Right that’s it.
Grouville St. Mary 16 Apr 21 06:49
Reply |

I’m cancelling my Jab appointment. Another colleague has had a bad reaction. 
 

you lot have had it and that’s good enough for me. 

I know quite a few people who have had bad reactions and needed to take 2 or 3 days off work.

As someone who has probably had the Vu and in a low risk group, I'm not massively fussed about getting the jab. 

The only reason I would probably get it is if it becomes a must have for international travel.  

Had it yesterday morning and no side effects other than a bit of a sore arm

should be getting up and going for a run but am considering just staying in bed for the day just in case

Royalty, you’re wrong. There is a small risk x of an adverse reaction to any jab. That compares to a no adverse reaction risk of zero if you don’t have the jab. Every extra jab you have exposed yourself to another small risk. 

JC

The fact you don't understand why this is a risk demonstrates that you're not widely educated or even very good at logic 

Your confidence despite this is impressive

By all means get vaccinated but the foolish choice is to leap to expose yourself to something totally unknown

1 in a million flu vaccine recipients get Guillaume barré

And that's a well tested thing

The chances of anything coming from Mars are a million to one they said

The chances of anythiiiing coming from Mars, are a million to one... And still they come

Ooooh laaaa

Also love how everyone who disagrees isn’t just wrong about this one thing but is actually an all-round moron who struggles with tying their own shoelaces and whose mum sighs with regret and declines the call whenever they try to phone her

Just to be clear, do you think there is no concern among the medical community about vaccines in general and covid vaccines in particular re the risk of autoimmune disease, chimp?

ANYONE WHO CALLS GROUVILLE ST. MARY A COWARD BECAUSE HE CANCELLED HIS JAB APPOINTMENT IS QUITE WRONG!!

GETTING THE JAB IN ORDER TO PROTECT HIMSELF, THOSE AROUND HIM AND THE WIDER COMMUNITY CARRIES WITH IT A RISK WELL INTO THE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF A PER CENT. OF HAVING SERIOUS COMPLICATIONS... NOT TO MENTION HE MIGHT FEEL A BIT POORLY FOR A DAY OR TWO!

IF ANYTHING, REFUSING TO GET THE JAB AND RISKING THE OPPROBRIUM OF THE WOKE LIBTARD BRIGADE WHO ARE WILLING TO BE VACCINATED IS THE FAR BRAVER THING AND I THINK IT WOULD BE RATHER NICE IF GROUVILLE ST. MARY AND THE REST OF US COULD CARRY SOME SORT OF EMBLEM SO THAT PEOPLE KNEW THAT WE WERE WILLING TO STAND UP TO THEM... 

... I WAS THINKING PERHAPS A WHITE FEATHER WOULD BE RATHER NICE?

Just to be clear, do you think there is no concern among the medical community about vaccines in general and covid vaccines in particular re the risk of autoimmune disease, chimp?

Not quite the same, but there was that doctor last week who said people should still get vaccinated even though her brother died from a blood clot post-vaccination.  Perhaps Clergs could explain risk and auto-immune disease to her? 

Cockpit she was a pharmacist but I accept the point. 

Risky m9, fair enough. Your body your choice at the end of the day. I'm sure you'll get another oportunity to have it if you change your mind later. I suspect you'll need it to travel again so you're probably only delaying the inevitable but that is OK. 

Don't change the subject
 

Er, I never said there is “no concern” so I’m not sure how this is “changing the subject”. The subject is who does or doesn’t understand relative risk. You seem to think that you do but your previous comments suggest that your appraisal of risk is shaky at best. You are obviously strongly motivated to minimise covid risk and exaggerate vaccine risk, for reasons best known to yourself.

Who should we listen to about the risks of vaccine, a trained medical professional who has encountered the real issues involved or a tax lawyer with no relevant experience?  Hmmm.

A girl I went to highschool with is ranting on FB about her brother, who had the jab and went paralyzed on half his body. He's expected to recover, but she's gone completely anti-vax as a result. Some sort of allergic reaction that they didn't expect I take it.

I still want it, because I need to be jabbed to make travel to see my immediate family less of a ballache and less costly. But if I didn't need to travel freely to Canada/USA, I'd probably just wait for this to blow over. And I am definitely pro vaccines generally.

Risk is percieved by an individual and we all have different fears and values. Some people spend huge sums on insurances, for example, to give "peace of mind". Others are happy to take their chances. 

I know I keep banging on about this but the courts acknowledged and addressed this in Montgomery. Risks that one person (whether patient or doctor) sees as trivial may be of immense importance to another person. For example a m9 had a baby recently. His wife is a nurse who works with brain damaged children and she wanted a C-section from the outset beacuse she had seen so many children with brain damage resulting from complex natural births. She wasn't at any kind of high risk of having a difficult birth but that was her choice based on her own individal fears and circumstances. 

I’m with you hanners.

Apparently 88% of people who take the vaccine have an adverse reaction and of those 25% have a SEVERE reaction.

Isn’t that right clergs?

Of course you should wait until tomorrow to let us know if posting the answer would take you over the 1.4 minutes that you have told us you spend per day on here.

Clergs - your need to resort to the ad hominem is telling and very tedious.  

Please educate us all on any scientific evidence supporting the notion that vaccines cause (or may cause) autoimmune disease.  If you can’t, then I don’t think there’s much more to say. 

Jc denton, it’s a bit rich of accusing clergs like that. The general pattern is

Clergs posts an article or statemetn

a Load of people attack her personally

she responds

Yes of course, if the worst happens it costs more. If it’s easier let’s generalize, there is a question around whether a publicly funded health service should Provide more than a basic service, particularly on things that are a matter of personal choice (in most cases at least). 

Yeah I suppose that is a question but as things stand the NHS in encourged to offer a choice of treatments and give patients agency. How true that is in practice I don't know but that is the theory. It is usually public health people who want to restrict individual patient choice. 

But the point was that people have different priorities. For example a woman who's mother died of breast cancer may be very worried about anything that would give her breast cancer even if the risk of whatever the thing is is objectively very low. 

The mind boggles at the speed of which many team saners have done a volte face in respect of level or risk that one should take into account when making decisions 

 

utter bed wetters 

crypto - why should everyone else pay to indulge that person’s irrational and illogical “different priorities” (“their truth” if you like)

 

FOR FVCJS SAKE!

risky is trolling

he said so

he will get his vax like a good citizen and then post another thread next week baiting all the team sane lot about the virtues of the vaccine

‘Clergs posts an article or statemetn

a Load of people attack her personally

she responds‘

lol I mean that’s literally not what happens but you know that.

Nothanners, you went off grid for two weeks after the Theresa May general election - surely a day or two lying low post the big prick is well within your capabilities. 

That was just some guy who posted in the same way and had exactly the same opinions on the same subjects who disappeared just before gsm turned up and has never come back.

Do pay attention.

Initially seeing Gillaume - Barre I thought clergy’s was making a cryptic reference to the former US Justice secretary, William Barr but fairly quickly realised she just created an imaginary syndrome that has a similar name to a real one, Guillain - Barre syndrome named in the old fashion after those who first published a description along with M. Strohl in 1916. Even now the cause is described as unknown so again do correlation and causation indicate anything but coincidence?

Clergs posts some total bollocks

people point out that she is talking bollocks and take piss out of her

she puts up the Team Sane bellend signal

Team Sane rush to her defence

Hoolie accuses everyone of misogyny.

crypto accuses SAGE of something

Hanners gets confused but tries to style it out

everyone else goes to the pub to chin pints

 

fixed it.

So massive economic damage, reigniting the troubles in ulster, increased bureaucracy, destruction of the fishing industry and a huge blow to our international prestige are worth it because I think those are bad ideas?

I also think reintroducing smallpox to the general population is a bad idea - would you like to do that too?

Clergs posts some total bollocks

people point out that she is talking bollocks and take piss out of her

she puts up the Team Sane bellend signal

Team Sane rush to her defence

Hoolie accuses everyone of misogyny.

crypto accuses SAGE of something

Hanners gets confused but tries to style it out

everyone else goes to the pub to chin pints

some quality work from notWello here