Covid19

[Ali C]

This is something I’ve brought up with friends, the government has seemingly done everything it can to make us unhealthy during the pandemic when they should’ve put all-round health as a number one priority.

Lockdowns might have helped but there shouldn’t have been any restriction on how long you can go out and exercise or where you can exercise (I got kicked off a pumptrack by the police despite not being near anyone else).

Gyms should’ve opened sooner than they did, especially in winter when some people can’t go out and exercise due to the weather or darkness, keeping them shut as long as they did caused physical and mental health deterioration.

The whole “eat out to help out” was just encouraging people to eat fast food, not ideal when exercising is limited.

 

Im shocked when I go into towns and see how large everyone is, it’s far more common to see overweight people than it is a lean person. If health is a help in fighting off Covid then there’s been a lot of wrong steps during this pandemic 

[JT!]

Adam I'm not really doubting any of the statistics you posted. It just seems like such an odd outlook on life to have.

What I mean by that is, it's like saying in the 7/7 terrorist attacks, just 70 people were killed which is a tiny number compared to those who die every day, so who cares? Why make a big deal about it.

But anyway, we can spend billions on food and health education, we just don't know how effective it's going to be. You can't force people to eat healthy and go out and exercise. You can only encourage it. But for things like covid, it's really simple to go out and get a jab, a jab where there's no evidence that shows it'll harm you in anyway (outside of 1 in a million side effects), a jab that shows it can greatly reduce the affect covid has on you.

Any of one us on this forum could die from covid. Maybe our last post in our post history could be saying how f**king bad covid is and they're hoping they don't have to go to hospital. That could very well be the last thing they post. Sure, we're generally all young and somewhat healthy due to the nature of why we're all here. But the idea that you can take a jab and reduce the chances of that happens by at least 75%, and people being adamantly against that, I just don't get it.

 

 

[ben_travis]

2 hours ago, JT! said:

But anyway, we can spend billions on food and health education, we just don't know how effective it's going to be. You can't force people to eat healthy and go out and exercise. You can only encourage it. But for things like covid, it's really simple to go out and get a jab, a jab where there's no evidence that shows it'll harm you in anyway (outside of 1 in a million side effects), a jab that shows it can greatly reduce the affect covid has on you.

I am double jabbed, and am more on the side of getting inoculated than not, but I don't think we should be forcing jabs on anyone either. You say there is no evidence it'll harm you, but we don't know the long term effects of getting the jabs so some are obviously going to be wary / suspicious when simply being healthier and taking care of your body can also greatly reduce the effect COVID has on you. 

Jabs are a short term solution for a long term problem, and in my opinion, a lazy way out of the issue (like most things we do as a species). Yes we can encourage taking, but mandating the jab to 'get back to normal' is ridiculous and i think that is the problem we'll have globally. I was told by someone else recently*, that the W.H.O announced that world leaders (and as such us), will just have to learn to live with COVID, like we do the flu, and I am definitely in agreement with that. It is just not likely to go away anytime soon.

 

 

*if it's bullsh*t and they didn't say it, then i think they should be saying it.

[monkeyseemonkeydo]

3 hours ago, Ali C said:

I got kicked off a pumptrack by the police despite not being near anyone else

That was down to safety more than anything from my understanding- they didn't want people getting injured doing high risk activities and adding more strain to the NHS. They shut our local (landowner organised) jump spot and pump track for the same reason.

Gyms should’ve opened sooner than they did, especially in winter when some people can’t go out and exercise due to the weather or darkness, keeping them shut as long as they did caused physical and mental health deterioration.

That was the social distancing thing. A bunch of people in a sealed room breathing heavily (ooh, err!) wasn't (still isn't?) a good idea...

Im shocked when I go into towns and see how large everyone is, it’s far more common to see overweight people than it is a lean person. If health is a help in fighting off Covid then there’s been a lot of wrong steps during this pandemic 

I reckon that was the case long before COVID unfortuantely. Poor Jamie Oliver has been fighting it in kids for the past 10 years, bless 'im.

 

[JT!]

6 hours ago, ben_travis said:

I am double jabbed, and am more on the side of getting inoculated than not, but I don't think we should be forcing jabs on anyone either. You say there is no evidence it'll harm you, but we don't know the long term effects of getting the jabs so some are obviously going to be wary / suspicious when simply being healthier and taking care of your body can also greatly reduce the effect COVID has on you. 

Jabs are a short term solution for a long term problem, and in my opinion, a lazy way out of the issue (like most things we do as a species). Yes we can encourage taking, but mandating the jab to 'get back to normal' is ridiculous and i think that is the problem we'll have globally. I was told by someone else recently*, that the W.H.O announced that world leaders (and as such us), will just have to learn to live with COVID, like we do the flu, and I am definitely in agreement with that. It is just not likely to go away anytime soon.

I never said anything about forcing people to get vaccinated. Mandating it for certain things, we can discuss those individually.

We know about the long term effects of the covid vaccine as much as we know the long term effects of any medication. What about the Chicken Pox vaccine? We "don't know the long term side effects of that". Every new flu vaccine every year "we don't know the long term side effects of that".

You can be the fittest person on the planet, covid still can kill you, or become a drain on the healthcare service of a country.

And yeah we're probably going to have to live with covid just like we do with the flu, with flair ups here and there, new strains, who knows maybe we'll eradicate it in a few decades. Vaccines are the tool we have to deal with it right now, certainly not the lazy option, what more can we do?

 

[ben_travis]

1 hour ago, JT! said:

I never said anything about forcing people to get vaccinated. Mandating it for certain things, we can discuss those individually.

Sorry, i wasn't trying to insinuate that you were, it was just a statement I wanted to make to make my position clear.

We know about the long term effects of the covid vaccine as much as we know the long term effects of any medication. What about the Chicken Pox vaccine? We "don't know the long term side effects of that". Every new flu vaccine every year "we don't know the long term side effects of that".

I take your point, but IIRC young healthy peeps are not recommended (or mandated) to take either of those vaccines though. I don't think we get the chicken pox vax in the UK and flu vaccine is typically for older generations and certainly not young, healthy people. other than the inoculations we get as kids in the UK, we're not recommended / mandated to take them, and those we are asked to are typically for diseases that are kept at bay by (i assume) said inoculations.

So we kind of do know the long term effects of those vaccines we are asked to all take, and those we don't (such as the ones you mentioned) aren't given to everyone. 

That was kind of rambling, sorry. I can just see why some people are apprehensive of taking them due to not knowing the long term effects.

You can be the fittest person on the planet, covid still can kill you, or become a drain on the healthcare service of a country.

While i have nothing to disprove this, I would imagine that a healthy person who takes care of themselves is more likely to fair better than someone of the same age but isn't healthy. I agree it effects everyone differently so you'll never know, but I can see why some people are willing to take their chances.

And yeah we're probably going to have to live with covid just like we do with the flu, with flair ups here and there, new strains, who knows maybe we'll eradicate it in a few decades. Vaccines are the tool we have to deal with it right now, certainly not the lazy option, what more can we do?

Well like i said, we can try and convince people to be more healthy and make better life choices, but like many things, societal change takes generations and pharmaceuticals makes money (as i'm sure you'll know living in the US) so is a much quicker easier fix. Let's agree to disagree on whether its a lazy option just to keep filling people with medication to get over ailments. 

 

Edited September 15, 2021 by ben_travis

[JT!]

I didn't realize that they don't vaccinate for chicken pox yet in the uk. I recently got shingles and I spoke to many people younger than me about Chicken Pox and they didn't even know what it is. Turns out they all get the vaccine now.

I disagree that we should agree to disagree on meds being the "lazy option". Unless you consider driving your car to work the "lazy option" rather than getting fit and running the distance every day?

I understand the hesitancy I really do, what I don't understand is the logic behind thinking there's more risk in the vaccine, than there would be in getting covid.

[MadManMike]

1 hour ago, JT! said:

I disagree that we should agree to disagree on meds being the "lazy option". Unless you consider driving your car to work the "lazy option" rather than getting fit and running the distance every day?

I'm pretty sure that's exactly what he means.

You get bad reactions when you say it on social media, but a massive percentage of articles that scream about 20 or 30-something year olds being in intensive care feature a hugely unhealthy patient - not in all cases, but the vast majority I've seen are like that. The kind of people that do zero exercise, eat all the wrong stuff and get out of breath climbing one flight of stairs. Of course a respiratory illness is going to hit them hard.

The number of younger, fit and healthy people that have had a serious illness from Covid is tiny. It's happened, but it's tiny.

So yeah, I agree, let's focus on making people healthier in general, then we won't need as much hospital intervention. I'm sure a lot of serious illness / death from Covid could have been avoided if the people were generally fitter and healthier, it's not always their fault, but sometimes it is.

This is also a pointless debate now anyway, as clearly you're massively pro-vaccine and that won't change, same for the other side of the debate.

[JT!]

Well yeah sure the fitter you are the less likely covid is gonna wreck you. But if we were all within a good bmi range and exercised a lot, we'd be in a better position, but covid would still be a big deal. People would still be getting horrifically sick, ending up in hospital and dying. Doesn't matter how fit and healthy you are, you can still have medial issues, and people are still going to be old. To me this kind of talk is just a distraction.

What this whole debate boils down to is the risks of being unvaccinated v the risks of the vaccine. My issue is I don't see any significant evidence that there's any risk in the vaccine, and I don't think anyone here has presented anything substantial to show that the vaccine is riskier than not taking it other than hypothetical long term effects.

I get that it's people choice to take it or not, I just taking the vaccine is the right one.

[Alyksett]

Or how someone can shy away from the conclusions of an organization that has almost 6 billion dollars of tools and capabilities whos sole purpose is to investigate drugs and medications to ensure their efficacy and safety, but would rather err on the side of unresearched alternatives. I'm not implying anyone here is like that but there are millions out there. Even if I knew someone who is a virologist/scientist and said the vaccine isn't safe I still would take it, because the opinion of thousands of scientists + billions in tools > 1 expert.  

It sets a lot of bad precedents to mandate a vax so I would never be in favor of doing so, and even if not everyone gets it then it's whatever, but I wish people would just get the jab lol

[Ali C]

I feel there’s a mass psychosis happening. The government says we should be scared, the media says we should be scared and the general public are whipped up into a frenzy of fear and segregation.

For me it’s not *just* that we don’t know long term data, it’s the way it’s been handled by people who seemingly have no clue what they’re doing, or only doing things to benefit them (I’m sure Boris will have all his failings forgotten when he’s triumphantly claiming that under his party he “got the country vaccinated and out of the pandemic”) or their pals.

I worry this is a the start of a yellow star type situation, we’re the frogs sat in a slowly boiling pot of water. “It’s just a lockdown” “it’s just a Covid passport” “it’s just a curfew” “it’s just barbed wire” etc. it’s maybe a bit of a jump to get to that conclusion but ever since Brexit was suggested I’ve lost all of my trust to these people in power and I personally find the whole vaccine thing fishy, my lack of long term data point still stands and I still think there’s other routes that could be looked into if it wasn’t so taboo but on top of that I simply don’t want any part of what the government is doing or saying.

 

Covid is no longer a public health topic but is now totally politicized 

[MadManMike]

3 hours ago, JT! said:

What this whole debate boils down to is the risks of being unvaccinated v the risks of the vaccine.

No it isn't. For you it is, for the rest of us it isn't. If you think "we" aren't having it purely because of the potential side effects, I suggest you read the thread again.

[manuel]

Pfizer has been administered nearly 6 Billion times. That is a huge data set to determine side effect percentages pretty darn accurately.

all the talk of long term data is a non starter - there aren’t long term effects for vaccines. They don’t stay in your body long enough. You can have side effects that appear in the short term, that may have long term effects on life, but they aren’t going to give you cancer 10 years from now. They pass completely out of your system in weeks, and you are left with entirely natural immune response. Because of this and the number of hits we have given out, the risks of taking this vaccine is known to a pretty high degree of accuracy.
 

The risk of taking the vaccine is significantly lower than that of getting covid19 the old fashioned way. (Again - huge number of data points for this too)

 

Anyone can choose not to take the vaccine, and that’s their call, especially if they are in low risk groups. But that’s still a roll that’s unnecessary, and does nothing to decrease transmission.

 

I still think taking a prescription drug without proper medical advice (a prescription), to combat something that has a proven pretty effective vaccine, when there are no published studies that have shown that it’s actually effective, is basically bordering on conspiracy theory action. 

 

 

[MadManMike]

55 minutes ago, manuel said:

and does nothing to decrease transmission.

You can still transmit it when vaccinated though, no?

[Ali C]

2 hours ago, manuel said:

Pfizer has been administered nearly 6 Billion times. That is a huge data set to determine side effect percentages pretty darn accurately.

all the talk of long term data is a non starter - there aren’t long term effects for vaccines. They don’t stay in your body long enough. You can have side effects that appear in the short term, that may have long term effects on life, but they aren’t going to give you cancer 10 years from now. They pass completely out of your system in weeks, and you are left with entirely natural immune response. Because of this and the number of hits we have given out, the risks of taking this vaccine is known to a pretty high degree of accuracy.
 

The risk of taking the vaccine is significantly lower than that of getting covid19 the old fashioned way. (Again - huge number of data points for this too)

2 hours ago, manuel said:

 

 

I still think taking a prescription drug without proper medical advice (a prescription), to combat something that has a proven pretty effective vaccine, when there are no published studies that have shown that it’s actually effective, is basically bordering on conspiracy theory action. 

 

 

It’s still a vaccine that’s never been used before, it’s the first of its kind and effects the nucleus of the cell. I’m not saying it is dangerous and even with as many uses as it’s had I still don’t want something injected into me if it isn’t 1000% necessary especially when they’re not all FDA approved. It’s something that should be provided to those at high risk (like originally planned) not blackmailed upon every person in the country/world.
 

Ivermectin is totally safe (and has had real life results outside of tests). Some can call it a conspiracy but there’s definitely a movement to quash it’s reputation, I don’t believe it’s due to it not working.

 

If you did want to go down the conspiracy route then we can talk about Blackrock and Vanguard who own just about every major company in the world including media and pharma…owned by the richest families in the world. It would sure be in their interest to quieten down ivermectin and increase the fear in the general public if they own the companies selling the vaccine. This is total conspiracy though, not my usual forte 

[Alyksett]

"A clear advantage of mRNA vaccines is that, unlike DNA vaccines, they do not need to enter the nucleus to express the antigen." (All the main vaccines are mRNA)

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMcibr2009737

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/hcp/mrna.html

Small correction here, mRNA is copied from DNA and used to create proteins, I think you're thinking of a regular DNA vaccine, which does enter the nucleus. Using an mRNA in the vaccine skips this step of transcription and it is quickly broken down after it is used. 

https://www.nebraskamed.com/COVID/where-mrna-vaccines-and-spike-proteins-go

mRNA vaccines are new, and it is the first of it's kind but we've known about RNA for decades and is pretty thoroughly understood.

 

And for what it's worth, I think the main reason the media is focused on squashing Ivermectin is because, at least in the US, we've had bad experiences with alternative medications (Hydroxychloroquine) and Ivermectin seems like another one of these alternatives, at least to them. The spikes in poisonings from it are a bit disconcerting though, even though these people took the wrong type.

 

Edited September 18, 2021 by Alyksett
another source and re phrasing

[JT!]

12 hours ago, Ali C said:

I feel there’s a mass psychosis happening. The government says we should be scared, the media says we should be scared and the general public are whipped up into a frenzy of fear and segregation.

For me it’s not *just* that we don’t know long term data, it’s the way it’s been handled by people who seemingly have no clue what they’re doing, or only doing things to benefit them (I’m sure Boris will have all his failings forgotten when he’s triumphantly claiming that under his party he “got the country vaccinated and out of the pandemic”) or their pals.

I worry this is a the start of a yellow star type situation, we’re the frogs sat in a slowly boiling pot of water. “It’s just a lockdown” “it’s just a Covid passport” “it’s just a curfew” “it’s just barbed wire” etc. it’s maybe a bit of a jump to get to that conclusion but ever since Brexit was suggested I’ve lost all of my trust to these people in power and I personally find the whole vaccine thing fishy, my lack of long term data point still stands and I still think there’s other routes that could be looked into if it wasn’t so taboo but on top of that I simply don’t want any part of what the government is doing or saying.

 

Covid is no longer a public health topic but is now totally politicized 

Your entire comment talks about covid as anything else other than a public health issue, then you end that comment with "Covid is no longer a public health topic but is now totally politicized", so let me ask you this, who's politicizing it?

Everything you've said outside of "we don't know the long term data" is completely political, and has no bearing on the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine, which is really what we're talking about here. The way it's been handled by the government, how Boris will be looked back on in history, the yellow star comparison and Brexit have nothing to do with a vaccine that's been used globally.

11 hours ago, MadManMike said:

No it isn't. For you it is, for the rest of us it isn't. If you think "we" aren't having it purely because of the potential side effects, I suggest you read the thread again.

I didn't say potential side effects, I said risks. I don't believe anyone in here has justified not taking the vaccine under any reasoning that would be considered a risk, but I'm happy to be corected.

10 hours ago, MadManMike said:

You can still transmit it when vaccinated though, no?

Manuel said "does nothing to decrease transmission". Everyone understands you can still transmit if you're vaccinated. It's possible it might be transmitted more due to people not realizing they're infected and not quarantining or staying home from work, or it could be transmitted less because you'll be infected for a shorter time and less coughing etc, I don't think we fully know yet.

8 hours ago, Ali C said:

It’s still a vaccine that’s never been used before, it’s the first of its kind and effects the nucleus of the cell. I’m not saying it is dangerous and even with as many uses as it’s had I still don’t want something injected into me if it isn’t 1000% necessary especially when they’re not all FDA approved. It’s something that should be provided to those at high risk (like originally planned) not blackmailed upon every person in the country/world.

First of all, the Pfizer vaccine is FDA approved.

Secondly, as I've said before, there are vaccines out there that don't use the mRNA tech, but I assume you're just as unlikely to go get vaccinated with one of those?
 

[Ali C]

1 hour ago, JT! said:

etc, I don't think we fully know yet.

And that’s my stance on the whole thing, conspiracies and politics aside I admit covid is a potential threat but I don’t consider it a big enough threat to be injected with an emergency treatment (the FDA have only approved it as an emergency treatment) that I have no chance of receiving compensation if any ill effects occur. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to want to wait.

[JT!]

5 hours ago, Ali C said:

And that’s my stance on the whole thing, conspiracies and politics aside I admit covid is a potential threat but I don’t consider it a big enough threat to be injected with an emergency treatment (the FDA have only approved it as an emergency treatment) that I have no chance of receiving compensation if any ill effects occur. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to want to wait.

You purposefully took my quote out of context. When I said "I don't think we fully know yet" I was referring to how the vaccine affects the spread of covid, not anything about the vaccines safety or effectiveness.

The Pfizer vaccine has been approved by the US FDA, it has been for about a month now. It's still under emergency use authorization for 12-15 year olds.

[AdamR28]

I find the diversity we are showing here in interpreting the same information pretty fascinating! Humans are an interesting bunch

I have got a bit lost with the thread and I need to 'leave' again, but I will leave some more info / personal experiences which maybe help explain my 'weird' opinions on Covid and life, then disappear again and leave you in peace.

 

Covid stuff:

We have a WhatsApp group with my school mates in, 8 people in total. Between us, we know of 9 people who have had serious and immediate reactions to Covid jabs. The mildest of the 'severe reactions' we encountered was instant vomiting of blood (while still at the Covid jab centre), the worst has been a blood clot which lodged in the brain and left the person in a coma (within a week). Since coming round this 54 year old person has lost significant bodily function and is no longer able to eat. If 8 of us know 9 people who have been pretty significantly affected, I am struggling to believe the official government figures.

Another friend works at Sainsburys in a team of 30 people. 4 of them, 13%, following their Covid jabs, began to feel weird and visited the doctors. They were found to have abnormal heart rhythm. I am not saying the Covid jab definitely caused this, because they may well have had it earlier, but for them to get 25-60 years through life and not notice anything previously seems strange. (The UKs average rate of abnormal heart rhythm is under 3%.) Also it begs the question, how many others have begun a strange medical condition and not had it checked out.

Which brings me onto my own mother. 70 years old, smoker for 50 years, one lung removed through a TB-like disease, twice cancer survivor, obese, eats terribly, does no exercise, can't even walk across a room without panting. Yet she got Covid and survived. Had her first jab, went for her second a few weeks later, and had it refused because she mentioned - in passing - that a weird swelling had appeared in her leg since the first jab. The swelling is still being investigated but nobody seems to be considering it may have been linked to her jab. Again, how many other similar cases are there.

(On the same subject, my mum has not once been offered lifestyle or healthy eating advice throughout all of her health complication consultancies, it has always been a drug or treatment. She now lives her life bouncing from hospital appointment to specialist to scan and back. She truly is 'in the system'. Same deal with my friend who has a Grade 2 brain tumour, no mention of any alternative treatments, however he then went on to research things himself and made the same progress as the medical profession without the nasty side effects and he is generally healthier overall to boot.)

The chance of dying from Covid in your mid 30s-early 40s is reported to be approx 1 in 1000. This takes into account all previous health complications, etc. Therefore an ACTUALLY healthy persons chance of death (not a 'healthy' person as reported by the news, who has two chins and a BMI of about 35, example: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-55788914.amp) is going to be less than this. Given the above personal experience, I am not going to risk the jab without further reliable, independent, long term data.

The chance of death for a 35-44 year old male going about their life as normal is higher than the chance of dying from Covid: http://www.bandolier.org.uk/booth/Risk/dyingage.html - so I still don't get why the world is losing its shit over Covid.

 

General stuff:

The rate of cancer prevalence (and other diseases) is increasing alarmingly. However, humans aren't evolving at anywhere near this rate. So we must be doing something to ourselves to cause this.

The medical profession isn't a philanthropic endeavour. It also isn't a magic bullet. Too many people look to it for solutions.

Thalidomide had a half life of only 5-7 hours and still managed to cause some pretty severe issues: https://www.google.com/search?q=thalidamide&oq=thalidamide&aqs=chrome..69i57.3955j0j9&client=ms-android-samsung-gs-rev1&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

 

Stay healthy all!

[manuel]

3 hours ago, Adam@TartyBikes said:

Thalidomide had a half life of only 5-7 hours and still managed to cause some pretty severe issues: https://www.google.com/search?q=thalidamide&oq=thalidamide&aqs=chrome..69i57.3955j0j9&client=ms-android-samsung-gs-rev1&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8

yes - but those issues appeared in the short term. all the damage was done by someone taking the drug in the very early stages of pregnancy. Tests on pregnancy were never carried out and it was just assumed there was no issue as it was deemed a harmless drug for humans. 

I would class thalidomide as having short term appearing effects that lasted a long time. its a special case as those short term effects were unable to be seen for 9 months...

 

Im not saying pfizer or others can't do severe damage very quickly, Im saying we absolutely know what the risks of that damage are now, and its not going to turn out that people start dropping dead in 10 years time from a long term unknown side effect. 

[AdamR28]

I agree thalidomide is a special and rare case of the medical industry making a monumental cock up, but the time it took to make the link was pretty scary (approx 5 years IIRC). Perhaps our recording and reporting is significantly advanced now, so this wouldn't happen any more.

 

I don't believe - from my own personal experiences - that we do genuinely know (or have been told) what the full and complete risks from any of these Covid jabs are yet; whether through misreporting, cover ups, lack of awareness of people of their own bodies, or another factor.

Would abnormal heart rhythm be classed as a long term side effect? And could that cause someone to drop down dead 10 years in the future?

Same (slightly rhetorical) question for a blood clot, which could be lodged somewhere non-critical for years then free up and block a passageway either to or from the brain or heart.

It'll be interesting to see what happens with my mums leg, thats for sure.

[manuel]

On 17/09/2021 at 10:13 PM, MadManMike said:

You can still transmit it when vaccinated though, no?

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02054-z
 

Yes but at a very reduced rate.

[JT!]

On 9/18/2021 at 7:28 AM, Adam@TartyBikes said:

I find the diversity we are showing here in interpreting the same information pretty fascinating! Humans are an interesting bunch

Covid stuff:

What you're saying doesn't line up with the rest of reality though, even if you believe the government isn't reporting side effects properly, with numbers like 13% all having abnormal heart rhythm, there would be a worldwide heath crisis right now, millions would be flocking to their doctors and getting diagnosed with heart issues, but that simply isn't happening. I would certainly have a health inspector check out that Sainsburys though!

I don't doubt what you're saying, but it's some extreme anecdotal evidence and I don't think those results would be typical outside of your friend group.

With regards to cancer prevalence / other diseases, don't forget that as we learn to cure and treat other illnesses, it just allows us to live long enough to get the ones we can't treat yet. It doesn't mean they're increasing.

But couldn't agree more with your comments about being healthy to prevent things like this. Getting shingles after Christmas made me realize that I need to not get so stressed out and I needed to quite the boozing (two things I'm sure didn't help my immune system health at the time).

 

[manuel]

On 18/09/2021 at 10:28 PM, Adam@TartyBikes said:

 

I don't believe - from my own personal experiences - that we do genuinely know (or have been told) what the full and complete risks from any of these Covid jabs are yet; whether through misreporting, cover ups, lack of awareness of people of their own bodies, or another factor.

Would abnormal heart rhythm be classed as a long term side effect? And could that cause someone to drop down dead 10 years in the future?

Same (slightly rhetorical) question for a blood clot, which could be lodged somewhere non-critical for years then free up and block a passageway either to or from the brain or heart.

It'll be interesting to see what happens with my mums leg, thats for sure.

so I would say as you mentioned - the chances of going 10years with abnormal rhythm and no side effects would be small so I would expect that people who have that side effect would be included in the statistical analysis? same with blood clotting, I can’t imagine that the chances of getting a blood clot AND it being lodged somewhere with no side effects and then turning into a fatal hit are particularly high. 
 

but yes I would class both those as short term effects as they happen immediately and 99.9999999999999999etc of the general cases where those side effects happen will likely be recorded as part of the statistics. 
 

the only other thing I would say is there is a bit of confirmation bias going on here probably (on both sides). My experience is entirely different with vaccination. For a start I only know a handful of people who actually got COVID (officially) and none who had any kind of bad experience with it. And again I know no one who has had anything other than a sore arm and a mild fever with the vaccination. If it were different and I had an experience like yours I’d like to think I’d still have it but I might not. The beauty of stats from such a big data set is that the overall stats will be pretty accurate but an individual may be lucky or unlucky with what they see?