Jump to content

The Vaccine


shull

Recommended Posts


2 hours ago, faraway saint said:

My wife received her vaccination on Wednesday, slight sore arm on Thursday/Friday, that apart, no other side effects.  :thumbs2

My wife, due to her profession, received her second vaccination on Monday. No side effects at all.

However, it seems that the second vaccination has been having greater side effects than the first on care home residents. The fall risk of residents and other side effects seems to be markedly increased.

I'm in the 55-60 category, so I'm not due for the vaccine for a while yet. Looks like April

Anybody who has in the past claimed to be  50 years old and has no underlying illnesses is going to wait even longer.

Edited by FTOF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FTOF said:

My wife, due to her profession, received her second vaccination on Monday. No side effects at all.

However, it seems that the second vaccination has been having greater side effects than the first on care home residents. The fall risk of residents and other side effects seems to be markedly increased.

I'm in the 55-60 category, so I'm not due for the vaccine for a while yet.

A doctor currently on BBC saying that theirs nothing to back up the 2nd dose has any increased side effects, in response to a question from a viewer, in fact probably less as the body will deal with it faster.

He didn't mention care home residents, I'm assuming he meant the general public. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, faraway saint said:

A doctor currently on BBC saying that theirs nothing to back up the 2nd dose has any increased side effects, in response to a question from a viewer, in fact probably less as the body will deal with it faster.

He didn't mention care home residents, I'm assuming he meant the general public. 

Yeah. Just saw that.

Just going on what the care home managers in some my wife's companies homes have observed.

More Side Effects for Second Doses of COVID-19 Vaccine (aarp.org)

 

Edited by FTOF
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, FTOF said:

Yeah. Just saw that.

Just going on what the care home managers in some my wife's companies homes have observed.

I'm staying away from care home issues, left a very bad taste I'm afraid. :(

ETA, aye, this sums it up for me........................

That said, the responses to the COVID-19 vaccines are highly variable. Some people don't experience any symptoms, while others have mild-to-moderate side effects, and some get more severe symptoms, experts say.

Edited by faraway saint
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just got my date with the syringe though I would have been happy enough to wait if the respective governments had decided teachers etc. were to take priority. I do hope the UK government are serious about giving the excess vaccines, which will be numerous, to less wealthy countries, and in tandem with giving us the protection, as this is a global issue. If the pandemic is as real a threat as the likes of WHO say then us getting the jag means diddly squat if it's still circulating and mutating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, stlucifer said:

Just got my date with the syringe though I would have been happy enough to wait if the respective governments had decided teachers etc. were to take priority.

Why?

It's absolutely right for the NHS that those most likely to get seriously ill and require months of expensive treatment because of underlying health conditions are vaccinated first.

There's absolutely no justification for putting teachers (or the police for that matter) ahead of anyone else. Those working in supermarkets have a much stronger case for needing protection.

All this is a distraction anyway. Everyone will have had their first dose within the next few months or so.

As a country we'll need to keep a reasonable amount of supplies back for booster jabs. Once we've looked after ourselves we should certainly look to help poorer countries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why?
It's absolutely right for the NHS that those most likely to get seriously ill and require months of expensive treatment because of underlying health conditions are vaccinated first.
There's absolutely no justification for putting teachers (or the police for that matter) ahead of anyone else. Those working in supermarkets have a much stronger case for needing protection.
All this is a distraction anyway. Everyone will have had their first dose within the next few months or so.
As a country we'll need to keep a reasonable amount of supplies back for booster jabs. Once we've looked after ourselves we should certainly look to help poorer countries.
I agree that it could delay everyone getting vaccinated if they had to try and find out everyone's job then categorise them accordingly. There was justification for priorities and by and large for what I can see, they got it correct.

PS, No I haven't been vaccinated yet, apparently I'm too young and healthy unlike the auld fat codgers that have been.

Discrimination that's what it is [emoji2959]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've to go to the Louisa Jordan on Tuesday. Anyone else had to travel outwith the town for their jag?
Rub it in why don't you. [emoji1787]

PS if it's inconvenient and you stay for instance just round the corner from let's say the lagoon. You can ask for it to be done there, might add a week or 2 on getting done though. [emoji6]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cookie Monster said:

Rub it in why don't you. emoji1787.png

PS if it's inconvenient and you stay for instance just round the corner from let's say the lagoon. You can ask for it to be done there, might add a week or 2 on getting done though. emoji6.png

Not at all, it's 10 minutes along the motorway and expressway, I just wondered how the locations are allocated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Eric Arthur Blair said:

I've to go to the Louisa Jordan on Tuesday. Anyone else had to travel outwith the town for their jag?

I think one poster on here got an appointment at the LJ and phoned up and got their appointment changed to the Lagoon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at all, it's 10 minutes along the motorway and expressway, I just wondered how the locations are allocated.
Wasn't sure if you drove when I wrote that. The penny has since dropped [emoji1787]

At certain times of the day from my Paisley abode....

(Driving legally) I can get to the QEUH quicker than I can get to the RAH.

(Driving the other way) I can get to the GRI quicker than I can get to the RAH. [emoji2958]
Link to comment
Share on other sites



I agree that it could delay everyone getting vaccinated if they had to try and find out everyone's job then categorise them accordingly. There was justification for priorities and by and large for what I can see, they got it correct.

PS, No I haven't been vaccinated yet, apparently I'm too young and healthy unlike the auld fat codgers that have been.

Discrimination that's what it is [emoji2959]


Hey, we're not auld fat codgers, we're auld fat lazy codgers. [emoji16]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, oaksoft said:

Why?

It's absolutely right for the NHS that those most likely to get seriously ill and require months of expensive treatment because of underlying health conditions are vaccinated first.

There's absolutely no justification for putting teachers (or the police for that matter) ahead of anyone else. Those working in supermarkets have a much stronger case for needing protection.

All this is a distraction anyway. Everyone will have had their first dose within the next few months or so.

As a country we'll need to keep a reasonable amount of supplies back for booster jabs. Once we've looked after ourselves we should certainly look to help poorer countries.

Because they have NO CHOICE but to put themselves in the firing line, they have been TOLD they have to put themselves there, so it's only right, IMHO, that the Governments protect them as much as possible. The Governments have put in place many protections for people in my age group who are more likely to suffer disproportionately. There is no magic bullet here but I feel it is that Government's obligation to at least minimalize any danger that causes the people they demand go into the lion's den.

As for the last paragraph. What don't you get about the word "global"? There is no point having a stock of vaccine if, due to less well off countries not having enough to vaccinate their population, the virus mutates to the extent that that stock of vaccine becomes useless.

Edited by stlucifer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, stlucifer said:

Because they have NO CHOICE but to put themselves in the firing line, they have been TOLD they have to put themselves there, so it's only right, IMHO, that the Governments protect them as much as possible. The Governments have put in place many protections for people in my age group who are more likely to suffer disproportionately. There is no magic bullet here but I feel it is that Government's obligation to at least minimalize any danger that causes the people they demand go into the lion's den.

I had, originally, thought there should be some prioritisation for certain groups but the logistics would only see a slowing down in the numbers of people getting treated.

Deciding who should "jump the queue" would only see more squabbling.

While this was going on many in these groups will be getting the vaccine anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, stlucifer said:

Because they have NO CHOICE but to put themselves in the firing line, they have been TOLD they have to put themselves there, so it's only right, IMHO, that the Governments protect them as much as possible. The Governments have put in place many protections for people in my age group who are more likely to suffer disproportionately. There is no magic bullet here but I feel it is that Government's obligation to at least minimalize any danger that causes the people they demand go into the lion's den.

As for the last paragraph. What don't you get about the word "global"? There is no point having a stock of vaccine if, due to less well off countries not having enough to vaccinate their population, the virus mutates to the extent that that stock of vaccine becomes useless.

Oh come on. The "firing line"???? "Lions den"??? 

Are you applying to work as a headline writer for the Daily Mail? :lol:

As for your last paragraph. You obviously were in such a frothing rage to type your post (as you seem to be in every one of your posts these days) that you didn't read mine properly. I had actually agreed with you. My very last sentence in fact.

You need to calm yourself down a bit bud.

Edited by oaksoft
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, oaksoft said:

Oh come on. The "firing line"???? "Lions den"??? 

Are you applying to work as a headline writer for the Daily Mail? :lol:

As for your last paragraph. You obviously were in such a frothing rage to type your post (as you seem to be in every one of your posts these days) that you didn't read mine properly. I had actually agreed with you. My very last sentence in fact.

You need to calm yourself down a bit bud.

Frothing rage? Stupid statement. I read your post completely. Though I have to say that's becoming less and less useful considering the content of your witterings.

And you weren't agreeing with me. You suggested that we look after a stock for booster jabs first. That's not what I was saying therefore you didn't agree. Let me reiterate though I couldn't have been more clear to begin with.

The boosters will be no good if the virus mutates to the extent o f nullifying the vaccine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, stlucifer said:

Frothing rage? Stupid statement. I read your post completely. Though I have to say that's becoming less and less useful considering the content of your witterings.

And you weren't agreeing with me. You suggested that we look after a stock for booster jabs first. That's not what I was saying therefore you didn't agree. Let me reiterate though I couldn't have been more clear to begin with.

The boosters will be no good if the virus mutates to the extent o f nullifying the vaccine.

We both agree fundamentally that spare vaccines should be sent to poorer countries.

We differ on our definition of "spare" and the timings on when vaccines should be sent.

And here is the difference between us.

I prefer to focus on where we agree on things.

You prefer to pick at the scabs of any small differences between us in order to allow you to continue shouting at the clouds in righteous rage.

That's your choice but I prefer sunnier personalities than the one you portray.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...