. We can't argue. They're experts. There's no way any of us can argue with their science. Its "the science".

This severely limits that person's quality of life with their family. They can't see them very often. There's no way they can do public transport due to the area of the country their parents live. It would be a ridiculous journey or bus/train/change train/bus/bus, and the times make it impossible as this person travels after working long hours and has to travel late Saturday and come back Sunday night.

But that's it. The expert says its required to get to net zero. So no questions, put up with it. One word against it, and that person gets called a "climate denier". Its required, there's definitely a climate emergency, no one can argue with that. So that's it, if the expert in THAT field says its required, its required. You can only see the family 10 times a year instead of every saturday night/sunday. The experts said so. Disagree and you're a "climate change denier". This is what is happening RIGHT NOW with vaccines. There are about half a million true anti vax people in the uk. Covid propaganda has ensured that's now 5 million. Even though the vast majority have taken tons of vaccines, and still would. I must also be a vegetarian because I don't eat rabbit according to this logic.

That the kind of world you want to live in? This is where I talk about the bigger picture.

I'm not arguing with the vaccine scientists. But is the expert on viruses also an expert on social and economic effects of mandation? An expert on effects of segregation? A behavioural expert? Will crime go up? Will people in poverty be more effected? Ethnic minorities? Are they experts on all this? Or are they experts on just the vaccines? Therefore is there more to it than simply following experts? In addition, are the experts compromised by money? 'Follow the money' is always a good idea. Do you trust the government experts to be absolutely 100% true to science and not be affected by financial gain?

I have to admit, the lack of seeing the bigger picture here absolutely fucking staggers me. I'm dumbfounded.

The knock on effect is that hundreds if not thousands of lives have been saved, thousands have been kept out of hospital and for the last five months life for the majority has been close to normal. Which fair enough, is obviously a happy accident.

I don't think you're anti-vax fwiw and I get the point r.e forcing people to do things. However, your big picture argument has to take into account that these vaccines only exist because we're in the middle of a pandemic that has killed millions across the globe. Scientists didn't wake up 12 months ago and think "fuck me, let's plough people full of this funky serum and see what flys". The big picture, to me, would suggest that there is nothing gained to society by having us locked down or restricted. They aren't going to start vaccinating people with things for no reason.

(12-02-2021, 05:12 PM)baggy1 Wrote:

(12-02-2021, 05:04 PM)baggiebuckster Wrote:

(12-02-2021, 05:00 PM)baggy1 Wrote:

(12-02-2021, 04:53 PM)backsidebaggie Wrote: I also heard some say nearly 12 months ago they wanted to see what they were "signing up to". The fact it looks like jabs 4 and 5 are coming vindicates them. Its looking like one a year or second class citizen. Or in Greece and Austria, they'll be bankrupted instead. fucking hell!

This is the bit that I just can't get my head around - we can show conclusively that jabs work, we can show conclusively that they are safe, we can show conclusively that the best way out of this mess to gain our freedoms that people are marching for is to have the vaccines. So what exactly is the problem of having to have a 6 monthly vaccination until we see a global improvement.

On a side note I see they have identified the reason why one of the rare side affects is the blood clotting and are working to solve that problem.

Not for everyone they are not.

For the vast vast majority they are - added to that the blood clotting issue has been identified link where there have been 73 deaths out of 50M doses. Every medicine will have issues for a very small number of people, paracetamol is included in that. The extremely rare chances of something being wrong are outweighed by the wider safety and health implications of not having the jab.

(12-02-2021, 05:10 PM)backsidebaggie Wrote:

(12-02-2021, 05:00 PM)baggy1 Wrote:

(12-02-2021, 04:53 PM)backsidebaggie Wrote: I also heard some say nearly 12 months ago they wanted to see what they were "signing up to". The fact it looks like jabs 4 and 5 are coming vindicates them. Its looking like one a year or second class citizen. Or in Greece and Austria, they'll be bankrupted instead. fucking hell!

This is the bit that I just can't get my head around - we can show conclusively that jabs work, we can show conclusively that they are safe, we can show conclusively that the best way out of this mess to gain our freedoms that people are marching for is to have the vaccines. So what exactly is the problem of having to have a 6 monthly vaccination until we see a global improvement.

On a side note I see they have identified the reason why one of the rare side affects is the blood clotting and are working to solve that problem.

The problem for some is they don't want an annual vaccine that hasn't been around 5 minutes. That's it. Some have also had nasty side effects, or know people who have. And as I say, the key here is for youngsters, their covid risks are very very small. That's what they're weighing it against. Many have had covid, some twice, most midly, they just don't want it. There's 5 million. And I think more will turn down the boosters at a guess.

And the fact you've said they're "conclusively safe" is simply not true. The bad side effects are very rare, but conclusively safe sounds like 100%. Not true.

And the best way out is to have vaccines? I'm afraid the last few months has indicated to many, given the large take up, that that is simply not true either. There are places in the world like Singapore who have almost 100% rate, and they had an enormous covid wave about 6 weeks ago and had to bring in further restrictions. If we're at 75%, another 10% ain't getting us out of this.

Agreed about the astrazeneca. I also believe Novavax may increase uptake slightly if that gets approved. Many are wary of the mRNA vaccines. I could be wrong but that's a hunch.